Today’s youth face challenges in navigating a digitally infused world. Yet we often leave young people to make their own decisions about ethical, safe and responsible use of digital technologies, with minimal guidance. In schools, students encounter inconsistent expectations for using technology from one teacher to the next, while different rules again may apply during breaks between classes. They also have to contend with peer pressure to use the latest and greatest apps for communications.
It’s common for students to arrive at school tethered to a personal device, and then enter a classroom where the device needs to be turned off or turned in to the teacher. But when we ask students to disengage with their devices, we lose a critical opportunity to help them learn how to ethically, safely and responsibly use digital technologies, and to promote active and informed digital citizenship. Students are carrying powerful learning devices; they already search online for information, use videos for learning, take photos of assignments, access digital texts, spend time on content creation sites, and use devices to communicate and collaborate with each other and connect with teachers to ask questions about school work.1 However, learning opportunities for youth to develop a critical 21st century skill – the safe and responsible use of digital technologies – are often limited and overly structured, at the discretion of the classroom teacher or school leader.
We’ve all heard of cyberbullying cases where students repeatedly use technology to broadly share content intended to hurt others. With a single click, a text message with a mean comment about someone else can spread throughout an entire student body. A sexually explicit image or message can become publicly accessible within seconds. How, then, can we ensure we are providing opportunities for young people in school to learn how to ethically and safely use powerful learning and communications devices?
Make safe information sharing a part of everyday learning, and design lessons where learners can demonstrate their understanding. Invite students to explain what they do to protect themselves and others in online spaces. For example, discuss how personal information can be inadvertently shared through hidden identifiers (background images, location, etc.). Talk about ways to protect information that can be shared through images, video, text posts and tags. Focus on how to practice “safe sharing” of one’s own information.
Teachers and school leaders need to stay up to date on how technology is changing. Years ago, it was important to teach students to keep passwords secure, change them regularly and not share passwords with friends. Today, students also need to learn about fingerprint security and the risks in storing friends’ fingerprints on their personal devices.
Learning about citizenship in a digital age needs to be part of the daily learning environment at school. Inviting a guest speaker to talk to staff, students and parents once each school year is not enough, nor is discussing online safety only during Digital Citizenship Week. Collective and ongoing efforts are needed to make digital citizenship a part of daily learning outcomes in schools.
Share how students are using technologies for social justice and to help others. There are daily news posts about youth who are providing service and helping others locally and globally that can be used to foster conversations about student leadership and action campaigns.2
Look at guiding documents developed in your local context. For example, guiding documents from provincial ministries in Canada3 can be used as a starting point to help students develop responsibility in safely and ethically navigating online spaces. Educators may also find such guides helpful for ideas about how to protect students as they work in open, collaborative online environments.
En Bref : En cette ère numérique participative, nous devons donner aux jeunes les moyens d’être des citoyens numériques actifs, informés et éthiques.
Illustration: iStock
First published in Education Canada, March 2017
1 Project Tomorrow, Speak Up Research Project for Digital Learning (2015). www.tomorrow.org/speakup/index.html
2 For example, see the campaigns sponsored by the WE Movement. www.we.org/we-at-school/we-schools/campaigns
3 For example, Alberta Education, “Digital Citizenship Policy Development Guide” (2012), https://education.alberta.ca/media/3227621/digital-citizenship-policy-development-guide.pdf ; Government of Saskatchewan, “Digital Citizenship Education in Saskatchewan Schools” (2015), http://publications.gov.sk.ca/documents/11/83322-DC%20Guide%20-%20ENGLISH%202.pdf
“I am not afraid of storms for I am learning how to sail my ship.” – Louisa May Alcott
THE CLASSROOM is calm and quiet. Students chat with classmates from around the world while working on their projects. Settlement workers, multicultural workers and counselors come in and out of the classroom, addressing a myriad of needs to support the students’ transition to a Canadian school. Mayahe Assaf (see photo) looks at a map and asks in Arabic, “Where is my country, where is Canada?” He turns to his friend behind him and they speak in Arabic and then laugh. The settlement worker explains, “The boys thought Syria was a big country, and then they looked at the size of Canada.” The hum of the classroom is filled with wonder, confusion and many questions. For many of the students, this is their first opportunity to find peace in school; some have lived for years in countries under conflict and disruption. A program that focuses on “settling in” is essential for their success.
The Surrey (B.C.) School District English Language Learner Welcome Centre offers programs to support parents’ and students’ initial settlement into their new community. This centre has been thought of as a model in countries with high immigrant and refugee student numbers, such as the U.S and Sweden. One of the programs at the Welcome Centre is the Bridge Program for newcomer students, including those with refugee experience.1 Classroom teacher Kris Hull describes it as a “soft landing into Canada.” The classroom, he says, “is a place for students to heal, relax, settle, acclimatize and reset their bearings, so they too can experience success in the next step of their educational journey.” For students who have experienced gaps in learning due to war, displacement or other factors, the adjustment into Canada begins with a predictable, safe, comfortable, low-pressure environment to allow the mind to start calming, to open up and prepare for learning.2
Mayahe’s family began their settlement journey with their acceptance into Canada. This invitation for resettlement into Canada brought peace and an opportunity to quell the storm they had been living in for the last four years in Syria – but the road ahead for this family is still complex and challenging. Mayahe was 18 years old when he entered Canada just over a year ago. He had some reading and writing in Arabic, no English speaking, reading or writing and had missed the last four years of school. Mayahe has been a witness to death and life experiences not even imagined in Canada. He is one of the many students and families from a refugee background who have found that in time, and with the right supports, their lives can be seamed back together.
The Surrey School District is the largest school district in B.C., with approximately 71,000 students. With a growing immigrant and refugee population, it is one of the most diverse public school systems in Canada; about half of the students have a home language other than English.3
Schools are one of the first connection points for newcomers to British Columbia. The Surrey School District English Learner Welcome Centre opened its doors in 2008 as part of a provincial initiative to enhance the role of schools and school districts in the settlement of school-age immigrants and their families. School districts were given the opportunity to contract directly with the provincial government for delivery of the Settlement Workers in Schools (SWIS) program (funding of the program has since moved to Immigrant, Refugee and Citizenship Canada). This was an opportunity for school districts to access external funding to support newcomer families in their settlement journey, utilizing community-based staff’s knowledge of government programs, policies and immigration laws, their expertise in serving immigrants, and their connections to other community services and resources.4
We recognize that all families come with different levels of need, and those needs are personal and unique. This principle guides us in developing strategies for support and case management. Comprehensive and cohesive settlement services must include a universal platform of services for all. Within that platform, the right tools and structures are provided at various levels of intensity and scale, tailored to the unique needs of different families and communities. Realizing a universal system that is locally responsive requires a partnership between governments and community stakeholders who also believe that:
Often we are asked, “How do newcomer families come to know about the Welcome Centre?” The first point of contact is during school registration. When a new family arrives at a school in Surrey, the Multicultural Worker (MCW) is often called to support the family in their first language for registration and a school welcome. Once this is complete, the child’s registration is sent to the Welcome Centre, where the families are connected to the Settlement Worker. This becomes the first contact in a supportive relationship between the school system and the families.
The intake with the family allows the staff to assess their needs and to connect them with their schools and the greater community. The students’ English Language assessment allows for a detailed and holistic assessment of student needs. Ross Powell, an assessment teacher at the Welcome Centre, believes that, given the wide range of education systems around the world and the even wider range of students’ language skills, a perfect language assessment for English Language Learners does not exist. However, good assessments “should provide a strengths-based profile of a student’s language proficiency and inform instruction for tomorrow.”
The assessment tools and processes used at the Welcome Centre are intended to assess both students’ social language and their academic language. Assessment is not a stand-alone event, but a starting point for planning, instruction and communicating student learning. Powell uses multiple measures to assess a child’s language ability. The assessment helps teachers set effective goals for the student’s growth, and also provides information as to what kind of curriculum and instructional designs will be most effective. In the interview with the students, Powell tries to view the “whole” child and identify all of the strengths each student brings. Equally important is to understand the possible barriers that might hinder performance on an assessment, such as students’ shyness, nervousness, previous experiences in school, or parental expectations. What Powell envisions for the initial assessment is not a “level of skill,” but “a profile of language strengths, and hope – for every child.”
Mayahe’s Canadian schooling began with a brief assessment using basic Dolch pre-primer sight words, and a conversation in Arabic about his schooling experience and language ability in Arabic. For Mayahe, attempting a more rigorous assessment would impact his confidence and feelings about being a student, and would not change the level of instruction he would require.
Trust, a sense of safety, and relationship are the first priorities when supporting refugee students and families in our schools. For school districts, having staff in schools who can communicate with parents in their first language and demonstrate cultural understanding helps build trust and a connection between home and school.
Mayahe’s memories of the war in Iraq are vivid. He remembers when the war reached their village and the family moved to Syria because of death threats. His hometown was no longer idyllic and safe; it became a place where different warring factions threatened the very life of their family. Experiences like this, that threaten the survival of the family’s children, are carried into the Canadian landscape and the need to restore safety is paramount. Through school, community and accessible programs the family slowly learned to gain trust in the Canadian system and access much-needed supports for their family.
Coralee Curby, our school psychologist, notes that programs like the Bridge Program allow time for newcomer youth to forge strong relationships with caring adults and learn in a predictable and safe environment.5 This is especially important for students from refugee backgrounds. Coralee finds that providing a “safe and supportive setting that promotes calming, caring connections and emotional regulation” gives students with complex backgrounds the best chance to recover from trauma.
The Centre for Health reports that although many immigrant and refugee children require increased levels of mental health support upon entering Canada, some refugee communities, unfortunately, are less likely to receive or access health services in comparison to others in the community. Some of the barriers to access can include: personal views on gender differences of the service provider, cultural misconceptions of mental health issues or personal health issues, language barriers, no access for unique languages, the availability of family or friends to assist and many other factors.
Upon arrival into Canada, students we have supported in the Bridge Program often show signs of trauma, displacement, and disconnection from their new country, which can significantly impair learning. Some of the features of trauma or post-migratory stress that we have witnessed in the Bridge Program include:
While each person’s story, experience and needs are unique, the research shows that the most important facets of any trauma recovery include:
Mayahe also remembers times of peace and fun in his home in Syria. He and his younger brother, Mohamed, used to help their father in his grocery store after school. Before the war, Syrian schools had an excellent reputation and Mayahe attended school with students from Yemen, China, Afghanistan, Russia, Syria and Iraq. Mayahe smiles quietly at these good memories.
“When did this memory change?” Mayahe’s face draws down and he says slowly, “Tuesday, July 17, 2012. Everything changed – ISIS burned my dad’s supermarket.” He goes on to say that his family was targeted for their beliefs. He tells us he saw dead people, burning, shooting, and killing. In 2013, mortar and rockets began firing against Damascus and conditions in the city declined. The children could no longer attend school. When the conflict became more intense, Mayahe started to combat against ISIS. He says, “For two years and eight months, I was fighting with the Syrian Army.” He pulls out his phone and shows a photo of himself in army greens, holding a heavy artillery weapon. He is just 15 years old.
In early 2015, the Assaf family received notification that their application to Canada was accepted, and they arrived in Vancouver on July 25th. Mayahe remembers walking in downtown Vancouver and feeling that “I didn’t know what to do. I had no English and I had no friends here in Canada.” When asked if adjusting to Canada was difficult for him, Mayahe says, “When I first arrived in Canada, I thought learning English was going to be hard, but it was not that hard for me. But I was worried they might send me back to Iraq.”
That September, “Someone [SWIS] helped us enroll in school and I started in the Bridge Program.” What were his early days of school like? “I didn’t understand anything; I thought I wouldn’t ever understand anything. I felt totally overwhelmed. I felt very challenged and frustrated. I was miserable and wanted to go back to Iraq.” But, he says, his teachers, Mr. Hull and Ms. Tang, were incredibly patient and good to him.
Mayahe says the Bridge Program “helped me learn to cope and do school in Canada. My school helped me so much. I know how to use words properly, make sentences and how to function in Canadian society – to speak to people and do what I can for myself.” Mayahe also attributes his success to his Canadian friends who helped him understand how to work and live here. He says, “I have kept going because I want a future, so I can take care of myself.” When asked what advice he give to a new student coming into Canada like he did, Mayahe laughs a little. “First when I came, I was angry, I got into fights outside of school, and this was my only way to express myself. But I learned if I want to live in Canada I have to change… Stay away from angry feelings, and focus on school and stay away from friends who lead you the wrong way.”
Like any 19-year-old, Mayahe is unsure about his future. But his ship is stable. The storm has passed. He has hope.
Photo: Courtesy Caroline Lai
First published in Education Canada, March 2017
1 Gerard Toal, Critical Geopolitics blog, Department of Government and International Affairs, Virginia Tech (2013). https://toal.org/page/7
2 Bruce D. Perry, Helping Traumatized Children: A Brief overview for caregivers (Child Trauma Academy, 2016).
https://childtrauma.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Helping_Traumatized_Children_Caregivers_Perry1.pdf
3 City of Surrey Immigration Fact Sheet, 2011. www.surrey.ca/files/Immigration_Demographic_Profile.pdf
4 Ference Weicker & Company, Delivery Model for School-Based Settlement Services (Vancouver, B.C.: Ministry of Education, 2007).
5 CMAS, Caring for Syrian Refugee Children: A program guide for welcoming young children and their families (2015). http://cmascanada.ca/2015/12/12/caring-for-syrian-refugee-children-a-program-guide-for-welcoming-young-children-and-their-families/
Why should we be concerned about student voice? In an introduction to one of Paulo Freire’s later works, Henry Giroux argued that “all human beings perform as intellectuals by constantly interpreting and giving meaning to the world.”1 In his own conclusion to the same publication, Freire maintained that in seeking to transform society in the interests of a more habitable, democratic and liberated world, the task ahead is “not to take power but to reinvent power.”2
Young people in schools are indeed intelligent beings who live their lives in these often highly regulated spaces and constantly interpret and give meaning to their lives, but whose interpretation and meaning-making is often marginalized at best and even frequently ignored. For many it is the case that they can neither take nor make power in any reinvented form.
Pessimistic as these words may seem, there is clearly change afoot. First of all, the rights of young people to be heard and for their voices to be listened to in the context of schooling and research in education now has a host of advocates, such as the late Jean Rudduck and Michael Fielding. This wave of interest, policy and activity finds its motivation in the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Convention is comprehensive and entitles children to a broad range of rights, including the right to have their best interests treated as a primary consideration in all actions concerning them, including decisions related to their care and protection (such as their education). In particular, Article 12 states that children have the right to say what they think in all matters affecting them, and to have their views taken seriously.
One outcome of the widespread ratification of the Convention has been that the perception of autonomy and participation rights for children has become the new norm.3 Even so, perception is one thing, actualization is another. Participation, that is the exercise of authentic agency, must address matters of power.
Power over others is never equal, even among young people themselves. However, power in schools and school systems is increasingly centralised, governed by rules and regulations as part of a competitive global scenario over which students have no control. As Taylor and Robinson have observed, there is “an uncritical view of the entrenched, hierarchical power relations in schools,”4 with the result that student voice activities are often little more than tokenistic interventions serving established power. Typically, student representative groups are enabled to run charity events or social occasions such as school assemblies, rather than have an input into the ways in which teaching and learning are conducted. There is an unfortunate tendency to reduce concepts of “voice” to nominal engagement that co-opts student voice to legitimate the entrenched interests that inform the design and enactment of schooling practices.5
There is also a growing acknowledgement that young people in schools are the “consequential stakeholders” who bear the brunt of decisions made on their behalf and thus should be participative in making those decisions. However, many of the arguments are of an instrumental kind, seeking to “improve” student learning outcomes within the existing frameworks of practice. There is an emphasis upon responsibility, accountability and a sense of autonomy, but little space granted to allow for the possibility of questioning the curriculum or the organization of schooling itself. As Prout has recognized, “Listening to children’s voices has become so ubiquitous that is has become part of the ‘rhetorical orthodoxy’.”6
What is it, then, about the nature of schooling that mitigates against the possibility of a re-imagined place for young people’s learning? Is it that having evolved thus far, the bones and form of the classroom are now given? In 1969 Edward Blishen launched The School I’d Like, a book based upon the huge range of entries to The Observer newspaper’s invitation the previous year for young people to submit their thoughts in a variety of media regarding the school that they would like, but which revealed most insistently what they did not like. The exercise was repeated in 2001 and again in 2011 by The Guardian. Burke and Grosvenor reviewed the collection and reported that the students’ views reflected the most human of needs related to the social and environmental contexts for learning, rather than what is to be learned. Children perceived that they were confronted by “a closed social order.”[7] So what are the factors that constrain an engagement with student voice that is of an authentically satisfying and transforming kind?
Certainly these variables are significant, but do they constitute a complete paralysis? The burgeoning of literature on student voice advocacy and research, including young people being engaged in participatory research, argues that there is some movement of a positive kind.
