Empowered Educators in Canada E-Book

Carol Campbell

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Bildung
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 373

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2017

Beschreibung

BEST PRACTICES FROM CANADA'S HIGH-PERFORMING SCHOOL SYSTEMS Empowered Educators in Canada is one volume in a series that explores how high-performing educational systems from around the world achieve strong results. The anchor book, Empowered Educators: How High-Performing Systems Shape Teaching Quality Around the World, is written by Linda Darling-Hammond and colleagues, with contributions from the authors of this volume. Empowered Educators in Canada details the core commonalities that exist across Canada with special emphasis on the localized nature of the systems--a hallmark of Canadian education. Canada boasts a highly educated population, and the provinces/territories truly value education as evidenced by the significant proportion of public funds allocated to schooling. Operated by the provinces and territories, participation in kindergarten, primary, and secondary education is close to 100% across the nation. In addition to offering traditional academics, secondary education includes opportunities for students to attend technical and vocational programs. To demonstrate exemplary education systems, the authors examine two top-performing jurisdictions, Alberta and Ontario, which have developed strong supports for teacher development. Canadian teachers are highly qualified, and salary scales in all jurisdictions are typically based on a teacher's level of education and years of experience. While Canada has enjoyed much educational success, the education of First Nations students has historically been one of the country's more controversial and contentious issues. Overall, Canada is a country that is proud of its education system and places a high value on--and participation in--publicly funded education.

Leseprobe

EMPOWERED EDUCATORS IN CANADA

How High-Performing Systems Shape Teaching

Carol Campbell Ken Zeichner Ann Lieberman Pamela Osmond-Johnson

with Jesslyn Hollar, Shane Pisani, and Jacqueline Sohn

Copyright© 2017 by The Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education (SCOPE). All rights reserved.

Published by Jossey-Bass

A Wiley Brand

One Montgomery Street, Suite 1000, San Francisco, CA 94104-4594 www.josseybass.com

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400, fax [phone], or on the Web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, 201-748-6011, fax [phone], or online at www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. Readers should be aware that Internet Web sites offered as citations and/or sources for further information may have changed or disappeared between the time this was written and when it is read.

Jossey-Bass books and products are available through most bookstores. To contact Jossey-Bass directly call our Customer Care Department within the U.S. at 800-956-7739, outside the U.S. at 317-572-3986, or fax [phone].

Wiley publishes in a variety of print and electronic formats and by print-on-demand. Some material included with standard print versions of this book may not be included in e-books or in print-on-demand. If this book refers to media such as a CD or DVD that is not included in the version you purchased, you may download this material at http://booksupport.wiley.com. For more information about Wiley products, visit www.wiley.com.

ISBN: 9781119369622

ISBN: 9781119369684

ISBN: 9781119369691

Cover design by Wiley

Cover image: © suriya9/Getty Images, Inc.

CONTENTS

Foreword

Acknowledgments

About the Sponsoring Organizations

About the Authors

Online Documents and Videos

Chapter 1 Education in Canada

Overview of Canada

Governance of School Systems

Organization of the System

Educational Funding

Working Conditions

Aboriginal Education

Conclusion

Chapter 2 Teacher Policies and Practices in Alberta

Geography

Demographics

Inequity for Racial (Visible Minorities) and Aboriginal Populations

Students in Alberta

Student Learning in Alberta

Governance, Sociopolitical, and Historical Context in Alberta

Alberta Education (Ministry of Education)