So, what is to be done? Is it possible to identify modest but compelling examples that demonstrate the potency of reinventing power in the relations between young people in schools and those who teach them?
A recent international conference held in Cambridge, U.K., part of a series held in honour of the contribution of the late Professor Jean Rudduck, demonstrated the extent to which a range of schools and academic communities have engaged with the notion of student voice in both celebratory and critical fashions. Sessions focused on areas such as the co-creation of learning and teaching; the ethical implications of eliciting young peoples’ voices; an exploration of conceptual and empirical ambiguities; emotional and empathic understandings; and consulting young people in the context of cultural institutions.
A notable feature of the conference was the participation of teachers and students from a range of settings well beyond the academic community, demonstrating the power of voice when groups that are normally excluded from established structures are enabled to take and express a stance both controversial and confronting. For example, Norwegian students discussed the capacity of Norway’s School Student Union, a national organization for students 13 to 18, reporting that Union members were able to attend meetings with senior policy figures such as Ministry officials to discuss issues of relevance to them.
Encouraging consultation with and participation of children and young people as a means of commenting on their circumstances has become, in some cases, the province of employing authorities themselves. For example in Ontario, student voice has been nominated as a tool to be employed in school improvement.8 Through a pedagogy of listening and inquiry, it is argued that a responsive learning environment may be co-created. A framework was constructed to develop student voice work progressing from expression, to consultation, to participation, to partnership and to, at the apex, shared leadership, where students are seen as “co-leaders of learning and accept mutual responsibility for planning, assessment of learning and responsive actions.”9 While the document aims to improve rather than critique, nonetheless it provides an example of an authority taking a positive stance in relation to interacting with young people within a framework that would permit their voices to be heard.
While there are many studies that relate to issues affecting children, there are few that directly present the young person’s point of view. In one of them, Sargent and Gillett Swan10 posed open-ended questions to participants from a range of primary and secondary schools in Australia, Sweden, New Zealand, Italy and England (mean age 11). Among them were two that they perceived to be of particular interest: “What is the question that you have for adults?” and “What is the one thing that you would like adults to learn?” Page after page of responses expressed the dissatisfaction and frustration that the young people felt:
They (adults) tell you to do stuff because they feel that’s the right way, but they never actually ask you what you think is the right way.
“The one thing that I’d like adults to know is that us children can have our own opinions and we can do things on our own but we also need a lot of help so they should support us and not make us feel small.”
”There are things that they (adults) don’t think about, coz if we do something that they tell us to do, it might affect us later in ways they don’t know and they can’t help.
There are also examples of more extended engagement with student voice to be found. In a four-year longitudinal study, conducted by Mayes11 in one of Sydney’s most challenging secondary schools, a cohort of young adolescents acted as co-researchers, investigating a series of matters, year by year. The four research areas were: The school I’d like; The teaching I’d like; The learner I would like to be; What I would like to learn.
The study was groundbreaking in its length, scope and the extent of risk-taking on the part of both the young people, as apprentice researchers, and their teachers. It is particularly noteworthy because it engaged a cohort of young people as a community in liaison with their teachers, rather than as individuals endowed with agency. Currently, there is a problematic neo-liberal ensnaring of the notion of “agency” that frames that attribute as a property of the individual, with the implication that teachers can gift agency to their students as a form of individual empowerment. Under the aegis of neo-liberalism, education becomes a commodity that benefits individuals, with little consideration for the communal and public good. In contrast, the Mayes study captured the collective of voices, rather than those of privileged individuals. In effect, it was created to permit those with the least power to speak.
Fostering student voice in schools will remain a challenge in relation to matters of power and agency. In his concluding essay published in the book cited in the introduction to this piece, Freire argues that a profound transformation of education can only take place when society itself is transformed. This can be achieved, not just by revolution, but by a series of smaller steps, one of the first being a recognition that education is both a political enterprise and a moral project. Throughout this article I have argued that education cannot be thought of as independent from the power that constitutes it, but it can be acknowledged as a springboard that allows all who participate in it to be recognized as functioning members of that power base. Reinventing education through the participation of those it most affects may take time, but measure for measure is an investment without parallel.
En Bref: Dans cet article, Susan Groundwater-Smith se penche sur le potentiel qu’ont les voix des élèves de réinventer la nature du pouvoir en classe. De nombreux obstacles se dressent sur la voie d’une nouvelle façon d’imaginer l’école en tenant compte des perspectives des enfants et des jeunes qui en sont les parties prenantes corrélatives, en tenant compte d’aspects tels que l’accès et la légitimité. L’auteure présente néanmoins plusieurs cas où les élèves ont non seulement été consultés au sujet de questions scolaires, mais ont également participé à la recherche et à l’élaboration de politiques. S’appuyant sur le cadre de la Convention de l’ONU sur les droits de l’enfant, elle soutient qu’il n’est pas que pragmatique d’encourager la voix étudiante en éducation, c’est aussi – et surtout – un projet moral.
Photo: Dean Mitchell (iStock)
First published in Education Canada, December 2016
1 H. Giroux in P. Freire, The Politics of Education: Culture, power and liberation (Hampshire: Macmillan Publishers Ltd., 1985), p. xxiii.
2 Freire, p. 179.
3 D. Reynaert, M. Bourverne-de Bie and S. Vandevelde, “A Review of Children’s Rights Literature since the Adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child,” Childhood 16, no.4 (2009): 518–534.
4 C. Taylor and C. Robinson, “Student Voice: Theorising power and participation,” Pedagogy, Culture and Society 17, no.2 (2009): 166.
5 N. Mockler and S. Groundwater-Smith, Engaging with Student Voice in Research, Education and the Community: Beyond legitimation and guardianship (Dordrecht: Springer, 2015).
6 A. Prout, “Participation, Policy and the Changing Conditions of Childhood. In Hearing the Voices of Children: Social policy for a new century, eds. C. Hallett and A. Prout (London: Routledge Falmer, 2003), p. 11.
7 C. Burke and I. Grosvenor, The School I’d Like Revisited (London: Routledge, 2015), p. 96.
8 Student Achievement Division, “Transforming Relationships,” Capacity Building Series (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2013). www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/CBS_StudentVoice.pdf
9 Student Achievement Division, “Transforming Relationships,” p. 8.
10 J. Sargeant and J. Gillet-Swan, “Empowering the Disempowered through Voice Inclusive Practice: Children’s views on adult-centric educational provision,” European Educational Research Journal 14, No. 2 (2015): 177–191.
11 E. Mayes, “Students Researching Teachers’ Practices: Lines of flight and temporary assemblage conversions in and through a students as co-researchers event (paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education, Adelaide, December 2013).
High school can be challenging for any student. For some, the stress is unmanageable; just entering the crowded hallways each day causes enough anxiety to avoid school altogether. Imagine having a space within a traditional school setting, where students can walk in at their own choosing, hear peaceful music, smell the aroma of essential oils, and find a calm, safe and caring place to work. At Cochrane High School (CHS) in Cochrane, Alta., this is an option for students like Christy.
THE END OF GRADE 2 and early Grade 3 are recognized as important milestones in young learners’ written literacy development. At this juncture, children are expected to have “language by hand” under sufficient control to participate in an array of literacy demands, increasingly for school-related work and the transition to academic literacy.
(more…)
You never know when or where a good idea will present itself. But many such ideas never materialize. They get jotted down on a piece of scrap paper or in the margin of our lesson planners, and that’s where they stay, left to wither away as we deal with the myriad routines that make up the teaching day.
In late 2013, one of these ideas happened across our path, but this time it would actually bear fruit. We had the opportunity to present at the International 1:1 Computing Conference held in Atlanta, Georgia in December. Of the many interesting sessions, one stood out to both of us. During Dr. Alicia Banuelos’ keynote address, she mentioned a smaller project within her bigger constitutional free Wi-Fi program in San Luis, Argentina that caught our imagination.
For this project, students collected data about their carbon footprint and calculated the number of trees needed to reduce it. After they had completed the work, and with the help of various partners, they started to plant trees in their community. The idea was intriguing, and we added another note to the margin of our conference agenda. While many of the ideas we gathered during those two days did indeed wither away, the embers of this one continued to smolder in our minds as we returned to our intermediate school, Amalgamated Academy.
Several months later, circumstance allowed the ember of this idea to be rekindled into a full-blown fervour. Each spring, the Newfoundland and Labrador department of Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural Development requests proposals for Youth Innovation Grants. These grants are for projects that put the youth of our province in control of creative and innovative initiatives. With the support of our school administration and community partners, we submitted a proposal in May 2014 that had at its core that seed of an idea planted in our minds by Dr. Banuelos.
Amalgamated Academy’s proposal focused on energy conservation, climate change, and the application of science, technology, engineering and math to solve practical problems that affect the daily lives of our students. We were successful in our grant application, and in September 2014, a group of about 15 curious and energetic students in Grades 8 and 9 came together to create Amalgamated Academy’s Conservation and Engineering Corps.
The work commenced that new school year with weekly extracurricular meetings. From the beginning this was a student-driven project. We challenged the group to become informed on their environmental impact through research, and more importantly experimentation, design, and the development of a plan to reduce their impact. The group’s work would end up including the design and development of multiple experiments, a community garden, and a personal solar mobile device charger – all attempts to take some personal and local proactive action regarding the bigger problem of climate change.
In order for students to have a genuine real-world learning experience, we had to allow them to engage with partners beyond the school. Amalgamated Academy has a great school community that extends beyond the walls of the building, and support for the project was easy to find. Partnership agreements were secured from the Town of Bay Roberts, O’Neill’s Gardenland, Memorial University’s Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, and the Electrical Engineering department of the College of the North Atlantic. Each group’s contribution was essential, supporting the students’ efforts with community space, equipment and resources, horticultural expertise, scientific and engineering knowledge, and a practical electronics workshop. Each of these partnerships not only broadened the scope of the project, but allowed our students to experience the interconnectedness of the world around them. We wanted to give our students the opportunity to understand that the subjects they learn in school are not simply isolated knowledge domains, and that complex real-world problems require multiple perspectives and expertise for the development and application of successful solutions.
As we started the year-long project, students quickly recognized a connection between their energy consumption and the creation of carbon dioxide at our local oil-burning power generation facility, and how this is linked to climate change. To solidify this connection, the group devised a data collection method whereby they used a plug-in power meter to observe the electricity consumption of a number of household appliances and devices over time. The data collected by multiple students was analyzed and extrapolated to assess their impact on a larger scale. The next natural step in the project was to formulate a plan to reduce this impact. From their prior science background, our students recognized that plants utilize carbon dioxide during photosynthesis and would be part of a viable solution. They undertook extensive experimenting to determine the amount of carbon dioxide and oxygen present during photosynthesis. During the experimental design process, students used a variety of plants, materials, and apparatus before successfully collecting valid data. This part of the project allowed for growth in their ability to problem solve, work collaboratively, innovate, and gain an understanding of the work of scientists and engineers.
Once confident in their results, the group discussed multiple courses of action that could help on a local level. As this lively discussion unfolded over several sessions, the group decided on two courses of action. For the first part of their project they would undertake the design and creation of a community garden, with the support of the Town of Bay Roberts and O’Neill’s Gardenland. The second part of the project would focus on an avenue to reduce the use of fossil fuels for energy consumption. The exploration of alternative energy sources eventually led to a consensus on developing a device that would harness enough solar energy to charge a smartphone. This endeavour would be supported by the College of the North Atlantic.
As spring approached, we were making good progress on the garden design. Students consulted with a local horticulturist from O’Neill’s Gardenland to design a low-maintenance diverse ecosystem. They created both computerized and physical 3D models that they presented to municipal officials for approval – a very proud moment for all students involved. As the snow receded, the group made multiple trips to the designated garden site to select the best location, make measurements, stake out their garden’s boundaries, and mark the location of their trees and shrubs. With the garden laid out, municipal workers moved in to clear the small plot of land and dig the bigger holes for the trees and shrubs – a gesture that was greatly appreciated by the group. Then the group returned with our local horticulturist for a lesson on proper planting techniques, and they spent the rest of the day carefully placing the trees, shrubs, and perennials into their new homes. But the work didn’t stop that day. The continued development of this garden has become one of the cornerstones of the group and extended into the next school year.
The students also had the opportunity to delve into the world of engineering. Almost everyone has a mobile device and no matter the brand, make or model, they all have a single common flaw. They all run out of energy. From this premise and the idea of alternative energy as a means of reducing their individual carbon footprints, the students decided to create a solar charger. We researched many different kits and components and in the end decided on a kit from Adafruit that would give the students a good balance of hands-on making and success. With the help of two instructors in the Electrical Engineering department of the College of the North Atlantic, our students participated in a beginner’s electronics workshop before tackling their own chargers. This process allowed for the development of many skills. The group became versed in basic circuit construction, soldering, troubleshooting, problem solving, and creating and printing 3D models – all within a collaborative and cooperative environment. In the end, everyone had a working charger that didn’t just come off the shelf and that met their goal of reducing their reliance on carbon-emitting energy.
While you can plan and have a rough idea of where you’ll end up with this type of experiential learning project, you never know exactly what will happen when you share a leadership role with your students. In our case, working on the garden extended into the next school year but students did not lose their motivation. This is a clear demonstration of how students respond when engaged in learning opportunities that connect them to their world. From a teacher’s perspective it has been, and continues to be, very satisfying to watch our students lead and learn, and to see the boundaries between the classroom and outside world blur into something more – something meaningful.
So it might be worth your while to take a minute and thumb through some of those old idea notes scribbled on the margins of your planner. You never know where they may lead!
En Bref: L’établissement de liens entre l’apprentissage des élèves et leur expérience vécue peut poser tout un défi. Les enseignants doivent parfois aller au-delà de l’enseignement en classe traditionnelle pour vraiment éveiller l’intérêt de leurs élèves. Cet article traite d’un projet d’un an réalisé par un groupe d’élèves et d’enseignants de l’Amalgamated Academy à Bay Roberts, parrainé par le ministère des Affaires, du Tourisme, de la Culture et du Développement rural de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador. Ce projet visait à guider les élèves dans un processus d’enquête qui les a amenés à élaborer des solutions personnelles et locales à de vrais problèmes mondiaux liés au changement climatique. La participation au projet a permis aux élèves d’acquérir une foule de compétences en sciences, en génie, en technologies et en mathématiques.
Photo: David Gill
First published in Education Canada, September 2016
When Darren McKee attended school in rural Saskatchewan, he was the only brown boy in a sea of white, and he knew it. The bullying and intimidation he suffered drove him to get an education against the odds and work to ensure that no other Aboriginal child experienced what he did.
McKee worked as a teacher and principal, a deputy minister of education, and is now the Executive Director of the Saskatchewan School Boards Association, focusing on what he calls the “cultural responsiveness” of the education system. As an example, he offers an anecdote from his own teaching career: trying to teach Aboriginal kids from remote communities how to spell the word “escalator” when most of them had no idea what that was.
“My own culture was about education and we were always taught how important learning was,” McKee says. “But the system wasn’t about learning, it was about conforming.”
That, he says, is changing, thanks to initiatives like former Prime Minister Paul Martin’s Martin Family Initiative (recently changed from Martin Aboriginal Education Initiative, www.maei-ieam.ca), part of which aims to keep First Nations, Métis and Inuit kids in school through entrepreneurial training tailored to their culture. The Aboriginal Youth Entrepreneurship Program (AYEP) is now offered in 48 high schools in eight provinces and one territory, and so far, about 700 students have completed it. “We know that a majority of the kids who enter the program continue to complete their school, which is a huge thing,” McKee says. “For the first time, they feel like they are successful and they’re treated as successful. One of our students won a national entrepreneurship award.”
Sydney Demerais is enrolled in the AYEP at Prince Albert Collegiate Institute and will be the first of her six siblings to graduate from high school. While this 17-year-old Plains Cree student plans to attend university to become a nurse, she’s loving learning how to be “professional and grown up” in the AYEP.
“I’m very excited about the financial part of the course and learning about banking,” Demerais says in a telephone interview during a break from class. “I’m thinking I’d like to start a non-profit youth centre where kids could do sports or go to a gym.”
Martin himself credits the quality of the teachers and support of principals for the program, which was designed in 2008. But also the workbooks and textbooks – the first of their kind in the world – were designed by two Indigenous teachers with Indigenous culture in mind.
“These kids can see other Indigenous people succeeding,” Martin said in a recent interview. “They have role models to follow.”
“It doesn’t matter where you come from, who you are, you deserve the opportunity to be successful,” says McKee. But one key to that success is networking and being introduced to people and places that in the past may have been out of reach. Making those connections requires going outside the traditional education silo and building partnerships with credit unions, chambers of commerce and corporate sponsors, outfitting the kids with suits and giving them networking opportunities.
“We have to engage in these partnerships that invite those outside of education, like the Martin foundation and the businesses. Traditionally, we haven’t done that in education” McKee says. “There are certain rules when you come to work for kids, but if you follow those rules you’re welcome to be part of it.”
When I spoke with her, Desmerais was looking forward to getting dressed up and attending a formal dinner in a restaurant organized by the local credit union, where she and her fellow students could get to know established business people from Prince Albert.
Tiara Opissinow is a Grade 10 student at Eagleview Comprehensive High School, in Onion Lake, Sask. She says she has learned skills she can use to help her grandmother, who runs a food truck and sells homemade earrings.
“I think I’ll be able to help her with the accounting,” she says over the phone during a break in class. “The course doesn’t just teach us how to start a business, but we also learn life skills like banking, saving money, budgeting and accounting.” Opissinow thinks she may want to become a lawyer, but since signing up for AYEP, she is also considering taking business at university.
Martin has made it his mission to right the inequalities in Aboriginal education and has received assurances from the current Liberal government that funding to Indigenous schools will increase to ensure it happens.
With Canada’s fastest growing population under the age of 15 being Aboriginal, it just makes economic sense, he says. Plus, it’s downright discriminatory that Indigenous schools, which are funded by the federal government, receive 30-50 percent less financial support than other schools, which are funded by the provinces.
“The federal government doesn’t have a department of education, but there’s no way any federal government can plead ignorance,” Martin said in a recent interview. “Those numbers are sitting out there. They’ve been verified by every province and every First Nation in the country. That’s why teachers in these schools leave, this is why there are no special programs for kids with disabilities or any of that.”
And there’s no doubt that Indigenous students are in need of increased support. Statistics Canada figures from 2011 suggest a whopping 58 percent of on-reserve Aboriginal students drop out of high school, compared to just ten percent of their non-Aboriginal counterparts. Martin maintains that many students have given up long before reaching adolescence, partly because they have never learned to read and write fluently. While it may be obvious, studies from around the world have concluded that reading well is fundamental to success in school.
To try to shift the imbalance, his Aboriginal Education Initiative began a literacy pilot project in 2009, based in two Ontario Ojibwa community schools – Hillside School, run by the Kettle and Stony Point First Nation on the shores of Lake Huron, and Walpole Island Elementary School, about two hours from Kettle Point. The results were extraordinary. The number of Grade 3 students whose reading and writing skills met or exceeded the Ontario Ministry of Education’s target jumped to 91 percent, an increase of more than 50 percent and well above the provincial average of 70 percent. Further, the number of students identified as needing speech and language services decreased significantly.
With funding from the Pathy Family Foundation and the Lawrence and Judith Tanenbaum Family Foundation, about $1 million was spent in each of the two schools over five years, mostly on intensive training for teachers. The key change was that reading and writing had to be taught for 100 minutes every morning from Kindergarten to Grade 8.
“At the end of the program, when we had brought Kettle and Stony Point up to the provincial average, which was extraordinary – people said it couldn’t be done – the Chief of Kettle Point said, ‘This proves if you give us the tools, we will do the job’,” Martin says. “And he was so right.”
It was that thinking, says Martin, that inspired the creation of the MAEI in the first place.
“We knew that if we provided the tools to the Métis, the First Nations and the Inuit, they would develop education systems as good as any in the country,” he said. “And if they could demonstrate that, there would be no excuse for any federal government not to fund them properly.”
Now the challenge is to get the program in all Indigenous schools in the country and to see Indigenous Canadians succeeding on the same scale as other Canadians right through from Kindergarten to PhD.
“There’s no doubt in my mind this is possible,” Martin says. “In every area where we have our programs it’s making a difference. People ask, can we afford to do this? If anyone came along to any Canadian and said we can’t afford to give your child a primary school education, Canadians would not stand for that. Why would they stand for it for their next-door neighbour who happens to be Indigenous?”
As for the entrepreneurship program, McKee is already seeing the benefits in the 15 Saskatchewan schools where it is currently offered. “I’m seeing our young Aboriginal people who are confident,” he says. “It was education that got us into this dilemma, through the Indian Act and the residential schools, and it will be education that will get us out of it – but we have to fundamentally shift the way we do things.”
In February of 2015, CEA gathered over 100 Indigenous, education and corporate leaders in Toronto to listen to a conversation between former Prime Minister Paul Martin and CEA President and CEO Ron Canuel about the crucial steps that must be taken to provide Indigenous children the future they deserve.
Watch highlights from “Indigenous Education: The Urgency to Act”: www.cea-ace.ca/paulmartin
En Bref: L’ex-premier ministre Paul Martin s’est donné pour mission de redresser les iniquités de l’éducation autochtone. Il soutient qu’il est tout simplement discriminatoire que le budget des écoles autochtones, financées par le gouvernement fédéral, soit inférieur de 30 à 50 pour cent à celui des autres écoles, qui sont financées par les provinces. Le programme Jeunes entrepreneurs autochtones de l’Initiative d’Éducation Autochtone Martin donne déjà à des élèves du secondaire assez d’assurance pour se lancer dans le monde des entreprises – où leurs ancêtres étaient rarement les bienvenus. En outre, un projet pilote destiné à enseigner la lecture et l’écriture aux plus jeunes dans deux écoles autochtones a remporté un succès retentissant. « Je suis absolument persuadé que c’est possible, affirme Paul Martin. Chacun de nos programmes a des résultats probants. »
Photo: courtesy the Saskatchewan School Board Association
First published in Education Canada, September 2016
Wyatt sat uncomfortably in his chair, squirming as I looked over his transcript and file. Five different grade schools, two middle schools, not back to back. “What happened in the intervening year?” I thought, but deeper down, I understood. I’d seen it all too often before.
For over five years, I worked as a therapist in private practice, leaving my home office to my employees three days each week as I travelled to five separate First Nations. On the days I hadn’t scheduled myself to work in the community health centres, I would arrive at the local school, just as the tired students were filing in for another day of classes.
First, I would speak with the principal or office personnel and lay out the slate of clients I was to see that day. Frequently I would be told, “Oh, she’s not here anymore; they’ve moved to the city. John is back again, though. Things didn’t work out so well down in Toronto.”
The movement of many families from First Nations to the cities and back again is well documented. Some theorists point to the effort to find meaningful employment as the motivation for these transitions, but in my experience, many parents are also seeking to provide a strong education for their children. It’s a different kind of school choice that leads families from First Nations to move to the city in order to enrol in public provincial schools.
After moving from private practice into a public school setting, I continued to see these students. The difference was that I now encountered them as they entered public high school. I looked again at Wyatt’s file. One… two… we were the third high school that he had attended, including the one back in his home community. He had credits at the Grade 9, 10, and 11 levels, but he hadn’t fully completed the core courses in any one of these grades.
“How was it, going to school in the city?” I asked.
“Okay,” he said. He didn’t need to say more. The tone of his voice told it all. Like a fish pulled from the water, First Nations students who arrive in provincial schools from rural communities find themselves surrounded by a culture and educative process that feels unfamiliar, foreign and even threatening. To a lesser extent, but still in a very real sense, those whose families have lived away from their home communities for generations still sense this disconnection. Schools incorporate token nods to Indigenous content, but they seem to be unaware that, to those coming from Indigenous communities, this is very different from the local traditions.
Furthermore, some federally operated schools on reserves may stand decade after decade as counter-cultural institutions, chronically failing to acquire any affinity with the community around them. To be fair to those working in these schools, it should also be noted that, in many communities, acquiring an education from governmental schools is seen as “selling out,” and the pressure not to succeed can be great. At times it is this very dynamic that compels families to make the choice to move to cities and towns, where they sense a greater freedom to achieve.
“I think you’ll find things different here,” I said. Wyatt looked around my office, his eyes fixing briefly on the painting of an eagle soaring over sunlit clouds and then on the traditional cedar bough hanging above the door. His shoulders relaxed, but just a little.
It wasn’t until the bell rang that Wyatt’s eyes began to show a glint, a sparkle of hope. We hadn’t finished crafting his schedule, but one by one First Nations students began to fill my small office. They all knew that they didn’t need to knock – this was their space.
“Hey, are you the new guy from up north?” asked Tyrell.
“That’s my home community where you’re from,” Talia joined in. “But I haven’t been there since I was a baby.”
Wyatt looked at me questioningly. “Can’t keep a secret around here,” I smiled back at him.
“Wyatt, right?” Tyrell continued. “Hey, you want to come with us to the caff? I’ll show you around.”
Wyatt looked again at me. “Go ahead; I’ll be here when you get back.”
Parents considering the move from their First Nation are confronted with the dilemma of weighing the benefits and trade-offs of such a move. To stay in the community will ensure a connection to the local culture, to family and to traditional values. In traditional cultures, success is defined in much broader terms than mere economic security and advancement, in that individuals are only considered to be successful when they take their places well in the circles of community and creation.
On the other hand, federal schools are, in most cases, funded far below the per capita allotments seen in off-reserve schools. School facilities are often not as desirable, a large percentage of teachers do not remain for extended periods of time, and most who are parachuted in from elsewhere bring with them an unfamiliarity with the local culture and a promotion of value systems based in non-Indigenous thought.
Those who leave, however, are not just moving away from that which they perceive to be negative; they are also attracted by certain aspects of off-reserve schooling. Students at provincial schools frequently demonstrate stronger academic achievement and better preparation for post-secondary education. Furthermore, school facilities, in many cases, demonstrate state-of-the-art innovations and technology.
In leaving, parents are aware that their children will be losing intimate contact with their home communities. Other costs are not as immediately obvious. The often-hidden realities of education off-reserve include subtle alienation, which is felt by students who don’t see themselves or their Indigenous heritage reflected in the curriculum, in the teaching staff or in the school’s physical environment. This marginalization inevitably creates a sense of isolation and disconnection that is only heightened by instances of overt racism. When families choose to access the benefits of provincial schools by sending their children to be billeted or to live with relatives, while they themselves remain in the home community, an even greater sense of isolation ensues.
Clearly, parents seek the best for their children, but the trade-offs are real, and many of the negative factors are unforeseen. At the same time, it is within the power of provincial educators to mitigate and even eliminate the factors that cause marginalization.
In June 2015, the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) convened a symposium in Yellowknife, NT, inviting delegates from across Canada. The concern being addressed was simple: How do the Indigenous peoples of Canada gain equitable employment as teachers in the classrooms of the nation? In Manitoba, for example, 17 percent of the population identifies as Indigenous,1 while only 10 percent of the teachers in the province do so.2 Furthermore, those teachers who are Indigenous typically gravitate to specific communities, leaving others with an even greater disproportion in representation.
Delegates to the CMEC conference sought to address the central issues, but repeatedly they were confronted with the inescapable fact that education in Canada does not reflect Indigenous values, mores and beliefs.3 Indigenous students feel alienated from the educative process. This more pressing reality underlies the reluctance of Indigenous students to enter careers in education.
Near the close of the conference, working groups were tasked with addressing one of eight key questions focused on bringing more credentialed Indigenous teachers into the system. However, of the eight working groups, fully three returned to report that their primary suggestion would, instead, confront the greater challenge of the ghettoization of Indigenous philosophies and perspectives in the public schools themselves. These three sub-committees each, in turn, made the recommendation that, across all jurisdictions in Canada, a requirement be set in place whereby completion of a minimum of one credit in Indigenous studies would be required for graduation from secondary school, regardless of school or program specializations. Thus, without exception, students graduating from high school in Canada would have some background in Indigenous thought and culture. Thus dual-diploma and technical education programs (i.e. those offering the standard diploma coupled with a second diploma in specialties such as business or the trades), university preparatory programs, and even secondary programs as diverse as those serving Hutterite colonies would all require exposure to Indigenous philosophy and thought.
Informing this recommendation, which was later affirmed by the conference as a whole, is the understanding that Indigenous thought (diverse as it is in its manifestations and nuances) is beneficial to all learners. Moreover, it was noted that simplifying Indigenous philosophical perspectives for sporadic integration into pre-existent course content creates the impression that Indigenous understandings of the world are substandard, crude and unsophisticated – none of which is accurate.
Conference delegates noted that students in the Northwest Territories are already required to complete such a credit before graduating (Northern Studies 10) and those in British Columbia are able to take an English Language Arts course with Indigenous focus at any grade level from 9 through 12. In Manitoba, students are able to select option courses such as The Consequences and Triumphs of Indigenous Philosophy and Current Topics in First Nations, Métis and Inuit Studies.
For the recommendations of the conference to take effect, each jurisdiction would be required to bring forth legislation, changing the graduation requirements. Whether or not this transpires remains to be seen, but the underlying concern should not be dismissed: Indigenous perspectives are, at best, marginalized in public schools and are often absent entirely from the curricula of specialized, secondary schooling. This leaves non-Indigenous students uninformed and intellectually impoverished and Indigenous students feeling alienated from the educative process.
“Not again.” The teacher in the corner of the staff room was looking over the agenda for our upcoming professional development day and obviously did not notice that I had entered the room. “Why do we always have to talk about Aboriginal education, as if they are the only special interest group? Why not Dutch education or Filipino education?”
That question is not uncommon, though perhaps it is not commonly voiced so insensitively. Furthermore, it can and ought to be answered on a number of levels. First, it should be noted that the treaties of Canada provide for the education of First Nations students, and this has implications for the educative process wherever Indigenous students attend for schooling. The graduation rate for Indigenous students is significantly lower than that of others, often hovering just above 50 percent. One of the most significant reasons for this is the alienation and marginalization Indigenous students feel in Canadian schools. As long ago as 2003, Schissel and Wortherspoon conducted groundbreaking research that found that Indigenous students perform best when immersed in curricular programming that thoroughly reflects Indigenous thought and worldviews. Perhaps counterintuitively, the second-best performance for Indigenous students was found when no attempt at all was made to integrate Indigenous perspectives into the curriculum. The least conducive environment for Indigenous students was that where a sprinkling approach was taken with regard to the inclusion of Indigenous perspectives. Although there may be numerous factors that bring about this dynamic, one of the most plausible explanations would be that students in this third group are experiencing Indigenous content as that which is the other, or worse yet, that which is inferior.4 As a result, they are estranged from the institutions that are ostensibly attempting to promote their success.
A second response to the question of why Canadian educators should feel compelled to incorporate and value Indigenous worldviews in curricula has to do with an ethical obligation. This can best be stated in light of history. The displacement of Indigenous peoples in Canada transpired through the dynamics of interaction between sovereign entities. As such, the sovereign rights of Indigenous people were not extinguished by military subjugation. By contrast, immigrants to Canada come to our shores knowing that, among the many changes that they will encounter, is the need to accommodate Canadian forms of pedagogy. This is a choice that they willingly make; whereas Indigenous peoples never were given that option. Instead, the current pedagogical system has been forcibly imposed over the course of history with devastating consequences.
The third reply to questions concerning the need for Indigenous education in Canadian schools is simply the enrichment that exists when Indigenous thought and worldviews are embraced. While Indigenous philosophy around the world does manifest unique aspects from one location to another, there is a striking commonality to Indigenous thought whether it is in Northeast India, Japan, Zambia or Western Canada. Although anthropologists have been baffled by these undeniable commonalities of thought in populations around the globe that had little if any contact with one another, Indigenous people can easily provide the answer. Regardless of where one may live, common teachers among the four-footed, the finned and the winged races can teach us about the world, what exists, how things work and how we should be in the world. These lessons inform all Indigenous wisdom and understanding. Therefore, an education that includes the perspectives of, for example, the Cree of Saskatchewan will, to some degree or another, also reflect the wisdom of the Ainu of Japan, the Nenets of Russia and other Indigenous people of the world.
At present, the Canadian educational landscape demonstrates an all-too-frequent marginalization of Indigenous worldviews. Students opting into specialized schools through “schools of choice” policies quite often leave any vestige of Indigenous philosophy behind. At the same time, students from Inuit, First Nations and Métis territories who relocate in order to attend provincial and territorial schools also frequently encounter a dearth of authentic Indigenous content.
Only when a conscious effort is made to embrace and value Indigenous thought on an equal footing with those worldviews and perspectives that have their genesis in Europe do Indigenous students perform at rates on par with others. In speaking of the Waadookodaading School in Hayward, Wisconsin, Dr. Anton Treuer points out that this Anishinaabemowin immersion school consistently outperforms other schools on state standards exams, which are taken in English. Waadookodaading School has a student population that is over 95 percent Ojibwe, employs Indigenous teachers and incorporates traditional Anishinaabe understandings of the world in the educative process.
The challenge for educators in Canada is to bring this degree of success into both the mainstream of our educational institutions and the disparate corners created by schools of choice policies. This will occur only when we incorporate and thoroughly value Indigenous philosophy and perspectives. I would like to say that Wyatt found this inclusive curricula in the school where I was on staff. Perhaps he did, on some days and in some classes. The reality, however, is that this school was struggling to adjust its pedagogical practice in the same way that most are across the nation. For Wyatt, it was the support of caring instructors and the friendship of fellow students that helped him to navigate his three years with us and to graduate with honours.