The Work of Alberta’s Teachers

Funding

Teacher Preparation Programs

Teacher Certification

Teacher Induction

Change in Institutional Resources

Change in Teaching Approaches and Strategies

Alteration of Pedagogical Assumptions or Theories Related to Innovation

Teacher Evaluation/Supervision/Teacher Growth

Conclusion

Notes

Interviews

Appendix 2–A Teaching Quality Standards

Appendix 2–B Vignettes of Teacher Preparation Programs

Chapter 3 Teacher Policies and Practices in Ontario

System Improvement and Ontario’s Theory of Action

Ontario’s Theory of Action for Educational Improvement

Overview: Ontario Education System

Length of School Year, Instructional Time, and Organization of the School Day

Governance at the Provincial and Local Level

Partnership Working among Provincial and Local Organizations

Improving the Ontario Education System: Provincial Goals and Results

Looking to the Future: A Renewed Vision for Achieving Excellence

Supporting Teachers and Teaching Quality

Leadership Development for Administrators

Conclusion

Appendix Methodology

References

Eula

List of Tables

Chapter 2

Table 2-1

Table 2-2

Table 2-3

Table 2-4

Table 2-5

Table 2-6

Table 2-7

Chapter 3

Table 3-1

Table 3-2

Table 3-3

Table 3-4

Table 3-5

Table 3-6

Table 3-7

Table 3-8

List of Illustrations

Chapter 1

Figure 1-1

Provinces and Territories of Canada.

Chapter 2

Figure 2-1

Province of Alberta.

Figure 2-2

Alberta Education Governance Structure.

Figure 2-3

2014–2015 Educational Funding Allocations.

Chapter 3

Figure 3-1

Province of Ontario.

Figure 3-2

Sample Junior Student Schedule—Grade 5/6, Toronto District School Board.

Figure 3-3

Sample Secondary Student Schedule, Grade 11, York Catholic District School Board.

Figure 3-4

Projected Educational Funding 2013–2014.

Figure 3-5

GSN Funding per Pupil 2002–2003 to 2014–2015.

Figure 3-6

Combined Reading, Writing, and Mathematics Results for Elementary Schools.

Figure 3-7

High School Graduation Rates.

Figure 3-8

Distribution of elementary schools by EQAO achievement category (2005–2006 to 2012–2013).

Figure 3-9

Percentage point difference in achievement between ELL students and all students overall on EQAO assessments.

Figure 3-10

The Future of Ontario’s Education System.

Figure 3-11

Teacher Development in Ontario.

Figure 3-12

Cumulative Ontario Teacher Education Application Statistics as of September for the Past 10 years.

Figure 3-13

Applications and program choices for Ontario teacher education programs from 2014 and 2015.

Figure 3-14

Student Schedule, Grade 4, York Region District School Board.

Figure 3-15

Teacher Schedule, Grade 4, York Region District School Board.

Figure 3-16

Secondary Teachers’ Average Work Week.

Figure 3-17

Number of Professional Learning Activities During Working Hours Over the Past 12 Months.

Figure 3-18

Learning Activities Over the Past 12 Months Outside of Regular Work Day.

Figure 3-19

K–12 School Effectiveness Framework.

Figure 3-20

Professional Learning Group Master Schedule, York Region District School Board.

Figure 3-21

The Ontario Leadership Framework. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/policyfunding/leadership/framework.html.

Figure 3-22

Principal Performance Appraisal Process.

Figure 3-23

Principals’ Hours Spent on Different Tasks, Duties, and Responsibilities—Per Week.

Guide

Cover

Table of Contents

Chapter

Pages

vii

viii

ix

xi

xii

xiii

xiv

xv

xvi

xvii

xix

xx

xxi

xxii

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

25

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

35

38

39

40

41

42

43

45

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

71

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

FOREWORD

FEW WOULD DISAGREE THAT, among all the factors that affect how much students learn, the quality of their teachers ranks very high. But what, exactly, do policy makers, universities, and school leaders need to do to make sure that the vast majority of teachers in their jurisdiction are literally world class?

Perhaps the best way to answer that question is to look carefully and in great detail at what the countries whose students are performing at the world's top levels are doing to attract the highest quality high school students to teaching careers, prepare them well for that career, organize schools so teachers can do the best work of which they are capable, and provide incentives for them to get better at the work before they finally retire.

It was not hard for us to find the right person to lead a study that would do just that. Stanford professor Linda Darling-Hammond is one of the world's most admired researchers. Teachers and teaching have been lifelong professional preoccupations for her. And, not least, Professor Darling-Hammond is no stranger to international comparative studies. Fortunately for us and for you, she agreed to lead an international comparative study of teacher quality in a selection of top-performing countries. The study, Empowered Educators: How High-Performing Systems Shape Teaching Quality Around the World, took two years to complete and is unprecedented in scope and scale.

The volume you are reading is one of six books, including case studies conducted in Australia, Canada, China, Finland, and Singapore. In addition to the case studies and the cross-study analysis, the researchers have collected a range of videos and artifacts (http://ncee.org/empowered-educators)—ranging from a detailed look at how the daily schedules of teachers in Singapore ensure ample time for collaboration and planning to a description of the way Shanghai teachers publish their classroom research in refereed journals—that we hope will be of great value to policy makers and educators interested in using and adapting the tools that the top-performing jurisdictions use to get the highest levels of teacher quality in the world.

Studies of this sort are often done by leading scholars who assemble hordes of graduate students to do the actual work, producing reams of reports framed by the research plan, which are then analyzed by the principal investigator. That is not what happened in this case. For this report, Professor Darling-Hammond recruited two lead researcher-writers for each case study, both senior, one from the country being studied and one from another country, including top-level designers and implementers of the systems being studied and leading researchers. This combination of insiders and external observers, scholars and practitioner-policy makers, gives this study a depth, range, and authenticity that is highly unusual.

But this was not just an effort to produce first-class case studies. The aim was to understand what the leaders were doing to restructure the profession of teaching for top performance. The idea was to cast light on that by examining what was the same and what was different from country to country to see if there were common threads that could explain uncommon results. As the data-gathering proceeded, Professor Darling-Hammond brought her team together to exchange data, compare insights, and argue about what the data meant. Those conversations, taking place among a remarkable group of senior policy actors, practitioners, and university-based researchers from all over the world, give this work a richness rarely achieved in this sort of study.

The researchers examined all sorts of existing research literature on the systems they were studying, interviewed dozens of people at every level of the target systems, looked at everything from policy at the national level to practice in individual schools, and investigated not only the specific policies and practices directly related to teacher quality, but the larger economic, political, institutional, and cultural contexts in which policies on teacher quality are shaped.

Through it all, what emerges is a picture of a sea change taking place in the paradigm of mass education in the advanced industrial nations. When university graduates of any kind were scarce and most people had jobs requiring only modest academic skills, countries needed teachers who knew little more than the average high school graduate, perhaps less than that at the primary school level. It was not too hard to find capable people, typically women, to do that work, because the job opportunities for women with that level of education were limited.

But none of that is true anymore. Wage levels in the advanced industrial countries are typically higher than elsewhere in the world. Employers who can locate their manufacturing plants and offices anywhere in the world and who do not need highly skilled labor look for workers who have the basic skills they need in low-wage countries, so the work available to workers with only the basic skills in the high-wage countries is drying up. That process is being greatly accelerated by the rapid advance of automation. The jobs that are left in the high-wage countries mostly demand a higher level of more complex skills.

These developments have put enormous pressure on the governments of high-wage countries to find teachers who have more knowledge and a deeper command of complex skills. These are the people who can get into selective universities and go into occupations that have traditionally had higher status and are better compensated than school teaching. What distinguishes the countries with the best-performing education systems is that: 1) they have figured this out and focused hard on how to respond to these new realities; and 2) they have succeeded not just in coming up with promising designs for the systems they need but in implementing those systems well. The result is not only profound changes in the way they source, educate, train, and support a truly professional teaching force, but schools in which the work of teachers is very differently organized, the demands on school leaders is radically changed, teachers become not the recipient of a new set of instructions from the ”center,“ but the people who are actually responsible for designing and carrying out the reforms that are lifting the performance of their students every day. Not least important, these systems offer real careers in teaching that enable teachers, like professionals in other fields, to gain more authority, responsibility, compensation, and status as they get better and better at the work, without leaving teaching.

This is an exciting story. It is the story that you are holding in your hand. The story is different in every country, province, and state. But the themes behind the stories are stunningly similar. If you find this work only half as compelling as I have, you will be glued to these pages.