En Bref : Chaque année, un grand nombre de familles autochtones optent de quitter leurs collectivités pour profiter des avantages des écoles publiques provinciales établies dans des villes et villages. Bien que les nouvelles écoles choisies par ces élèves transplantés puissent comporter des avantages d’ordre scolaire, il y a aussi lieu de tenir compte des compromis qui sont faits. La richesse de la philosophie et de la pensée autochtones est, dans une large mesure, marginalisée dans les écoles publiques, de sorte que les élèves autochtones se sentent souvent déconnectés de l’école et les autres élèves sont privés de perspectives élargies qui pourraient enrichir leur expérience éducative. D’ores et déjà, il revient aux établissements d’enseignement canadiens d’apporter les importants correctifs nécessaires pour corriger cette dynamique et établir ainsi l’équilibre que méritent tous les élèves canadiens.
Original Photo: courtesy National Reading Campaign
First published in Education Canada, June 2016
1 “National Aboriginal Populations,” Employment and Social Development Canada. http://well-being.esdc.gc.ca/misme-iowb/.3ndic.1t.4r@-eng.jsp?iid=36
2 Aboriginal Education Directorate, “Aboriginal Teachers Questionnaire Report, 2009” (Winnipeg, MB: Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth).www.edu.gov.mb.ca/aed/publications/pdf/teachers_questionnaire09.pdf.
3 J. Tim Goddard and Rosemary Y. Foster, “Adapting to Diversity: Where cultures collide – Education issues in Northern Alberta,” Canadian Journal of Education 27 (2002): 9.
4 Bernard Schissel and Terry Wotherspoon, The Legacy of School for Aboriginal People: Education, oppression and emancipation (Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2003), 92-95.
Since the early 1970s, public schools in Anglophone boards across Canada have responded to the demand for programs leading to functional levels of bilingualism by, in large part, implementing variations of French Immersion, a program where non-French-speaking students learn through experiencing French as the language of instruction. Increasing numbers of parents continue to ask for access to French Immersion programs as a choice within public schooling.
Currently, approximately 10 percent of Canadian students are registered in French Immersion (FI).[i] However, over half of FI students leave the program before the end of Grade 12. Studies have demonstrated that some students find the program too confining or difficult as the school years progress, and some value the French they have learned but wish to pursue other interests.[ii] An additional 40 percent of Canadian students are registered in other forms of French as a Second Language (FSL) programs, with a wide range of program designs. We have little idea of the comparative effectiveness of any of these programs, and no information on other international language programs.
This article examines the situation regarding second-language programs in the Canadian school system today, questioning if our propensity to consider French Immersion as the only viable model is the most equitable approach to preparing the most students possible as global citizens equipped with second-language and intercultural competence.
French Immersion does produce students with a high level of functional bilingualism – provided these students remain in the program as designed until the end of Grade 12, which the majority do not. But there are challenges in continuing to expand FI programs. The ability of school boards to continue to respond to parental demand for the expansion of French Immersion is confined by context and circumstances around available space, student enrolments, budget, personnel and competing demands from neighbourhood schools and other programs of choice. Finding and keeping teachers with the necessary linguistic, cultural and pedagogical competence to teach in FI is a continued challenge for pre-service and in-service programs.
Finally, there are concerns that the FI pedagogical model mitigates against equity. The FI program is sometimes perceived as providing “a private school within the public system” and a more homogeneous class composition. French immersion has continued to be challenging around inclusionary practices. Students cannot join Early FI after Grade 1. Many newly arrived English Language Learners (ELL) would choose FI or another effective FSL program if they could have neighbourhood access at later points than Grade 1. In addition, despite increased efforts to promote differentiation of instruction and inclusionary practices, French Immersion does not historically retain anywhere near the same percentages of special education students as the rest of the system, especially at the intermediate and secondary grades.
The question becomes, are there additional pathways to French competence that could improve access and ease some of the strain on the system?
Rather than continue to communicate to parents that French Immersion is the only pathway to acceptable levels of second-language (L2) competence, we need to expand our viable pedagogical pathways and make space for more students to learn French, or additional languages, in meaningful and effective ways. In the global village of today, and in the bilingual, plurilingual, pluricultural, forward-thinking country of Canada, it is the role of the Canadian school system to seek out more pathways to develop students’ competencies in multiple languages.
Curriculum reform is currently moving towards personalization of curriculum, interdisciplinary competencies and multiple pathways to success. Second-language education has much to contribute to this 21st century learning. Intercultural competence is a lifelong skill that accompanies second-language learning experiences. This goal is for all learners and is particularly pertinent in light of the core competencies that are key features of “deeper learning.”[iii] Researchers and policymakers underline the intercultural dimension of second language education:
“… the ‘intercultural dimension’ in language teaching aims to develop learners as intercultural speakers or mediators who are able to engage with complexity and multiple identities and to avoid the stereotyping which accompanies perceiving someone through a single identity… Intercultural communication is communication on the basis of respect for individuals and equality of human rights as the democratic basis for social interaction.”[iv]
So how can school boards expand the options to include more opportunities for more students?
A companion to the Immersion model is found in the Intensive model, which has been expanding across Canada since its introduction by Canadian second-language researchers Joan Netten and Claude Germain in 1997. Intensive French is defined as “an enrichment of the Core French program consisting of offering from three to four times the number of hours regularly scheduled for FSL in a concentrated period of time (five months) at the end of the elementary school cycle (in Grade 5 or 6).”[v] This model is enacted in the neighbourhood school setting. Essentially, students experience a mini-immersion into the language for half a year, and the other subjects are compressed to accommodate this in the rest of the year.
Because of its intensity, this increased time is effective in giving students a significant boost in oral language and literacy. An important consideration in developing the program is ensuring an immersion-like experience, wherein authentic use of the language is emphasized – that is, language used for real communication rather than as an object of study. School boards that introduce the Intensive model in Grade 5 or 6 must ensure appropriate staffing and in-service training. Follow-up courses (upper intermediate and secondary) that respect the emergent oral fluency of the students are also essential in order to reap the benefits of such a model. This model is being used for other additional languages, including Aboriginal languages, and is currently being introduced internationally.
In a 2015 presentation to the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages, Germain called for federal funding categories for school boards to be altered to reflect the proficiency levels reached by students, rather than funding on the basis of participation rates only.[vi] Students who begin with Intensive French in Grades 5 or 6 and follow through in Post-Intensive French until at least Grade 10 arrive at an Intermediate level of competence, able to communicate comfortably and continue learning in a Francophone milieu. Moreover, the Intensive model is a neighbourhood school option with much less pressure on staffing and the de facto inclusion of all students. Yet Germain reports that in 2013-2014 in Canada, there were still only 34,000 students enrolled in Intensive or Post-Intensive French, about 4 percent of Canadian students in Grades 5-10. This model deserves federal funding equivalent to Immersion funding to provide incentives to boards to implement more programs.
Other models in existence across Canada that emphasize time, intensity and action-oriented language use include:
As a means of illustrating the complexities faced by school boards and the value of alternative program models offered in conjunction with French Immersion, I will briefly describe some examples from Western Canada.
In Surrey, the largest school district in B.C., Wendy Carr worked as a participant researcher alongside the teachers, principals and school district staff to describe the successes and challenges of Intensive French program implementation in five elementary schools. Careful attention was also paid to the follow-up at the secondary school level. Since Intensive French in Grade 5 or 6 does not involve teaching content through the language, is viewed as low risk by parents, and is a “neighbourhood school” program, it proved a very popular choice with ELL families in Surrey.[vii]
A second case study was conducted by the Centre for the Study of Educational Policy and Leadership at Simon Fraser University in the region of Golden, B.C. This small town and surrounding area is projected to suffer from declining enrollment over the next ten years. The manner in which the Early Immersion enrollment was affecting the demographics of the one and only primary school in town was a matter of serious concern to the Board. The percentage of special-needs students was very much higher in the English classes at the school and the differences in clientele were pronounced. The recommendations of the report included modifying the Immersion program to start in Grade 4 instead of Kindergarten (a model common in some provinces), so that all students in the region could attend.[viii]
A recent review of French programs offered in the Yukon Territory, found a mix of Immersion and Intensive programs, an impressive set of choices given the diversity of population, a significant commitment to multiple Aboriginal languages and cultures, and a combination of urban and rural schools. Recommendations of the review suggest strengthening options and pathways for students of both Immersion and Intensive programs at the secondary level, by offering experiential programs such as an integrated semester in French focusing on outdoor education, work experience, and language-through-content options such as cooking and arts in French, as well as intensifying the use of technology-based action-oriented projects to reach out to and connect with speakers of the language around the world.[ix]
GIVEN CANADA’S COMMITMENT to a pluralistic society, and that we live in a global community where intercultural competence is highly valued, school boards have important choices to make in evaluating the effectiveness and equity of their current options and in meeting the second-language needs of the most students possible.
The caveat in this call for expanded pathways to functional fluency in second languages is that there is little or no useful information available to school boards, provinces or the federal government as to the achievement levels of students who have experienced these programs.
To deepen the commitment to effective second-language education for the most students possible, federal and provincial jurisdictions need to continue their work with the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) in the Canadian context.[x] Canada is involved in several initiatives supported by the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) and the Canadian Association of Second Language Teachers (CASLT) to implement the vast array of tools available for assessment and credentialing through the CEFR.[xi] Clear expectations based on globally accepted descriptions of competency levels will help students, parents and boards understand their language proficiency and learning pathways.
In jurisdictions in Europe, for example, it is common to see job postings with levels of required second-language fluency attached. A fine example of efforts in this regard is the Edmonton Public School Board, which has implemented bilingual programs in six languages, and has been working for years with the CEFR-inspired “student language passport”: a digital portfolio of language experiences, and related benchmarks and credentials. Efforts to encourage students to follow through at the secondary level are further enhanced by concrete goals and internationally recognized attainable credentials for achievement.
[i] Canadian Parents for French, Enrollment Statistics for FSL Programs 2009 to 2014. http://cpf.ca/en/research-advocacy/research/enrolmenttrends
[ii] C. Lewis and S. Shapson, “Secondary French Immersion: A Study of students who leave the program, Canadian Modern Language Review 45, no. 3 (1989).
[iii] Michael Fullan, Great to Excellent: Launching the next stage of Ontario’s education agenda (2013). www.michaelfullan.ca/media/13599974110.pdf
[iv] M. Byram, B. Gribkova and H. Starkey, Developing the Intercultural Dimension in Language Teaching: A practical introduction for teachers (Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2002). http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/source/guide_dimintercult_en.pdf
[v] W. Carr, “Intensive French in British Columbia: Student and parent perspectives and ESL student performance, The Canadian Modern Language Review 65,no. 5 (2010): 787-815.
[vi] Claude Germain, Presentation to the Senate Committee on Official Languages (2015). http://www.francaisintensif.ca/media/gen-02-eng-senate-committ-lng-c-germain-march-2015.pdf
[vii] W. Carr, “Intensive French in British Columbia.”
[viii] Centre for the Study of Educational Policy and Leadership, External Review of the Golden Zone: Rocky Mountain School District (Faculty of Education, Simon Fraser University: 2010).
[ix] C. Lewis and R. Swansborough, FSL Programs in the Yukon Focus Group Report: More French for more students, follow the learner (2016).
[x] Council of Ministers of Education of Canada, Working with the Common. European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) in the Canadian Context (2010). www.cmec.ca/docs/assessment/CEFR-canadian-context.pdf
[xi] L. Hermans-Nymark, “The Path to Bilingualism: The Common European Framework for languages in Canada,” Education Canada 53, no. 1 (2015). www.cea-ace.ca/education-canada/article/path-bilingualism
Photo Caption: This Grade 12 student (middle) was able, through the Brock University Science Mentorship Program, to work with Professor Craig Tokuno (left) on his research into the neurophysiological and biomechanical control of human movement.
I never teach my pupils; I only attempt to provide the conditions in which they can learn.
–Albert Einstein
Most would agree that students need to become more scientifically literate. However, science-literate students are not necessarily equipped to confront the complex societal issues that they will encounter as citizens. Students require knowledge, skills, and dispositions that enable them to critically and responsibly deal with an increasingly scientific and technological society. One way forward is to engage students in authentic, relevant and meaningful learning activities nested in their communities. This important educational innovation can help students become more engaged in learning science, help them connect their science learning to other subjects, strengthen their understanding of science, and improve their capabilities for responsible citizenship in their community. Nevertheless, the role of science teachers, schools and communities in terms of developing effective partnerships along with appropriate curriculum and pedagogy is not fully understood. This commentary begins the dialogue regarding science teaching and learning in relation to school communities.
Historically, the conceptualizing of scientific literacy has been an esoteric endeavour. Nevertheless, pundits agree that increased scientific literacy of students and citizens will have broad societal benefits.[1] While science career goals are always part of any statements for scientific literacy, democratic and responsible science citizenship goals are just as important. For instance, there is agreement that proficiency in the areas of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) is closely related to a country’s capacity in important sectors of the economy.[2] Without question, society is strengthened when all students, regardless of their career path, are equipped to learn, evaluate and respond to scientific and technological issues in their community.[3]
Schools are a part of their local communities. These schools interact in myriad ways with families and the general public, but also with governmental, non-profit, and business organizations, to support students and teachers. These connections can bring a wide range of resources, including additional funding and staffing, into schools.[4]
A growing number of schools and community partners are adopting programs that allow students to learn in their communities. These partnerships provide students with more authentic ways to develop necessary knowledge and skills, aiming to engage students in curricular topics that explicitly relate to where they live, and to use their own community as a source and location for learning. This is an important feature, as failing to contextualize science learning can lead to students’ alienation from science. While there are many ways to organize community-based education, advocates have focused on models that engage students in meaningful experiential learning through problem- or project-based approaches. Collectively referred to as community-based learning, these models include: academic partnerships, civic education, environmental education, place-based learning, service learning, and career-based learning.[5]
Community-based science education is an approach to teaching and learning that connects disciplinary learning to the local context. Figure 1 illustrates how schools and science can be seen as a focal point for a network of locations consisting of material and human resources for science learning within a community.
Figure 1: Community-based science education
Below are a few Canadian examples that highlight community-based science learning opportunities for students:
The Science Ambassador Program pairs senior university science, engineering and health science students with rural and remote Aboriginal community K-12 schools to support creative and culturally-relevant science teaching and learning. University students work alongside teachers to present hands-on science activities, facilitate class discussions, and mentor students.
www.artsandscience.usask.ca/scienceoutreach/ambassador
The EcoLeague program is a youth initiative that provides resource kits for elementary and secondary students across Canada to encourage them to help the environment through community- and school-based sustainability action projects.
http://resources4rethinking.ca/en/ecoleague/about-us
The Brock University Science Mentorship Program links secondary school science students from local schools in Ontario’s Niagara Region to university faculty mentors from various disciplines including Biological Sciences, Biotechnology, Chemistry, Health Sciences, Neuroscience, and Physics. Working on site with university researchers, students are encouraged to consider a career in the sciences while engaging in science research programs carried out at the university.
www.brocku.ca/mathematics-science/outreach-to-schools/science-mentorship-program
While these initiatives are meaningful opportunities for students, student engagement in science education – particularly at the secondary school level – can be further enhanced when learning environments:
One example of an initiative that incorporates some of the above characteristics is EcoSpark’s Changing Currents program. Based in the Greater Toronto Area, the program aims to allow students to identify and monitor a watershed close to their school community. Not only do students have access to community resources while engaging in authentic ecological science practices related to water quality and biodiversity; they also have the opportunity to conduct future study on issues or challenges they discover based on their data collection, as they contribute to a regional water monitoring program. Additionally, teachers are provided with resources and training to help their science students carry out the watershed science.
www.ecospark.ca/changingcurrents
Community-based science education provides a way for students and teachers to become local problem-solvers who can deal with scientific and technological challenges that are of consequence. But programs such as Changing Currents are not common.
These partnerships are challenging to develop due to the need for specific science materials and equipment, along with science and educational expertise – all necessities not available in many Canadian communities. Further, partnerships can have multiple and sometimes competing goals. Outcomes for students, teachers, and community partners need to be clearly articulated, and resources and relationships need to be sufficient and workable. Overall, there has been an increase in school-community initiatives in school science, typically focused on environmental science topics (e.g. biodiversity, air, and water projects). However, these represent only a small sample of potential partnership opportunities available in many communities across Canada.
While there have been some efforts to research and develop community-based science programs with schools,7 additional efforts are required to develop science curriculum and support professional learning that emphasize school science and community partnerships. The potential benefits to science students are important.
Using a communities of practice framework8 can help address the elements required for a successful science-community partnership. These include:
Needless to say, government policies and incentives for initiating and sustaining partnerships are critical for community-based learning in science. Emergent technologies (e.g. social/collaborative online tools) can also play a critical role in facilitating the participation of science experts, educators, parents and volunteers.
We are entering an era where schools and communities are forming more and more partnerships, and cultivating these relationships is becoming ever more important. In order to establish beneficial community relationships, teachers and school administrators must be at the nexus of these relations. Thus, continued efforts are necessary to support important outcomes beneficial to all participants with/in communities across Canada.