MARC TUCKER, PRESIDENT

NATIONAL CENTER ON EDUCATION AND THE ECONOMY

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

WE WISH TO ACKNOWLEDGE and thank the many individuals and organizations who contributed to the design, conduct, and reporting of the research presented in this book. In particular, we wish to thank the National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE) who funded the overall International Teacher Policy Study and the members of their Center on International Education Benchmarking (CIEB) who reviewed and provided feedback on draft materials. We want to express our deepest thanks to Linda Darling-Hammond who was the overall principal investigator for the International Teacher Policy Study and who provided leadership, direction, and guidance to all case studies. We are indebted also to members of the Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education (SCOPE), who provided advice and assistance throughout this study, particularly: Dion Burns, Maude Engstrom, Sonya Keller, and Jon Snyder.

We wish to thank and acknowledge our colleagues and coauthors who provided considerable research expertise and contributions to the conduct, writing, and completion of the Canada, Alberta, and Ontario case studies: Jesslyn Hollar, Ann Lieberman, Pamela Osmond-Johnson, Shane Pisani, and Jacqueline Sohn.

In addition, for the Alberta case study, we offer great thanks to those who provided us with information and materials related to policies and practices in Alberta: Mark Bevan, Paul MacLoud, and Karen Shipka of the Ministry of Education; Diane Wishart of the Ministry of Advanced Education; J. C. Coulture and Mark Yurick of the Alberta Teachers’ Association; Jim Brandon of the University of Calgary; Jean Clandinin, Jim Parsons, and Randy Wimmer of the University of Alberta; Peter Grimmett of the University of British Columbia; Val Olekshy of the Edmonton Regional Learning Consortium; and the following Alberta teachers: Robert Gardner, Marion Brenner, Wayne LaVold, Katherine McReady, Katherine Macmillan, Tammy Thero-Soto, and another teacher who chose to remain anonymous.

For the Ontario case study, our deepest thanks go to the individuals who agreed to provide their expertise and time by being interviewed to inform our case study. Thank you to: Lindy Amato, Rob Andrews, Paul Anthony, Sandra Bickford, Megan Borner, Kathy Broad, Hanca Chang, Paul Charles, Camille Chenier, Suzette Clarke, Peter Edwards, Lori Foote, Richard Franz, Mary Jean Gallagher, Jacqueline Hammond, Rhonda Kimberley-Young, Wahid Khan, Judi Kokis, Ann Lopez, Judith Lyander, Pauline McNaughton, Dawn Merlino, Susan Perry, Demetra Saladaris, Michael Salvatori, Bruce Shaw, Tina Sidhu, Jim Strachan, Christina Terzic, and Sabir Thomas. We are grateful also to several teachers and principals who agreed to be interviewed but asked that we keep their identity confidential. Ontario’s education system and students benefit tremendously from your individual expertise and collective professionalism. Thank you all! In addition, we wish to thank: Taddesse Haile and his team at the Education Statistics and Analysis Branch in the Ontario Ministry of Education and Barbara Gough and colleagues in the Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities who provided advice and assistance with provincial data to inform our case study; Simon Young and Bill Powell from the Ontario College of Teachers who assisted with photographs; and Margaret Brennan who provided transcription services for the case study. We are grateful for all of the contributions that have benefited this case study. Any errors or omissions, however, are the responsibility of the authors.

CAROL CAMPBELL AND KEN ZEICHNER

ABOUT THE SPONSORING ORGANIZATIONS

THIS WORK IS MADE possible through a grant by the Center on International Education Benchmarking® of the National Center on Education and the Economy® and is part of a series of reports on teacher quality systems around the world. For a complete listing of the material produced by this research program, please visit www.ncee.org/cieb.

The Center on International Education Benchmarking®, a program of NCEE, funds and conducts research around the world on the most successful education systems to identify the strategies those countries have used to produce their superior performance. Through its books, reports, website, monthly newsletter, and a weekly update of education news around the world, CIEB provides up-to-date information and analysis on those countries whose students regularly top the PISA league tables. Visit www.ncee.org/cieb to learn more.

The National Center on Education and the Economy was created in 1988 to analyze the implications of changes in the international economy for American education, formulate an agenda for American education based on that analysis and seek wherever possible to accomplish that agenda through policy change and development of the resources educators would need to carry it out. For more information visit www.ncee.org.

Research for this volume was coordinated by the Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education (SCOPE) at Stanford University. SCOPE was founded in 2008 to foster research, policy, and practice to advance high quality, equitable education systems in the United States and internationally.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Carol Campbell is associate professor of Leadership and Educational Change and director of the Knowledge Network for Applied Education Research (KNAER) at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE), University of Toronto. Carol is also an appointed education advisor to the Premier and the Minister of Education in Ontario, Canada. Her previous roles include: executive director of the Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education (SCOPE) at Stanford University, USA; holding progressively senior leadership roles in the Ontario Ministry of Education including becoming the Ministry’s first chief research officer; and academic, education, and policy roles in the UK. Carol is originally from Scotland and earned her PhD at the University of Strathclyde.

Jesslyn Hollar is a doctoral candidate at the University of Washington and director of Central Washington University’s alternative route to certification program. Her research interests include teacher education and policy, sociology of education and history of teacher education, teacher learning, and education reform. She is a member of the History of Education Society and the American Educational Research Association and serves on the editorial board for the Northwest Association of Teacher Educators.

Ann Lieberman is currently a senior scholar at Stanford University. She is an emeritus professor from Teachers College, Columbia University. She is affiliated with two Stanford Centers: SCALE and SCOPE. Her major areas of research are: teacher knowledge, learning, and leadership, as well as school/university partnerships. She is internationally known for her work on finding a way to get at teacher knowledge to go with research knowledge. She has written or edited over 18 books, scores of articles and chapters, all focused on the teacher, teacher leadership, and school reform. She has been on the forefront of arguing for policies that enable teacher learning and leadership that recognize the complexities of teaching and the critical importance of supporting teachers.

Pamela Osmond-Johnson is an assistant professor of Educational Administration with the Faculty of Education at the University of Regina. Pamela recently completed her doctorate in educational administration from the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto, with a focus on educational policy. Her research includes work around teacher leadership, teacher professionalism, teacher federations, and the professional growth of teachers. Prior to beginning her doctorate, Pamela was a high school science teacher and vice principal in Newfoundland.

Shane Pisani is a doctoral candidate in the University of Washington’s Curriculum and Instruction Department. He is an instructor with the Seattle Teacher Residency and also teaches a number of courses for both the elementary and secondary teacher education programs at the University of Washington. His research interests include teacher perceptions of global education and the positioning of mentor teachers as teacher educators.

Jacqueline Sohn is a PhD candidate in Educational Policy at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto. Her current research focuses on the political influencers of evidence use for macro-level policy decisions in the area of child poverty. More broadly, she is interested in the use of interdisciplinary research and cross-sector collaborations for developing effective social policies. Prior to beginning her doctoral studies, she was employed at the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term care in a provincial project coordination and policy role.

Ken Zeichner is the Boeing Professor of Teacher Education at the University of Washington, Seattle. Prior to moving to the University of Washington in 2009, Zeichner was the Hoefs-Bascom Professor of Teacher Education and association dean for Teacher Education and International Education. He was a member of the UW-Madison faculty for 34 years. He is an elected member of the National Academy of Education, a fellow in the American Educational Research Association (AERA), and a former vice president of AERA. His publications include Teacher Education and the Struggle for Social Justice (Routledge, 2009). His current work focuses on teacher education and professional learning, teacher education policy, and engaging local communities in teacher education.