En bref: La plupart des gens conviendraient que les élèves doivent accroître leurs connaissances scientifiques. Cependant, les élèves possédant des notions scientifiques ne sont pas nécessairement outillés pour confronter les questions sociétales complexes auxquelles ils feront face en tant que citoyens. Une solution consiste à engager les élèves dans des activités d’apprentissage authentiques, pertinentes et significatives intégrées à leur communauté scolaire. Cette importante innovation éducative peut aider les élèves à se consacrer davantage à l’apprentissage des sciences et à faire le lien entre leurs connaissances en sciences et d’autres matières, ainsi qu’accroître leur compréhension de la science et leurs capacités civiques dans leur collectivité. Néanmoins, le rôle des enseignants en sciences, des écoles et des collectivités dans l’établissement de partenariats efficaces n’est pas entièrement compris. Ce commentaire suscite un débat concernant le lien entre l’enseignement des sciences et les communautés scolaires.
Photo: courtesy Photo courtesy Brock University Science Mentorship Program
First published in Education Canada, March 2016
1 Douglas A. Roberts, “Scientific literacy/science literacy,” Handbook of Research on Science Education (NY: Routledge, 2007), 729-780.
2 Graham W. F. Orpwood, Bonnie Ann Schmidt, and Jun Hu. Competing in the 21st Century Skills Race (Canadian Council of Chief Executives, 2012).
3 Glen S. Aikenhead, “Towards Decolonizing the Pan-Canadian Science Framework,” Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics & Technology Education 10, no. 4 (2006): 387-399.
4 Carolyn Gregoric, School-Community Involvement (UNESCO-APNIEVE Australia publications, 2013); Catherine M. Hands, “Why Collaborate? The differing reasons for secondary school educators’ establishment of school-community partnerships,” School Effectiveness and School Improvement 21, No. 2 (2010): 189-207.
5 Atelia Melaville, Amy C. Berg, and Martin J. Blank, Community-Based Learning: Engaging students for success and citizenship (Washington, DC: Coalition for Community Schools, 2006).
6 Randi A. Engle and Faith R. Conant. “Guiding Principles for Fostering Productive Disciplinary Engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom,”Cognition and Instruction 20, No. 4 (2002): 399-483.
7 Lisa M. Bouillion and Louis M. Gomez, “Connecting School and Community with Science Learning: Real world problems and school-community partnerships as contextual scaffolds,”Journal of Research in Science Teaching 38, No. 8 (2001): 878-898; Douglas D. Karrow and Xavier Fazio, “NatureWatch, Schools and Environmental Education Practice,” Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education 10, No. 2 (2010): 160-172.
8 Etienne Wenger, Richard Arnold McDermott, and William Snyder, Cultivating Communities of Practice: A guide to managing knowledge (Boston: Harvard Business Press, 2002).
There’s a golden opportunity lurking deep below the surface of one of the most challenging issues facing school systems right across the country. But while more and more districts are grappling with the increased interest in and high uptake of French Immersion (FI) programs—some opening their doors to students as early as Kindergarten, the opportunity to take a deeper dive into questions of mission and vision may be missed along the way.
In a sense, this is understandable. After all, the popularity of FI among Canadian parents continues to be on the uptick, bringing with it closely-connected challenges around staffing, transportation, student support and the viability of English programming in some communities. These are very visible issues and can quickly become hot buttons for district and school administrators, trustees and parents. Solutions don’t come easy and consensus is often very difficult to reach.
But there is a sense in which these immediate concerns might take us away from the opportunity to tackle some more fundamental questions that, despite their currency in the professional literature and the blogosphere, likely aren’t regular items on many school board, staff meeting or parent council agendae. So what might those questions be and how are they connected with conversations about French Immersion programs?
Well, first, I’m going to go out on a bit of limb and suggest that, choosing a French Immersion program may not always be about French, per se. When you think about it, the option to choose a French or English stream for our children may be the only choice that most parents actually get in a publicly-funded system! In most Canadian contexts, school assignment is largely a function of geographical location and we know that geographical location is largely a function of socio-economic status. But, whether offered in the neighbourhood school or whether enrolment will require moving schools, the option to say “yes” or “no” to FI is one of the only choices that parents of younger children currently have. For many, that is significant.
So, if we travel just a little below the surface, we encounter this rather sticky question about choice in public education and its a question that has implications for individual families, neighbourhood schools and entire systems.
But it isn’t the only issue that we meet on our deep dive. In fact, adjacent to the question about choice is another about equity, especially in terms of access and support. There was a time when French Immersion programs was perceived to be a more rigorous option—one that might preclude some students from entry. These days, however, many districts make it abundantly clear that all students are welcome to apply. Fine to say, but what pressures and concomitant effects does this place on the system in terms of being able to support all who choose the program? And what commitment is there to the success of all who enrol in an FI program? These are important questions arising soon after you wade into the choice discussion. It’s also a question that touches down at the personal, local school and system levels.
A third area of conversation is probably best understood not as a question, but as more of a tension—a fundamental tension. And even though it has likely always existed, it’s a tension that, I believe, is becoming more pronounced as we move further into our re-visioning work in public education. It’s a tension that pulls between two polarities: the success of MY child and the success of ALL children. Refreshed narratives around personalization, the development of individual potential and the desire to have our children maintain a competitive edge appear, in some ways, to be diametrically opposed to a vision of systems that are committed to social justice, equity and the success of all. Again, its a conversation that invites consideration by individual families, school communities and entire districts.
While the French Immersion context is not the only one that could lead us into a consideration of these more fundamental questions and challenges. But it seems to be a context that has currency and import for many Canadian districts. So, what might happen if, alongside our deliberations about the practicalities and logistics connected with offering sustainable FI programs in our school districts, we also took the time to develop the space to engage in these deeper, admittedly philosophical, questions about purpose, choice and access. What might be the result if some of these questions found their way onto the agenda at local school board meetings, parent gatherings and provincial roundtables?
My sense is that the result will be a different understanding of the importance of programs like French Immersion (and other forms of language instruction). Beyond that, however, (and, I would argue, more important) it will also open up some important dialogue about the meaning of public education in the 21st century. How can we develop viable and vibrants systems that are comfortable offering valuable choices like French Immersion, but still have a commitment to the broader social values of public education?
In this short, plain-language book, Joel Westheimer provides an astute critique of recent educational reform, with specific attention to his concern that it “is limiting the kinds of teaching and learning that can develop the attitudes, skills and knowledge necessary for a democratic society to flourish.” (p. 14) Moreover, he asserts that even when programs to foster democratic citizenship do exist, they “usually have more to do with volunteerism, charity, and obedience than with democracy.” (p. 37)
However, he finds that a growing number of educators have recognized this problem and responded with three types of citizenship programs, each based on a different vision of a “good citizen”: the Personally Responsible Citizen, the Participatory Citizen and the Social Justice-Oriented Citizen. The ideal program, says Westheimer, would draw from the strengths of each and he provides inspiring examples of some that do. However, he does not advocate any particular program, but rather models that “give teachers the freedom and flexibility to design curriculum in ways that take advantage of local contexts.” (p. 69) He sees teachers, therefore, as not merely adopting such curriculum but as actively adapting it in situ, drawing on their own and students’ interests. He believes that “educators in a democratic society have a responsibility to create learning environments that teach students how to think, how to critically analyze multiple perspectives, and how to develop the passion for participation in the kind of dialogue on which a healthy democracy relies.” (p. 33)
This book presents a powerful and passionately delivered argument for citizenship education and convincingly demonstrates that recent educational reform tends to be hostile to this goal. For Canadian readers, Westheimer’s argument may seem overstated because it is almost exclusively focused on the American experience, which is more severe in its dependence on high-stakes standardized assessment than anything that we have yet seen in this country. On the other hand, since U.S. policy often influences Canada so strongly, this can read as a warning of what may come if we continue down a path which, says Westheimer, teaches students “how to please authority and pass the tests, not how to develop convictions and stand up for them.” (p. 18)
Photo: Dave Donald
First published in Education Canada, December 2015
Teachers College Press, 2015 ISBN: 978-0807756355
What should the future of Canadian science education look like? Can we consider a uniquely Canadian approach to science education – one that challenges common assumptions and changes the very nature of science education in Canadian schools? A recent study conducted among a panel of over 100 science education specialists and scientists addressed these and related questions in a quest to identify where the priority areas should be for Canada’s youth, as they prepare to live and work in a technology-rich and selectively globalized society. One member of the expert panel assembled for the study described the sense of urgency to change the orientation of science education in Canada in this way:
Why should we continue to deliver science education in our schools if we fail to recognize the fundamental importance of sustaining the very systems of this planet upon which humanity critically depend? Allow me to be absolutely clear on this point – the human species is presently on a trajectory that could have globally catastrophic outcomes; science education has a role to play in altering that trajectory and so presents an explicit reason to change our approach to education in the sciences, and soon.
The last episode of looking in-depth at the state of science education in Canada took shape in the late 1970s and the early 1980s. That period almost certainly received some degree of inspiration from the Symons Report of the Commission on Canadian Studies released in 1975. The title of the report – To Know Ourselves – was telling, recalling the Delphic maxim from Plato as he wrote in the Republic that to “know thyself” transcends the individual and relates also to the life of the individual functioning in the larger society. The report was a sweeping manifesto which echoed the patriotism felt by many Canadians after our centennial celebrations.
The Symons Report identified such an urgent need to focus on the perceived lack of a Canadian perspective in science education and technology that it devoted an entire chapter to this one discipline area alone. A subsection of the Commission report titled “Is There a Canadian Science?” provoked a spirited debate among the Canadian scientific establishment with the suggestion that the universality of scientific achievement might also bear the marks of a uniquely Canadian character and culture. Symons’ argument reflected a perspective shared by many at the time: “Science in Canada can be simultaneously international and Canadian in the sense that it is approached from a Canadian viewpoint, it fulfils a particular Canadian need, or it is related to a particular Canadian interest aroused by location, geography, climate or by some other distinct feature of the country.”
It should not be surprising that the science of sustainability is of essence to be integrated through the disciplines. On what alternate grounds would the future of science education rest?
The Science Council of Canada’s groundbreaking 1984 release of Science for Every Student: Educating Canadians for Tomorrow’s World is now 30 years behind us.1 In addition, some 20 years have passed since the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada initiated the process culminating in the Common Framework of Science Learning Outcomes K-12 of 1997, which provided a number of Canadian provinces with the basis for new science curricula (variants of which are still in use today). Given the growing influence being felt from the STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) movement in recent years – a decidedly American influence – I felt that the timing was opportune for a national scan, not of the present state of play in science education but a consideration of its future.
Centuries ago, at the Temple of Apollo at Delphi in Greece, it was customary for influential members of society to pay a visit to the Pythia, the priestess charged with summoning the messages of the gods and delivering “oracles” about the future. The difficulty with these pronouncements was that they were always delivered as an obscure riddle with two possible outcomes – a great success or a catastrophic failure. It was the interpretation of the recipient that determined the outcome.
In recent decades, Delphi has come to represent a widely used research method – particularly in instances where a large-scale, complex problem is addressed. Originally used in classified Cold-War era research, a Delphi panel gathers expert opinion on a subject or issue from a group intended to be representative of those who should typically have a say in the matter. With the advent of the Internet, we can now pull together an online panel of experts, creating a group that is diverse in expertise, experiences, character, and geography. Moreover, many of the traditional pitfalls of face-to-face deliberations are mitigated by this research method, which preserves the anonymity of the participants while at the same time allowing for the free flow of discussion.2 In recent years, Delphi studies of the expert community have become rather common in educational circles and this methodology seemed a very good fit for a study of the future of Canadian science education.
Over a five-month period in early 2014, an expert panel convened online for a series of deliberations. The membership included curriculum specialists from provincial/territorial education departments, award-winning K-12 science teachers, faculty from Canadian universities in the sciences, engineering and education, industry scientists, and the science media. The process was initiated by lengthy, free-form written responses to four “seed” questions. These questions grounded the research in four areas thought to have high levels of effect:
Once I had examined the remarkable diversity of opinion expressed in the panel members’ responses, a series of questionnaires were developed which asked the panel to rank in order of importance the dominant themes across the four questions. Not only was the panel contributing to a broad consensus on priority areas for science education, each was also asked to provide a justification for their respective positions. Between questionnaires, each member was provided with summaries of the group responses prior to the next round of deliberations. This is the custom in a Delphi study, in the hopes that consensus positions will emerge as each member is provided with the thinking of the others involved in the study. The process stops when it appears as though the positions of the panel have solidified, but not always with consensus achieved.
If there was a common thread making its way through the deliberations of the national panel, and one which appeared and re-appeared across responses to the four questions framing this study, it was this: Sustainability of the planet’s systems and humankind’s relationships with, and influences upon, those systems rises to the top of the list of priorities for science education in this country. No less important, the panel encouraged a priority on making strong connections among the pure sciences, sustainability issues, socio-scientific issues, and the relevance of the curriculum for students. An appreciation for the interconnectedness of these important threads, they felt, could be the foundation of a Canadian understanding of science in today’s world.
In short, the emerging consensus proposed a comprehensive and complete re-orientation of science teaching and learning among Canadians. The result would be an approach I like to call “the circumpolar curriculum,” one that appeals to the context of Canadian society, its demographics, its geographic diversity, its traditional knowledge base, and its position internationally as a northern nation of changing influence. As one panel member described it:
“It should not be surprising that the science of sustainability is of essence to be integrated through the disciplines. On what alternate grounds would the future of science education rest? Concerns about sustainability, health, energy, food security and water are examples of significant issues that face today’s societies and must involve both curriculum policymakers and the requirement of action. The issues are massively interconnected.”
If we were to list the qualities which should characterize science education in Canada for the next couple of decades, and do so on a priority basis, the national consensus from this panel would group these into two distinct sets of priorities which should invite a contentious debate. Figure 1 summarizes these priorities:
When asked to describe the nature of science education as it could be practiced in Canada, much of the commentary from the panel pointed to maintaining the traditional strengths we have enjoyed in areas such as socio-scientific issues and broad literacy in science, but now embedded in a sustainability focus. One new element is the explicit demand to focus attention on our founding peoples’ aspirations, with an eye to explicitly advancing this aspect of a circumpolar approach to science. One panel member described it eloquently as follows:
“The involvement of Indigenous peoples in science education is paramount. Indigenous philosophies, ways of seeing the planet, and defensible and de-colonizing pedagogical practices need to be central to the development of science education among our communities. This is essential if we are to foster greater Aboriginal student engagement in the sciences… learners who often have to engage in ‘border crossing’ in order to ‘feel’ what science is to them. In Canada, there is a critical underrepresentation of Aboriginal people going into science-related programs at the post-secondary level. This has an impact on their ability to participate fully, knowingly having a Canadian voice, and be representative in the world’s scientific communities on an equitable footing.”
Encouraging a new view for science education with the sustainability sciences as its hallmark will require a new understanding of what the term “sustainability” means to the science curriculum. Sustainability focuses on the reconciliation of society’s rapid pace of development with the planet’s environmental limits as laid down by networked systems operating on the time scale of geology, not human life spans. Sustainability science is not, then, exclusively focused on environmental science but recognizes that conducting science outside of environmental, citizenship and cultural contexts is neither remotely conceivable nor possible. That is, science (and education) are inescapably embedded within the environments in which it occurs.
We can now envision a new model for science education with sustainability science at its core, which builds on the emphases identified by the Canadian educator Douglas Roberts about three decades ago (see Figure 2, Visions I and II) to add a third dimension (Vision III) inclusive of Indigenous views – thereby strengthening Canada’s role as a circumpolar nation while simultaneously working to de-colonize the curriculum.
Nature and society mutually shape one another, and therefore sustainability science provides for balanced attention to how society alters the physical environment and how the state of that environment shapes society. There is perhaps a no clearer and more provocative vision for a truly Canadian science education, than one that could develop the knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary to attaining a more habitable planet for all.
En Bref: Une étude nationale récente a engagé divers intervenants à l’échelle du pays à répondre à des questions portant sur l’avenir de l’enseignement des sciences au Canada età examiner les facteurs appelés à influer sur l’enseignement et l’apprentissage des sciences pour la prochaine génération. Ce panel d’experts a donné lieu à un ensemble de positions consensuelles qui pourraient procurer aux éducateurs une occasion historique de réorienter sensiblement les fins mêmes de l’enseignement des sciences dans les écoles canadiennes. Fait étonnant, les opinions du panel allaient à l’encontre de certaines des présomptions courantes qu’ont les éducateurs canadiens sur ce qui est d’une importance vitale en enseignement des sciences. Ces tensions émergentes concernent notamment le rôle des évaluations internationales des élèves telles que le PISA, le prestige international actuel accordé aux sciences, à la technologie, à l’ingénierie et aux mathématiques (STIM) et un appel à mettre la science et le développement durable au cœur même du curriculum.