ONLINE DOCUMENTS AND VIDEOS

Access online documents an videos at http://ncee.org/empowered-educators

Link Number

Description

URL

2-1

Canada's Employment Equity Act

http://ncee.org/2017/01/canadas-employment-equity-act/

2-2

Inequality in Calgary

http://ncee.org/2017/01/inequality-in-calgary/

2-3

Closing the Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal Education Gaps

http://ncee.org/2017/01/closing-the-aboriginal-non-aboriginal-education-gaps/

2-4

Inspiring Education: A Dialogue with Albertans

http://ncee.org/2017/01/inspiring-education-a-dialogue-with-albertans/

2-5

Alberta Task Force for Teaching Excellence

http://ncee.org/2017/01/alberta-task-force-for-teaching-excellence/

2-6

Alberta Teaching Quality Standards

http://ncee.org/2016/12/alberta-teaching-quality-standards/

2-7

Education Funding in Alberta

http://ncee.org/2017/01/education-funding-in-alberta/

2-8

Alberta School Act

http://ncee.org/2017/01/alberta-school-act/

2-9

Canada's Approach to School Funding

http://ncee.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Alb-non-AV-9-Herman-2013-Canadas-Approach-to-School-Funding.pdf

2-10

Alberta's Programs of Study (Curriculum)

https://education.alberta.ca/

2-11

Alberta Provincial Test Mathematics Grade 9 2013

http://ncee.org/2017/01/alberta-provincial-test-mathematics-grade-9-2013/

2-12

Alberta Provincial Test Mathematics 30-1 2014

http://ncee.org/2017/01/alberta-provincial-test-mathematics-30-1-2014/

2-13

Alberta Provincial SLA Information Bulletin 2015-2016 Grade 3

http://ncee.org/2017/01/alberta-provincial-sla-information-bulletin-2015-2016-grade-3/

2-14

Performance of Alberta Students on National and International Assessments

http://ncee.org/2017/01/performance-of-alberta-students-on-national-and-international-assessments/

2-15

Randy Wimmer, Vice-Dean & Associate Dean (Academic) at the University of Alberta

http://ncee.org/2016/12/audio-randy-wimmer/

2-16

Collective Agreements

https://www.teachers.ab.ca/For Members/Salary Benefits and Pension/Collective Agreements/Pages/Collective Agreements.aspx

2-17

Alberta Education Sector Workforce Planning

http://ncee.org/2017/01/alberta-education-sector-workforce-planning/

2-18

Alberta: Teaching in the Early Years

http://ncee.org/2017/01/alberta-teaching-in-the-early-years/

2-19

Campus Alberta: A Framework for Action

http://ncee.org/2017/01/campus-alberta-a-framework-for-action/

2-20

Bridging Program for Foreign-Prepared Teachers Calgary Model

http://ncee.org/2017/01/bridging-program-for-foreign-prepared-teachers-calgary-model/

2-21

Mentoring Beginning Teachers

http://ncee.org/2017/01/mentoring-beginning-teachers/

2-22

2012 ATA Professional Development Survey

http://ncee.org/2017/01/2012-ata-professional-development-survey/

2-23

Alberta Professional Development Programs and Services Guide

http://ncee.org/2017/01/alberta-professional-development-programs-and-services-guide/

2-24

A Framework for Professional Development in Alberta

http://ncee.org/2016/12/a-framework-for-professional-development-in-alberta/

2-25

Alberta Teacher Growth Supervision and Evaluation Policy

http://ncee.org/2017/01/alberta-teacher-growth-supervision-and-evaluation-policy/

3-1

Ontario PISA 2012 Highlights

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-pisa-2012-highlights

3-2

Ontario Ministry of Finance 2015 – Ontario Fact Sheet

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-mof-2015-ontario-fact-sheet/

3-3

Ontario Education Act 1990

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-education-act-1990/

3-4

Audio: Ontario Governance, Policy, and Educational Goals

http://ncee.org/2017/01/audio-ontario-governance-policy-and-educational-goals/

3-5

Ontario Teaching Profession Act

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-teaching-profession-act/

3-6

Public Education in Ontario: Who Does What

http://ncee.org/2017/01/public-education-in-ontario-who-does-what/

3-7

Ontario Guide to Funding for Student Needs

http://ncee.org/2016/12/ontario-guide-to-funding-for-student-needs/

3-8

Ontario Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-equity-and-inclusive-education-strategy/

3-9

Ontario FNMI Education Policy Framework

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-fnmi-education-policy-framework/

3-10

Ontario Research and Evaluation Strategy brochure

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-research-and-evaluation-strategy-brochure/

3-11

Ontario Education: Achieving Excellence

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-education-achieving-excellence/

3-12

Ontario Report on Teacher Professional Learning

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-report-on-teacher-professional-learning/

3-13

Ontario Bachelor of Education Course Descriptions 2015-2017

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-bed-course-descriptions-2015-2017/

3-14

Ontario Transitions to Teaching Survey 2011

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-transitions-to-teaching-survey-2011/

3-15

Audio: Initial Teacher Education

http://ncee.org/2017/01/audio-initial-teacher-education/

3-16

Ontario Standards of Practice

http://ncee.org/2016/12/ontario-standards-of-practice/

3-17

Ontario Hiring Practices

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-hiring-practices/

3-18

Ontario Putting Students First Act

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-putting-students-first-act/

3-19

ETFO Teacher Workload and Professionalism Study

http://ncee.org/2017/01/etfo-teacher-workload-and-professionalism-study/

3-20

Audio: Ontario Recruitment, Induction, and Mentoring

http://ncee.org/2017/01/audio-ontario-recruitment-induction-and-mentoring/

3-21

Ontario New Teacher Induction Program Manual

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-new-teacher-induction-program-manual/

3-22

Ontario School Effectiveness Framework

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-school-effectiveness-framework/

3-23

Audio: Ontario Continual Professional Learning

http://ncee.org/2017/01/audio-ontario-continual-professional-learning/

3-24

Ontario Teacher Learning and Leadership Program Overview

http://ncee.org/2016/12/teacher-learning-and-leadership-program-overview/

3-25

Ontario Teacher Appraisal Manual

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-teacher-appraisal-manual/

3-26

Ontario Annual Learning Plan

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-annual-learning-plan/

3-27

Audio: Ontario Teacher and Leadership Development

http://ncee.org/2017/01/audio-ontario-teacher-and-leadership-development/

3-28

Ontario Leadership Strategy Quick Facts

http://ncee.org/2016/12/ontario-leadership-strategy-quick-facts/

3-29

Ontario Board Leadership Development Strategy Manual

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-board-leadership-development-strategy-manual/

3-30

Ontario Principals Qualification Program

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-principals-qualification-program/

3-31

Ontario Principal Performance Appraisal

http://ncee.org/2017/01/ontario-principal-performance-appraisal/

1EDUCATION IN CANADA

Pamela Osmond-Johnson, Carol Campbell, and Ken Zeichner

UNLIKE MOST INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES around the world, there is no federal body of education in Canada; rather, education is under provincial or territorial authority, granted under Canada’s Constitution Act of 1867. As highlighted in Figure 1-1, Canada is composed of ten provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Quebec, and Saskatchewan) and three territories (Nanavut, Northwest Territories, and Yukon). Thus, while there are many similarities across provincial and territorial education systems, there are significant policy variations in the areas of curriculum, assessment and accountability. These differences reflect the geography, history, language, culture, and corresponding specialized needs of the diverse populations served in each jurisdiction. All the education systems in Canada, however, are highly developed and widely accessible, reflecting a shared societal belief in the importance of education (CMEC, 2015). In this volume we begin by outlining the core commonalities that exist across the country while paying special attention to the localized nature of the systems—a hallmark of Canadian education. We then take a closer look at two of Canada’s top performing jurisdictions, Alberta and Ontario, as exemplars of school systems that have developed strong supports around teacher development within their own unique policy contexts.

Figure 1-1Provinces and Territories of Canada.

Source: Natural Resources Canada.

Overview of Canada

Canada is a multicultural society, with a foreign-born population of almost 20% (OECD, 2015). The Canadian constitution recognizes both English and French as its two official languages. According to 2011 Statistics Canada census data, 5.8 million (17.5%) of Canadians speak both official languages. Nearly 7 million (21%) Canadians reported speaking French most often at home in 2011, although this is largely concentrated in the province of Quebec. In the rest of Canada, 74.1% of Canadians speak only English at home (CMEC, 2015). The minority language rights of French-speaking students living outside the province of Quebec and English-speaking students living in the province of Quebec are protected in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Canadian Charter or Rights and Freedoms outlines the conditions under which Canadians have the right to access publicly funded education in either minority language. Each province and territory has established French-language school boards to manage the French-first-language schools. In the province of Quebec, the same structure applies to education in English-first-language schools.