Photo: courtesy Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board
First published in Education Canada, December 2015
1 G. W. F Orpwood and J.-P. Souque, “Toward the Renewal of Canadian Science Education: II. Findings and recommendations,” Science Education 69, no. 5 (2006): 625-636.
2 For a comprehensive treatment of the Delphi research method, including many sample studies, see Linstone and Turoff (2002), available online at: http://is.njit.edu/pubs/delphibook/
3 The complete national study by the author is available online at http://hdl.handle.net/1993/30080 or directly from the author at: murrayjo@brandonu.ca
I was invited to submit a blog response to this question based on the recognition of Simcoe County’s Fieldcrest Elementary School as one of the 2014 Ken Spencer award winners. We were recognized for our success in supporting student engagement, learning and achievement in mathematics using the Balanced Mathematics framework developed by SCDSB teacher Lee Sparling.
Balanced Math has contributed to the designation of Fieldcrest Elementary School as one of 11 “Promising Practices” schools in Ontario based on a consistent five-year growth in EQAO Mathematics scores. Its components include math journals, shared and independent problem-solving, guided math, math facts and math games. This framework promotes consolidation of learning through the spiraling of concepts throughout the year and a blend of conceptual understanding and procedural fluency.5 6 It also encourages a Math Talk Learning Community through problem solving and math journals.
So what are the best ways to teach math? The best part about the question is the recognition that there are many ways to do so. In Simcoe County, we embrace the idea that teacher mathematics content knowledge, a blend of conceptual understanding and procedural fluency, and assessment-informed instruction are essential. 1 However, educators are encouraged to differentiate the instructional strategies used in order to be responsive to the needs of the learners in their classrooms. Furthermore, our Board Learning Plan (BLPSA) emphasizes the importance of making authentic connections between mathematics and other subject areas, such as the arts, science and social studies. 2 To support these beliefs, educators have voice and choice in their professional learning, which includes a variety of collaborative inquiries:
The foundation for mathematics education in Simcoe County is based on three overarching goals detailed in our Math Action Plan: Inspire Positive Math Mindsets, Deepen our Focus, and Customize Support for each Student/School. First and foremost, we recognize that student, educator and parent mindsets about learning and mathematics have a significant impact on achievement.3. To support Positive Math Mindsets, we have collaborated with PERTS Lab at Stanford University to bring mindset learning to students and educators.4 To Deepen our Focus we are embedding Paying Attention to Mathematics Education monographs, assessment and the use of digital tools into our inquiries. Customizing Support for each Student/School is accomplished through responsive professional learning opportunities based on School Learning Plans (SLPSA-WB) and individual teacher and student needs that arise through assessment.
Balanced Mathematics is one example of an instructional framework from which we have experienced measured success. Of 232 Junior/Intermediate students surveyed, 73%reported that they “definitely” or “most times” feel more confident about problem solving, and 69% reported that they are better at communicating their math thinking.
In No More Math Wars, Ansari suggests that effective mathematics education includes a combination of procedural and conceptual understanding: “all of the literature clearly suggests that both instructional approaches are tightly related to one another and are mutual determinants of successful math learning over time.” Often mistakenly viewed as “discovery learning”, the Ontario Mathematics Curriculum is actually a blend of both. 7 The Balanced Mathematics framework honours this blend through a combination of problem-solving and math facts and games.
In Simcoe County, it has been our experience that instruction which includes a rich combination of problem-solving opportunities that challenge student thinking, delivered through a range of responsive practices, results in the greatest learning and achievement for our students.
[1] “Wintertickle PRESS – Balanced Mathematics – ClicShop.” 2012. 17 Oct. 2015 <http://www.teacheasy.net/c378000384_en/index.html>
[1] “Download Presentation – Association of Educational …” 2014. 17 Oct. 2015 <http://www.aero-aoce.org/uploads/6/6/0/0/6600183/aero_presentation_2013_suurtamm.pdf>
[1] “16903 LNS Effective Math Posters-SoftProof (R).” 2015. 17 Oct. 2015 <http://www.edugains.ca/mathposter.pdf>
[2] “SCDSB – Math Action Plan.” 2014. 17 Oct. 2015 <https://www.scdsb.on.ca/Programs/Assessment-and-Curriculum/Pages/Math-Action-Plan.aspx>
[3] “The Power of belief — mindset and success … – YouTube.” 2012. 17 Oct. 2015 <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN34FNbOKXc>
[4] “PERTS: Raising Academic Achievement.” 2012. 17 Oct. 2015 <https://www.perts.net/>
[5] “Paying Attention to Math – EduGAINS.” 2014. 17 Oct. 2015 <http://www.edugains.ca/newsite/math/payingattentiontomath.html>
[6] “Math in Motion Issue #14 – EduGAINS.” 2015. 17 Oct. 2015 <http://www.edugains.ca/resources/SystemLeader/MathInMotion/MathinMotion_Issue12_October2015.pdf>
[7] “No More Math Wars | Canadian Education Association (CEA).” 2015. 17 Oct. 2015 <http://www.cea-ace.ca/education-canada/article/no-more-math-wars>
[8] “Math Talk Learning Community Research … – EduGAINS.” 2010. 17 Oct. 2015 <http://www.edugains.ca/resources/LeadingChange/KeyDirectionsandFrameworks/MathTalkLearningCommunityResearchSynopsis.pdf>
[9] “Download Presentation – Association of Educational …” 2014. 17 Oct. 2015 <http://www.aero-aoce.org/uploads/6/6/0/0/6600183/aero_presentation_2013_suurtamm.pdf>
Numbers play an important role in our everyday lives. From the carpenter measuring lengths of wood to the physician checking a patient’s blood pressure measurements on a chart, we constantly use numbers and perform calculations to guide our actions and decisions. It has been shown that school-entry numerical skills are a more important predictor of subsequent academic achievement than early reading and socio-emotional skills.1 Furthermore, there are many reports linking numerical skills to economic outcomes, such as evidence showing that early math skills predict adult socio-economic status.2
In view of the above, it is critical that education systems seek to find the best ways to teach math and thereby equip learners with the skills necessary to succeed not only in school but also in life more generally. So what are the best ways to teach math? Are we currently using all the available evidence from fields such as educational research, cognitive psychology, developmental psychology and neuroscience to guide math pedagogy? Unfortunately, for decades there have been ongoing, fierce, partisan debates over how to teach math which have, for the most part, not been informed by the wealth of knowledge about how children learn math. This article critically discusses one of the central debates in math education and draws attention to the importance of taking an evidence-based and developmental perspective on how to teach math.
Perhaps the most prominent debate that has been raging in math education for decades is whether children should be taught to calculate by rehearsing (also referred to as “drilling” or “rote learning”) arithmetic facts, such as learning the times tables, or whether students should be taught to learn arithmetic and other math skills by discovering the principles that underlie it, through being encouraged to use hands-on materials, invent their own strategies, solve open-ended problems and describe their problem-solving strategies without having to memorize answers (often referred to as “discovery-based learning” or “problem solving”). Another characterization of the debate is that one side advocates for greater attention to teaching children procedural knowledge for mathematical problem solving (such as explicit teaching of strategies) and encouraging them to memorize facts, while the other emphasizes the students’ construction of rich conceptual knowledge, allowing them insights into how they solve problems.
These two approaches to math instruction are frequently painted as being completely distinct and diametrically opposed to one another, creating the perception that there is a need to side with one particular view of best practice in math education. Indeed, math education curricula align themselves with one “side” or the other. History suggests that the pendulum swings between the two supposed extremes rather than settling for a balance in the middle.
Proponents of either instructional approach tend to have very strong negative views of the alternative. The debate over which of the two (supposedly completely opposing) instructional approaches should be adopted resembles a political debate with candidates on either side of the debate painting their opponents’ perspective as hurting student learning. This has frequently been referred to as the “math wars.”
Strongly held views about instructional approaches tend to flare up whenever there is evidence suggestive of falling student achievement in mathematics. Take, for example, the most recent (2012) results from the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) published by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).3 The PISA study assesses math, reading and science skills among 15-year-old students in over 50 countries every three years (PISA started in 2000). In 2012, the latest math results from the PISA study revealed that Canadian 15-year-olds ranked 13th among students tested in 65 countries. Critically, these scores were lower than in previous years, when Canadian students had ranked in the top ten of the countries participating in PISA. Thus the conclusion from these data was that math education standards in Canada were falling. This evidence of falling achievement levels among 15-year-old Canadian students garnered significant media attention and strong reactions. For example, John Manley, CEO and president of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, proclaimed in The Globe and Mail that the results were “on the scale of a national emergency.”4
Soon after the dust of the media frenzy surrounding the publication of the PISA results had settled, the search for the fall guy began. Quickly this search turned to discovery-based math instruction curriculum, used (with variations) in most provinces. A parent group in Alberta even initiated a petition against the discovery-based curriculum and in support of a back-to-basics approach focusing more on rehearsal of facts and procedural learning. To date this petition has over 17,000 signatories.5
What is sorely lacking from this highly politicized and emotional public debate over math instruction and the analysis of falling student achievement (such as that uncovered by the PISA study) is the use of a solid evidence base that, without biased opinions and beliefs about what works, seeks to inform decision making.
While the math wars have been raging here in Canada and abroad, scientists from developmental and educational psychology as well as cognitive neuroscience have been busy accumulating evidence regarding the ways in which children learn math and what factors influence their learning trajectories and achievement success. This evidence suggests that the dichotomy between discovery-based or conceptual learning, on the one hand, and procedural or rote learning, on the other, is false and inconsistent with the way in which children build an understanding of mathematics. Indeed, there is a long line of research showing that children learn best when procedural and conceptual approaches are combined.6 Moreover, children’s procedural and conceptual knowledge are highly correlated with one another, speaking against creating a dichotomy between them through instructional approaches. Researchers, such as Bethany Rittle-Johnson at Vanderbilt, have demonstrated that an effective use of instructional time in math education involves the alternation of lessons focused on concepts with those concentrated on instructing students on procedures.7 While there is still some debate in the literature over the precise sequencing of procedural and conceptual instruction (i.e. which one should come first – with several studies indicating optimal learning when some conceptual instruction precedes procedural learning in elementary school mathematics), all of the literature clearly suggests that both instructional approaches are tightly related to one another and are mutual determinants of successful math learning over time.8
Discovery math proponents argue strongly against the use of setting time limits for students to complete mathematical tasks, such as calculation. Here again, the empirical evidence speaks against the notion that speeded instruction necessarily has negative consequences. For example, research I conducted in collaboration with Gavin Price (Vanderbilt University) and Michelle Mazzocco (University of Minnesota)9 demonstrated that young adults who performed well on a test of high-school math achievement (the Preliminary Scholastic Achievement Test, PSAT) activated brain regions associated with arithmetic fact retrieval in the left hemisphere more while solving simple, single-digit arithmetic problems (such as 3+4) compared to their lower-achieving peers, who recruited brain regions associated with less efficient strategies, such as counting and decomposition in areas of the right parietal cortex. These data suggest that arithmetic fluency and its neural correlates contribute to higher-level math abilities. Moreover, recent research by Lynne Fuchs and colleagues at Vanderbilt University10 has demonstrated that speeded practice can lead to larger student gains in arithmetic compared to nonspeeded practice, and that such practice can be particularly useful for low-achieving students in overcoming their math reasoning difficulties. Thus speeded practice is beneficial, when combined with other approaches.
Such evidence clearly shows that the current debate over what kind of math curriculum to adopt is ill-informed and focuses on false extreme dichotomies that paint students as either learning one way or the other – when the evidence demonstrates that both conceptual and procedural knowledge are required for successful math learning. Do we really want to create, on the one hand, students who can solve arithmetic problems quickly but who lack conceptual knowledge and are not able to be flexible mathematical thinkers; or, on the other hand, students who are able to reflect on their mathematical problem solving, but are unable to quickly retrieve the answers to intermediate solutions in the context of complex calculation problems, because they lack mathematical fluency?
When considering the evidence base for guiding math instruction it is also critical to think developmentally and to ask what sequence of learning and content of learning is most appropriate at which age/level of the student. Learning math is a cumulative process – early skills build the foundations for later abilities. For example, when we ask students to reflect on their mathematical problem-solving strategies, we need to consider whether they have the metacognitive skills (the ability to reflect on one’s thinking) necessary to articulate how they are thinking; when we train students to solve arithmetic problems under speeded conditions, we need to ascertain that they understand the meaning of the numbers that they are performing arithmetic operations with.
Finally, it is important to carefully evaluate the evidence that is drawn upon to guide educational decision-making. Take for example the PISA study that is now being used to motivate the back-to-basics approach. In this context, it is also important to note that the results of the PISA study do not directly show that the curriculum is to blame. The PISA study generates complex, multi-layered data that do not allow for straightforward conclusions about the factors that cause student performance. Furthermore, the PISA study only tells us about the math performance of 15-year-old children and can therefore not be generalized to learners of all ages. Critically, the focus of the PISA study is designed to measure the extent to which students can apply their knowledge to real-life situations and therefore the test is not directly linked to the school curriculum. Hence, to take the PISA ranking as an indication that a particular curriculum is the causal factor ignores the complexity of this international comparison study.
Enabling students to be mathematically competent is a major challenge for our education systems. For too long math education has been characterized by emotional debates that falsely dichotomize instructional approaches without consulting evidence about how students learn math. It is time to heed the empirical evidence coming from multiple scientific disciplines that clearly shows that math instruction is effective when different approaches are combined in developmentally appropriate ways. It is time for mathematics educators, educational policy makers and textbook publishers to take this evidence seriously, to move beyond opinions towards a level-headed, unemotional and evidence-based approach in order to to improve student learning in mathematics.
En Bref – Les compétences en mathématiques sont essentielles tant pour réussir ses études que pour mener une vie saine et prospère. Alors, comment peut-on le mieux enseigner les mathématiques? Dans cet article, j’examine la tendance des enseignants de mathématiques à créer de fausses dichotomies entre les approches pédagogiques visant à développer les connaissances conceptuelles des mathématiques des élèves et les méthodes d’enseignement axées sur les habiletés procédurales des apprenants. Je présente des constats tirés de la psychopédagogie, de la psychologie du développement et de la neuroscience pour démontrer que les élèves apprennent mieux lorsque ces deux approches pédagogiques sont combinées et que les éducateurs réfléchissent attentivement à la séquenced’enseignement adaptée au développement des approches conceptuelles et procédurales des mathématiques. Je préconise d’abandonner les fausses dichotomies et de tenir compte des constats existants pour élaborer des programmes d’études équilibrés améliorant l’apprentissage des élèves.
Photo: Dave Donald
First published in Education Canada, September 2015
1 G. J. Duncan, C. J. Dowsett, A. Claessens, K. Magnuson, A. C. Huston, P. Klebanov, L. S. Pagani, L. Feinstein, M. Engel, J. Brooks-Gunn, H. Sexton, K. Duckworth, and C. Japel, “School Readiness and Later Achievement,” Developmental Psychology 43 (2007): 1428-46.
2 S. J. Ritchie and T. C. Bates, “Enduring Links from Childhood Mathematics and Reading Achievement to Adult Socioeconomic Status,” Psychological Science 24 (2013): 1301-8.
3 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, PISA 2012 Results in Focus: What 15-year-olds know and what they can do with what they know (2014).
4 www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/canadas-fall-in-math-education-ranking-sets-off-red-flags/article15730663/
5 www.change.org/p/back-to-basics-mastering-the-fundamentals-of-mathematics
6 B. Rittle-Johnson, R. S. Siegler, and M. W. Alibali, “Developing Conceptual Understanding and Procedural Skill in Mathematics: An iterative process,” Journal of Educational Psychology 93 (2001): 346-362.
7 B. Rittle-Johnson and K. R. Koedinger, “Iterating Between Lessons on Concepts and Procedures Can Improve Mathematics Knowledge,” British Journal of Educational Psychology 79 (2009): 483 – 500.
8 M. Schneider, B. Rittle-Johnson, and J. Star, “Relations Between Conceptual Knowledge, Procedural Knowledge, and Procedural Flexibility in Two Samples Differing in Prior Knowledge,” Developmental Psychology 47 (2011): 1525-1538.
9 G. R. Price, M. M. Mazzocco and D. Ansari, “Why Mental Arithmetic Counts: Brain activation during single digit arithmetic predicts high-school math scores,” Journal of Neuroscience 33 (2013): 156-63.
10 L. S. Fuchs, D. C. Geary, D. L. Compton, D. Fuchs, C. Schatschneider, C. L. Hamlett, P. M. Seethaler, J. Wilson, C. F. Craddock, J. D. Bryant, K. Luther, and P. Changas, “Effects of First-grade Number Knowledge Tutoring with Contrasting Forms of Practice, Developmental Psychology 105 (2013): 58-77.
What is the best way to teach math and science?
It’s a question that Canadian educators and parents have been asking a lot in recent years, prompted by domestic and international tests that indicate a decline in the math and science test scores of Canadian students. Ontario’s Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) shared results in 2014 showing that more than half of the high school students in Grade 9 Applied Math are not meeting the provincial standard.
Math education is a subject of lively debate in this country: Should we stick with the “new math,” or return to the old “drill-and-kill” method? Or perhaps the answer is a bit of the old with a dash of the new?
As Head of School at Trafalgar Castle School, an independent day and boarding school in Whitby, Ont. for girls in Grades 5-12, I have certainly asked these questions myself. But instead of wrestling with the “new math vs. old math” argument, we at Trafalgar Castle chose another option: Singapore Math.
We introduced Singapore Math to our school three years ago, after researching a number of programs and determining that this method had the best achievement results internationally. At Trafalgar Castle, we have a “world-best” education philosophy, which means we are constantly evaluating programs from countries around the world that have proven to be successful. Students in Singapore in the middle school years rank consistently in the top worldwide for math and science testing, way beyond most other countries (including Canada).
Trafalgar students in Grades 5 through 8 learn math through this innovative, even contrarian, teaching method, which turns traditional approaches upside down. Singapore Math deliberately slows down the teaching of math, taking more time to ensure students grasp each concept before moving on. For example, students might spend two weeks on multiplying fractions, instead of spending a day or two and then coming back to it later.
Singapore Math is also highly interactive, and approaches mathematical problems from different perspectives, taking into account all the ways children learn (visual, aural, verbal, physical, etc.). Students use visual aids like bars and blocks way before they start writing equations with “x” and “y,” so they achieve a deeper grasp of the actions they perform. This visualization is not deployed nearly as much in Canadian classrooms. In most settings, you would see a concrete-to-abstract strategy whereby multiplication, for example, would use physical objects, then shift to the abstraction of lining up numbers in a multiplication equation. Singapore Math introduces a middle step between the concrete and abstract, called the pictorial approach. The students draw a diagram of the concepts going on. This extends to diagraming word problems on paper, rather than the fatiguing and often frustrating scenario of trying to picture a problem in their heads.
One happy result of all this is that when students reach algebra, they’ve already met the core concepts pictorially; indeed in most cases students in Grade 6 are able to understand algebraic concepts that normally wouldn’t be grasped until mid-way through Grade 8.
Another important element of Singapore Math is that it relies on strong mathematics teaching. You need people who know and love mathematics to teach it. Unfortunately, there is a dearth of qualified people to teach the subject, especially at the elementary level, so this is a challenging requirement. Yet surely we should not deploy a mathematics curriculum to satisfy the aptitude of the teachers instead of the needs of the children they are entrusted to teach.
Our results
When it comes to student performance, the response to Singapore Math has been overwhelmingly positive. Each year, the Singapore Math students have performed above grade level, and their overall final averages continue to rise each year. Perhaps even more importantly, our students love math. In fact, we were so pleased with the results that we added Singapore Science to the curriculum last year.
Like its math counterpart, Singapore Science is an interactive and “hands-on” method of teaching, devised to stimulate students’ natural curiosity and cultivate their spirit of inquiry. In my view, nothing saps the excitement and power out of learning like telling kids something they could find out for themselves. In Singapore Science, students do experiments to learn key concepts, incorporating active discussion and real-world examples. We’ve put a lot of resources into our labs so that the children can learn by doing. The core of the program is teaching the experimental method, and we intuitively know (and for doubters there is plenty of research to back it up) that students learn best when they are highly engaged.
When it comes to the “math wars,” at the end of the day you have to base it on results and how kids learn best. The Singapore Method might not work for everyone, but it certainly has for us. We will continue to re-evaluate it though, as we do all of our programs, and to look beyond our borders to find the best teaching methods possible.
En Bref – Il y a trois ans, l’école Trafalgar Castle School a mis en place la méthode de mathématiques de Singapour pour ses élèves. Cette méthode novatrice d’enseignement des mathématiques aide les élèves à saisir des concepts beaucoup plus avancés que ce que l’on attend d’eux. Ainsi, les élèves de 6e année sont capables de comprendre des concepts algébriques normalement enseignés en 8e année. À l’école Trafalgar, la méthode de Singapour fait ses preuves chaque année et les notes en mathématiques des élèves en témoignent. Cette méthode pourrait ne pas convenir à tous, mais elle nous a été utile.
Photo: Sarah Harries-Taylor, Trafalgar Castle School
First published in Education Canada, May 2015
Even though graduation rates have stabilized in the province of Quebec, failure to graduate remains an acknowledged problem for provincial educators. Here at Concordia’s Department of Art Education in Montreal, we focus on questions of how the visual arts and digital media can engage youth who are at-risk of dropping out. We have studied existing programs, such as Maison Kekpart and have developed and researched a mobile media curriculum. Though these projects are presently focused on the impact that visual arts and digital media can have on a student, we have identified a number of outcomes that suggest student engagement need not be limited to the arts.
Agency to Move
We are currently working on a long-term research study investigating the use of visual arts and civic engagement curriculum delivered through mobile media (smartphones and tablets). We are using this curriculum and digital technology with youth who are at risk of dropping out of high school or who have just returned to school to complete their diploma. Our intention was to engage students with learning outside of school through mobile media and art making. Participants shared images, made comments, and responded to the curricular missions posted by the researchers and educators involved. while the study was ongoing, Each week or so we would host after-school meetings to discuss the project. As the project evolved, participants wanted to increase the number of afterschool meetings. Students also used the mobile social network to coordinate the times and places they would meet in order to go on field trips together. When we asked participants why they wanted to come to the afterschool meetings and to go on field trips together, they enthusiastically contrasted these student-initiated activities with their former more teacher-directed experiences of schooling. Most of these students had spent their time in schools under constant surveillance and with restricted mobility. While we had hypothesized that the mobile media devices would enable participants to learn on their own, what we did not foresee was that their use prompted a sense of agency mobility, self-organization, and informal learning among our participants. What we found was that students who feel in control of their learning also feel more connected to it. This effect promises to make school as a whole, less alienating for at-risk youth.
Real World Relevancy: Learning Professional Skills
From our studies, we found that curricula incorporating professional skills and tools engage students in learning. In the above-mentioned mobile media curriculum, we started by asking students to engage critically with their civic environments by asking them what would they like to change to make their community better. For the most part participants were more interested in learning how to make beautiful images and felt they had no power to change things in their neighbourhoods. We noted that before students responded to the challenge of engaging critically with the world around them, they need and want to develop their visual voice and to master the grammar of their visual culture. In other words, they wanted to make images like professionals. Only then did they feel empowered to think about change in their neighborhoods. At Maison Kekpart outside of Montreal in Longueuil, media professionals taught students professional skills in media production. Many of the students when interviewed described how learning professional tools and techniques gave them a sense of accomplishment and the authority to voice their ideas. Students are savvy enough to identify learning that will empower them in the future. Given that students are immersed in visual culture every day, they implicitly know what an authoritative image looks like. They want to know how to make such effective images. Curricula that connect to their everyday experiences and instruction on how to participate as equals with media professionals (adult teachers and instructors) contributed to the highly engaging learning environment at Maison Kekpart.
Incorporating Youth Cultural Practices into Curricula
At Maison Kekpart, we observed how instructors incorporated into their curricula what students did with social media in their personal lives. For example, one media arts instructor noticed that one of his students was an avid YouTube user who posted new videos on an almost daily basis. Recognizing the social currency that is developed through an online presence as a professional himself, he began to model his social media practices by inviting students to follow and friend him online. This practice stands in stark contrast to how many schools approach social media. Instead, Maison Kekpart and their instructors use social media to connect with youth and to model professional practices. What instructors are doing is helping to transform the online cultural practices of youth into professional practices by engaging with them as professionals in the media arts.
While there is no easy fix for engaging youth with their education, we have found that the approaches presented here nurture the sense of agency in the learner. A large part of student engagement in education is based on the student feeling empowered to make choices about how and when that student will engage in learning. The knowledge that students acquire under these conditions makes them feel confident and competent. The knowledge that what they are learning is valued outside of the classroom but is of wide enough application to be used in the conventional classroom.
n.b. David Pariser and Martin Lalonde are affiliated researchers on this project.
Related Reading
Youth Practices in Digital Arts and New Media: Learning in Formal and Informal Settings
This blog post is connected to Education Canada Magazine’s Towards Fewer Dropouts theme issue and The Facts on Education fact sheet, How Can We Prevent High School Dropouts? Please contact info@cea-ace.ca if you would like to contribute a blog post to this series.
This is a story about school-based change on a broad scale. It is about how one school board embraced a series of government directives with two basic beliefs: (1) all students can succeed and (2) the path to school improvement is through sustainable teacher-learning networks. Developing such networks both within and between 67 schools at the same time is a challenge, given traditions of school and teacher autonomy and independence. However, our results, as we move through this process, give us reason to be optimistic. The English Montreal School Board (EMSB), the largest of nine English boards in the province of Quebec, increased its graduation rate from 83 percent to 88 percent between 2009 and 2014, fully five years ahead of its targeted date for that level of achievement.
Quebec’s graduation strategy
At the start of 2008, an important consultation process took place with the main education stakeholders in Quebec. A 28-member group, including representatives from the Quebec Ministry of Education, the business world, educational organizations and experts working in the field of student retention, released a report entitled Knowledge Is Power.[1] These experts reported that Quebec was not doing enough to ensure students were graduating with a high school or vocational diploma. The authors of the report painted a bleak picture of the potential long-term impacts, both economic and social, of the high dropout rate in Quebec. They argued that “promoting student retention is nothing less than rescuing our children from the life of poverty, ignorance, exclusion and distress that awaits them if they drop out of school.”
The report sounded the alarm that the Quebec education system was letting one in three students fall through the cracks. As a consequence of the report, significant changes were made to the Education Act through the adoption of Bill 88 in 2009. This introduced a results-based management model for school boards. School improvement, from that point on, had to be based on measureable results.
The Ministry identified five common goals[2] that every school board in the province had to address, with the aim of increasing the provincial graduation rate from 69 percent to 80 percent by 2020. A signed Partnership Agreement between each school board and the Ministry of Education, and similarly, between every school board and its respective schools, were used to ensure coherence and complementarity between the Ministry of Education’s strategic plan, the school board’s strategic plan and the school’s success plans. These agreements are aimed at integrating all actions within a global vision.
The added challenge facing the EMSB was to increase its graduation rate, which was already relatively high at 83 percent. The target graduation rate of 88 percent seemed impossible, given the range of challenges facing our schools: the EMSB includes 37 inner-city schools and 11 alternative schools; one-third of our student population lives below the poverty line. Despite the successful initiatives that established our baseline at 83 percent, we realized that new strategies needed to be considered.
EMSB’s response
The core values and beliefs guiding the school board did not change with the partnership agreements. What did change was how school improvement occurred, both at the school board level and at the local school level. The partnership agreements provided a framework and mechanism that allowed schools and the school board to use student achievement data to identify areas of strength and weakness, to set attainable goals and identify the pedagogical strategies to achieve them. While this did not suddenly make changing schools and improving teacher practice easy to do, it did lead some schools that had lost momentum to reflect on their successes and challenges, and to formalize plans for improvement. What these agreements did, then, was to turn our beliefs into concrete actions.
As a direct result of the partnership agreement, the EMSB created a plan to adopt evidence-based practices. Using an evidence-based approach for decision making meant that we had to acquire data literacy skills, to ensure that we used data effectively. Prior to 2008, schools did set objectives as part of their strategic plans each year; however, these tended to be generalized goals that were based on teachers’ observations rather than concrete data. Moreover, the old plans did not establish clear, measureable objectives, or the mechanisms to determine if they achieved those objectives. The data that was available to schools prior to 2008 was either in the form of local, teacher-set assessments, or in the form of global exam results that did not provide the kind of focused, relevant information required to inform practice. Furthermore, teachers did not have a structured forum for sharing this information.
Within the framework of the partnership agreements, teachers meet on a regular basis to reflect on the effectiveness of their practices and share knowledge about how to better serve the needs of their students. These changes did not occur overnight – in fact, some changes are not fully in place five years after the introduction of partnership agreements. We faced several challenges in this process, perhaps foremost among them the need to convince all stakeholders that data can be used as a guiding light to inform pedagogy and interventions, rather than as a punitive tool to lay blame where results were disappointing.
Recognizing the complexities involved in changing traditions and mindsets, we adopted a tiered approach to establishing teacher learning networks. This tiered approach, which involved four stages, began with a summit that introduced the concepts of professional learning communities (PLCs) and data teams to all our stakeholders. We followed up with PLC and data team training for all our in-school administrators and educational consultants. Moving from a broad to a more focused support model, the next step involved training lead teams from each school, comprised of teachers and administrators, accompanied by an educational consultant. The fourth stage saw consultants going into schools – on multiple occasions – to provide site-based training to school staff.
The adoption of an evidence-based approach and the creation of PLCs grew directly out of the partnership agreement. It is important to recognize, however, that some initiatives that had already been introduced prior to the partnership agreement became a priority and were strengthened within the new framework. These include a literacy initiative and the system of alternative learning schools.
Early literacy initiative
A balanced literacy initiative at the elementary level had been introduced two years prior to the launch of the partnership agreements. This initiative recognized the importance of early intervention as critical to student success. Based on solid evidence that students’ chances of success in high school and beyond can be traced to their reading ability as early as Grade 3 – or even by the end of Grade 1, according to some research[3] – the need for a literacy strategy was evident. Two principal objectives governed the creation of this strategy: promoting literacy instructional practices that would allow all students to be successful, and implementing a professional development model that would support the teacher learning needed to make this happen. This required far more than a few workshops on literacy instruction; it meant putting a comprehensive plan into place, one that would bring human and material resources to schools and pedagogical expertise to teachers, and that would incorporate a long-term strategy for effective, sustainable professional development.
The more challenging part of the literacy plan was creating a model for ongoing, sustainable professional development for teachers. Our response was to create a network of in-house literacy facilitators – one teacher from each elementary school – which was supported for five years as part of the ongoing balanced literacy implementation. These facilitators met once a month for five years for professional development and sharing, and were released for one day each week to work with other teachers in their own schools promoting best practices in literacy instruction. In some schools and classrooms, this work took the form of mentoring and modeling; in others it took the form of co-teaching, or collegial talk. The part-time release for facilitators in each school was intended to jumpstart the change process by fostering professional sharing.
Results from standardized testing, which have been analyzed yearly by our academic partner, Concordia University, provide reason for optimism. The rate of students reading at grade level in our original cohort increased from 67 percent to 88 percent over the five-year period. However, even with this notable investment in human resources, changing practice proved challenging. In some schools, traditions of autonomy were stronger; in other schools, local priorities received more attention. Buy-in among teachers – and even among administrators – was dependent on many factors that either impeded or promoted the change process.
The implementation of the partnership agreements shifted literacy instruction to the forefront, even at some schools where it had not previously received much attention. With heightened levels of accountability, schools were obligated to set measurable objectives along with specific strategies to achieve them, and they had to report back to their stakeholders on their progress. Vital to our success, we believe, is that the process of using data and producing these reports was not a punitive model. Schools were free to choose their targets and their strategies, and encouraged to reflect on their successes and challenges. What was required, though, was that school teams examine their data together in order to prioritize student needs. They were required to evaluate the success of their efforts with a view to considering how to continually improve.
Alternative schools
Another initiative at the EMSB that pre-dated the partnership agreements, but that took on a new focus within the results-based framework, was the system of alternative learning schools at the high school level. This network of alternative schools caters to high school students who are struggling to achieve in the more traditional learning environments found in mainstream high schools. These schools offer a range of flexible learning environments according to the particular needs of each school’s at-risk student population. Students in the alternative system are those who may have otherwise dropped out of school because they felt like they were not able to work within the confines of their time schedule, learn at the set pace and/or find their place and purpose in the mainstream school setting.
Prior to the results-based management framework, teachers in our alternative schools sometimes struggled in isolation to deal with a wide range of student learning needs. Within the structure of the partnership agreements, these schools came together to set goals and objectives specific to their student population. This network allowed teachers to share their challenges and their collective expertise and knowledge of how to best serve their student population.
Changing practice in schools is never easy; it comes with its own set of challenges. The tradition of working independently is something that many teachers hold dear and continues, at some schools, to be an obstacle to collaborative networks of learning. This challenge is exacerbated by school structures that often impede teacher collaboration: timetables, physical layout, and a range of extra duties leave teachers with little time to work together. Moreover, staff and administrator turnover is a constant destabilizing factor that affects the building of trusting relationships. Yet change is occurring at the EMSB.
Many schools have found creative ways to build in common meeting times for teachers to collaborate during the workday. Teacher teams are beginning to use data as a catalyst for discussions focused on pedagogy and student learning. School teams regularly visit colleagues’ classrooms in other schools to learn and share ideas and practices, and teachers from the alternative schools are meeting to find solutions to the unique challenges their students face. While we are only midway through this process, we are optimistic that we are on the right path: The data we are collecting show that student learning and graduation rates continue to improve.
En Bref – Une commission scolaire dont le taux de diplomation est élevé peut-elle relever la barre et améliorer ses résultats en cette ère de reddition de comptes? Cet article indique comment la Commission scolaire English-Montréal, dont plus de 50 pour cent des écoles sont désignées comme étant en milieux urbains défavorisés, a accru son taux de diplomation de 83 à 88 pour cent en sept ans, soit cinq ans avant la date cible du gouvernement. À mi-parcours d’un plan d’action décennal provincial, la commission scolaire continue de miser sur l’instauration de pratiques fondées sur des preuves, le développement de réseaux d’apprentissage pour les enseignants, la priorité accordée à l’alphabétisation précoce et le soutien d’écoles secondaires alternatives. D’après les données recueillies, l’apprentissage des élèves et le taux de diplomation continuent de s’améliorer.
Photo: Marie-Claude Bergeron, English Montreal School Board
First published in Education Canada, May 2015
[1] In the Quebec context, student retention refers to student perseverance in school, not to holding students back a grade level as a result of failing.
[2] The five Ministry goals included: increased graduation rates of students under the age of 20; reducing the number of dropouts; improvement to the mastery of the French and English languages; greater success for students with handicaps, social maladjustments or learning difficulties; promotion of a healthy and safe environment through the adoption of violence prevention measures; and, lastly, increasing the number of students under the age of 20 registered in vocational training programs.
[3] P. B. Gough and C. Juel, “The First Stages of Word Recognition,” in Learning to Read: Basic research and its implications, eds. L. Rieben and C. A. Perfetti (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1991).
When I was a child, my home country, China, hadn’t swung its door wide open to the outside world yet. If foreigners walked down Beijing’s streets, we didn’t just stare at them, we followed them as if they were a rare species. That, of course, doesn’t happen here. Canada is a country of immigrants. The fact that so many of us are first- or second-generation newcomers in a sense helps make us all the same.
I work as a substitute teacher in Toronto, arguably the most multicultural city in the world. I go to different schools and meet different groups of students on a daily basis. To break the ice in a classroom, I introduce myself by writing my Chinese name 谷真真 on the board. I have three questions for the students. The first one: which is my last name, 谷 or 真真 ? Even though they have a 50 percent chance of getting it right, more often than not, the youngsters are wrong. I explain to them that we put our family names first and given names second. Perhaps we value our families more than ourselves. Then I let them guess the meaning of my given name. Of course, I give them a hint: it is one of the good character traits their parents and teachers want them to have. The kids keep guessing: “respect,” “kindness,” “perseverance”… and eventually someone comes up with the right answer, “honesty.” Finally, I ask the class why I have two identical characters for my given name. Some reply, “very honest” or “double honesty.” Exactly! This is why the students call me Ms. Double Honesty. I tell them: I love my Chinese name and don’t want to change it. It is a gift from my parents and I will keep it as long as I live. The children usually appreciate the fact that I keep my own identity because many are immigrants themselves.
I also work as an international language instructor. I teach Mandarin, a high school credit course. A lot of my students are “CBC,” Canadian Born Chinese. They are fluent in English, but not in Chinese. I try to forge links between these two quite different languages. For example, Sunday in Chinese is 星期日 and 日 means sun. See something in common? I have always felt exhilarated at discovering new connections. For instance, there is an English saying: “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” Similarly, we have 入乡随俗, which means: When you enter a village, follow its customs. And the English expression, “Put a cherry on top” is analogous to the Chinese one, 画龙点睛. It means the finishing touch of drawing a dragon is drawing its eyes, which makes the dragon come to life.
The countless connections between the two languages and cultures are very intriguing. Once, I asked a teacher librarian from India if she too found such connections. She replied, “Yes. It is because we are all humans and have similar experiences and wisdom.” I totally agree with her.
I realize that people are not only interested in something familiar, but also captivated by something completely foreign. So in my Mandarin class, we learn life stories of influential figures my students know already, such as Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Curie, Shakespeare, Picasso, Chaplin… We read The Last Lesson by Daudet and The Little Match Girl by Andersen, in Chinese of course. Meanwhile, I introduce ancient Chinese poems to my students. I also teach them to play Chinese chess and ask them to solve riddles and arithmetic puzzles, all of which are traditional forms of mental recreation in China. The students also have opportunities to work on paper cut (剪纸), a Chinese folk art. But the most exciting thing is to play ping pong in the classroom!
To preserve the Chinese language and culture in the adopted country is my job. To be able to share this experience with others in the most diverse city in Canada is a bonus. My students are not only Chinese. I also teach students from Korea, India, Russia, Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia… It is incredibly rewarding. Recently, a former student with a South Asian background sent me an email with the good news: “I am completing a master’s degree in linguistics at the University of Toronto and will pursue a doctorate at the Chinese University of Hong Kong!” It made my day.
Photo: Huang Jian
First published in Education Canada, March 2015
Popular, independent, and social media across Canada are currently filled with stories of conflict related to natural resource development and exploitation in Indigenous territories. Protest and advocacy in response to proposed pipelines such as Northern Gateway, Keystone XL, Energy East, and the Kinder Morgan Burnaby expansion, hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) in Mi’qmaqi/ New Brunswick, and social movements such as Idle No More are often motivated by inadequate recognition by government, industry, and much of Canadian society of Indigenous treaty and Aboriginal rights.
Despite recent efforts to increase Indigenous perspectives and knowledge in provincial curricula across Canada and the growth of land-based education programs, educational programming that addresses and explores Indigenous ecological knowledge, philosophies, and associated rights remains largely inadequate. As educators working with students in any level or subject area, it behooves us to become familiar with the underpinnings of these issues in order to apply our understanding in our pedagogical praxis.
During the fall of 2012 and winter of 2013, I lived and taught in Prince George, B.C. My role as an assistant professor of Indigenous Environmental Studies at the University of Northern British Columbia (UNBC) proved to be especially interesting, as I arrived during the peak of hearings and protests related to the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline that would pass just north of Prince George en route to the Pacific Coast. That year also marked the introduction of the federal government’s omnibus Bills C-38 and 45, which contained drastic changes to environmental regulations, and the subsequent emergence of Idle No More.
After over a decade of working in outdoor and environmental education settings across Canada with both Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth, moving to UNBC at this time proved to be catalytic for my understanding of and connection to the link between contemporary socio-ecological issues and education. As a Métis academic and educator originally from Calgary, teaching predominantly Indigenous students from across northern B.C. and becoming involved in activism and advocacy as a faculty and community member also forced me to become much more familiar with the relationship between historical and contemporary treaties or lack thereof, constitutional and case law, and contemporary socio-ecological events. This experience also led me to a much deeper understanding of the historical and constitutional underpinnings of Indigenous rights that form the basis of most socio-ecological conflicts today – an understanding that I believe is lacking for many Canadians.
As an educator, I naturally came to view these events and my participation in them through a pedagogical lens, and I observed that significant teaching and learning was happening before, during, and after these rallies, marches, and protests.
I have now returned to Calgary, an economic and intellectual hub of natural resource development, where I work with education students at the University of Calgary to raise not only their awareness, but also their comfort level and confidence to engage with potentially controversial concepts in their studies and future teaching.
As such, I also experience tension at times when facilitating difficult conversations related to contemporary Indigenous and environmental issues. These dynamics have now become a major focus of my research. For example, I am currently leading a study into the pedagogical experiences of Indigenous and allied activists and educators involved in socio-ecological conflicts such as those described above.
In this article, I share insights from my recent experiences teaching and studying the tensions inherent in contemporary socio-ecological issues. I also introduce and discuss the duty to consult as an example of a commonly misunderstood area of Indigenous land and ecological rights. I conclude by providing suggestions based on my recent research in this area as well as links and resources for educators interested in learning more about historical and contemporary Indigenous ecological and educational topics in order to incorporate such discussions into their teaching practice.
Untangling the roots of conflict
The reverence for and maintenance of longstanding reciprocal relationships with specific geographical areas is a key aspect of Indigenous cultures around the world.1 This is certainly the case in Canada, where Indigenous peoples across the country have developed and maintained intricate relationships with particular territories prior to and after contact with Europeans and other settler groups.2
These reciprocal relationships have shaped Indigenous cultures, languages, epistemologies, and ontologies as well as the landscapes which our ancestors inhabited and cared for over thousands of years. These relationships are also practical in nature, as our ancestors learned over time how to survive and thrive in particular areas.2 As such, threats to Indigenous land rights are not only legal, political, and economic in nature; they threaten the very foundations of Indigenous cultures, wellness, and ways of being.
Unfortunately, many non-Indigenous Canadians remain unaware of the multifaceted centrality of the Land for Indigenous peoples and its recognition in rights that were affirmed in early treaties and the Canadian constitution.3 This lack of understanding often manifests in harsh, prejudicial and misinformed reactions to contemporary conflicts over land, such as recent events related to hydraulic fracturing on Mi’kmaq territory near Elsipogtog, New Brunswick.
(Mis)understanding Aboriginal and treaty rights
Early treaties contained specific “treaty rights” to various benefits such as medicine, education, and farming implements.4 However, in recognition of our ancestors’ longstanding relationships with specific territories, they also acknowledged inherent “Aboriginal rights” to continue traditional land-based activities such as hunting, fishing, and harvesting beyond designated reserve lands in territories subsequently designated as Crown land that were traditionally used by particular communities.
Fiduciary limitations on the potential disruption of these activities by settler governments and industry were clarified in Section 35 of the Constitution Act of 1982 and subsequently affirmed through a series of provincial and federal court cases as the “Duty to Consult and Accommodate.”4 Canadian courts have ruled in favour of Indigenous groups in the vast majority of cases,5 firmly placing the onus on government in partnership with industry to adequately consult and accommodate Indigenous groups potentially impacted by developments in their traditional territories.
Justice Beverley McLachlan’s recent decision in favour of the Tsiqhot’in people of central British Columbia (Tsilqhot’in v British Columbia) has further affirmed, clarified, and extended Indigenous communities’ rights to make decisions regarding development in their traditional territories. Indigenous groups potentially impacted by resource or other development on or near their traditional territory must be adequately consulted and, if an agreement is reached to move ahead with the development, adequately compensated for the disruption.
There have been a number of recent cases of adequate consultation and accommodation that have led to mutually beneficial resource developments and co-management of parks and other areas of land.6 For example, the Haida Watchmen have successfully co-managed Gwaii Hanaas National Park in partnership with federal and provincial authorities since 1993, protecting their coastal waters and fisheries in keeping with traditional practices as well as preserving and sharing traditional knowledge for the benefit of local residents and visitors alike. For more information on the Haida Watchmen visit: http://coastalguardianwatchmen.ca.
However, despite such progress, broad societal misunderstanding and ignorance of Indigenous rights, the duty to consult, and what constitutes adequate consultation and accommodation are still at the root of many conflicts related to natural resource development and management today. Education about these issues is therefore critically important; however, educators attempting to engage their students in such critically informed discussion often encounter strong resistance and tension.
Challenges and strategies for educators
Formal and informal educators attempting to raise discussion and encourage critical thinking regarding social and environmental issues often experience personal stress as well as conflict with other educators, administrators, students, parents, and community members. Reflecting on personal experiences with socio-critical pedagogy, well known educational theorists Aoki7 and Haig-Brown8 invoke Paulo Freire to note that these processes are often characterized by conflict within one’s self, organizations, and the rest of society.
Mi’kmaq scholar Battiste9 also notes that educators engaging with critical Indigenous issues are faced with the dual task of not only providing facts, but also disrupting deeply seated societal assumptions and prejudices towards Indigenous peoples. Educators attempting to introduce critical environmental issues into their praxis also encounter considerable tension and resistance. As Jickling suggests, “the relationship between environmental education and advocacy is a stormy one.”10 Jickling also questions the role of educator as advocate and proposes that critical educators walk a fine line between merely promoting their personal opinions and facilitating authentically critical and open-minded thought by their students.
Education about these issues is critically important; however educators… often encounter strong resistance and tension.
Regardless of the sensitivity or reflexivity of critical educators, they often still encounter intense resistance from students, peers, administrators, and parents since merely raising issues for discussion can be viewed as controversial. It is therefore understandable that many educators consciously or unconsciously respond by distancing themselves from controversial issues.
However, as discussed by several participants in my recent study, those committed to continue working in critical areas often find success through strategies such as:
Fortunately, inspiring cases of educators embracing these strategies are rapidly emerging and often shared, at least in part, on the Internet. A recent project by Grade 7 Science students at Connect, an inquiry-based middle school in Calgary, is a great example. These students had the opportunity to engage in an experiential research project exploring the social, cultural, economic, health, and environmental considerations of the Northern Gateway Pipeline. Their process and findings are shared on their website through a variety of media such as a sophisticated interactive map developed using ArcGIS technology, a physical model of the pipeline’s proposed route built to scale, and video.
This case exemplifies several of the strategies suggested above. The teacher, Greg Neil, clearly went to great lengths to invite various stakeholders into the classroom, foster critical discussion and inquiry, and connect with the broader community through several special events where the class shared their impressive work. Of particular note are the shifting and varied perspectives expressed by students before, during, and after the project. These students were provided with the necessary resources, tools, and intellectual freedom to conduct an inspiring case-based inquiry into a critical socio-ecological issue.12
As societal leaders working with learners of all ages, educators play a key role in questioning and shaping Canada’s understanding of itself. Sharing and gaining a deeper understanding of the challenges and successes experienced by educators and students who engage with critical socio-ecological issues such as Indigenous land rights, is a crucial first step in developing and providing better resources, curricula, and policies to support this highly important work.
En bref – Les médias populaires, indépendants et sociaux du Canada fourmillent actuellement de récits exposant des conflits en matière de développement des ressources naturelles et d’exploitation des territoires autochtones. Les protestations et les pressions qui en résultent et les mouvements sociaux tels Idle No More sont souvent issus du fait que le gouvernement, l’industrie et une grande partie de la société canadienne ne reconnaissent pas les traités et les droits des Autochtones. L’auteur de cet article fait état des constatations tirées de son expérience récente d’enseignement et d’étude des tensions inhérentes aux questions socioécologiques contemporaines. Il présente et examine également l’obligation de consulter, à titre d’exemple, un aspect souvent incompris des territoires autochtones et des droits écologiques. Enfin, des suggestions fondées sur les recherches récentes de l’auteur sont formulées à l’intention d’éducateurs souhaitant explorer les sujets des territoires autochtones et de l’écologie.
Original Photo: Michelle Caron (wikipedia.com)
First published in Education Canada, March 2015
1 G. Cajete, Look to the Mountain: An ecology of Indigenous education (Skyland, NC: Kivaki Press, 1994).
2 L. Simpson, “Anticolonial Strategies for Recovery and Maintenance of Indigenous Knowledge,” American Indian Quarterly 28, no. 3 & 4 (2004): 373-384.
3 G. Jardine, “An Invitation to Explore the Roots of Current Aboriginal/ non-Aboriginal Relations in Canada,” One World in Dialogue 2, no. 1 (2012): 25-37.
4 D.C. Natcher, “Land Use Research and the Duty to Consult: A misrepresentation of the Aboriginal landscape,” Land Use Policy 18 (2001): 113-122.
5 Jardine, “An Invitation to Explore the Roots of Current Aboriginal/non-Aboriginal Relations in Canada”; Natcher, “Land Use Research and the Duty to Consult.”
6 P. Nadasdy, “The Case of the Missing Sheep: Time, space, and the politics of ‘Trust’ in co-management practice,” in Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Natural Resource Management, ed. C. Menzies (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2006), 127-151; S. Tsetta, V. Gibson, L. McDevitt, and S. Plotner, “Telling a Story of Change the Dene Way: Indicators for monitoring in diamond impacted communities,” Pimatisiwin: A Journal of Aboriginal and Indigenous Community Health 3, no. 1 (2005): 59-70.
7 T. Aoki, “Experiencing Ethnicity as a Japanese Canadian Teacher: Reflections on a personal curriculum,” Curriculum Inquiry 13, no. 3 (1983): 321-335.
8 C. Haig-Brown, “Taking Control: Contradiction and First Nations adult education,” in First Nations Education in Canada: The circle unfolds, eds. M. Battiste & J. Barman (Vancouver: UBC Press, 1995), 262-287.
9 M. Battiste, “Post-Colonial Remedies for Protecting Indigenous Knowledge,” inTeaching as Activism: Equity meets environmentalism, eds. P. Tripp & L. Muzzin (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s Press, 2005), 224-232.
10 B. Jickling, “Environmental Education and Advocacy: Revisited,” The Journal of Environmental Education 34, no. 2 (2003): 20-27.
11 B. Niblett, “Appreciative Resistance: Balancing activism and respect,” Pathways: The Ontario Journal of Outdoor Education 20, no. 4, (2008): 4.
12 To view the project summary visit: https://connectcharterschoolblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/25/an-inquiry-into-the-northern-gateway-pipeline/