All Canadians meeting age and residence requirements have access to free public education. In 2010–2011, there were 5,053,985 total students enrolled in public elementary and secondary schools in Canada (CMEC, 2015). Education is under provincial jurisdiction and there is no federal department of education. That being said, the federal government plays an important role in Canadian education, directly making provisions for First Nations schools on reserves and indirectly providing funding through intergovernmental transfers which aim to redistribute wealth across the country and “ensure a significant degree of equality across provinces in their ability to deliver social services such as education” (Parkin, 2015, p. 25). Although localized variations exist, the education systems within the ten provinces and three territories are based around a common belief in the importance of education, as evidenced by the significant proportion of budgets allocated to schooling (approximately 20% of total expenditures, depending on the jurisdiction).

In 2013, Canada’s elementary and secondary school systems employed 397,122 educators (Statistics Canada, 2014), most of whom had four or five years of postsecondary study. The teaching profession is unionized in all jurisdictions; however, the scope of the work of teacher associations varies. National frameworks around teacher competencies, professionalism, and the work of teachers do not exist. Rather, teacher appraisal varies across jurisdictions and the establishment of professional standards and certification of the teaching profession are provincial/territorial responsibilities (OECD, 2015). To teach in Canada educators are required to obtain at least a bachelor of education from one of approximately 50 accredited teacher education programs at universities across the country. Some also offer postgraduate preparation for teaching. With large surpluses in teacher supply contrasted with available teaching jobs, Canadian teacher education programs and schools are selective in choosing candidates and teachers, which some analysts suggest is a contributor to high achievement (OECD, 2011). Positive learning environments and strong instructional leadership have also been identified as keys in Canada’s continued school improvement efforts. Indicators from PISA 2012 showed that Canadian 15-year-olds viewed teacher-student relations at levels that are higher than the OECD average and school leaders reporter higher than average levels of instructional leadership (OCED, 2015).

Canada has a highly educated population, with 53% of 25–64-year-olds holding tertiary qualifications in 2012—ranking first among countries participating in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) analyses, which collectively averaged 33% (OECD, 2014). In recent decades, Canada has consistently been ranked as a top performer on the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) (OECD, 2015). Across the ten provinces, Canadian 15-year-olds scored well above the OECD average in both mathematics and reading in the 2012 rankings and, of the 65 countries and economies participating in the assessment, only three OECD and six non-OECD countries outperformed Canada. As Parkin (2015) points outs, based on a variety of international assessments, “no country outside of East Asia performs better than Canada on a regular basis” (p. 6).

Complementing its focus on high quality education, Canada also has a strong focus on health and well-being, providing all residents with free health care and access to a host of social services dedicated to child, youth, and adult development. Since 2000, Canada has particularly focused on the provision of social programs and services in early childhood (birth to age 6) (Government of Canada, 2011). A national Universal Child Care Benefit (UCCB) issues a taxable monthly payment of $100 per child to families with children under the age of six (OECD, 2015). This funding is used at the discretion of parents to offset the costs of raising children. In late 2014, the federal government proposed increases to UCCB to $160 per child under the age of six and $60 per month for children aged 6–17. The increases took effect on January 1, 2015, and the first retroactive payment was made to families in July of 2015. Additional provincial baby bonuses and supplements for low-income families are also available to those who meet certain qualifications, with benefits and criteria varying between jurisdictions. While improvements in children’s health have been made in a number of areas (such as infant mortality, teenage births, and bullying), when it comes to overall child well-being, UNICEF (2013) describes Canada as a country “stuck in the middle”, achieving a middle ranking on their report card of 29 of the richest countries for the past decade. As such, key public education issues include a focus on diversity and equity with particular attention to social justice issues such as poverty, gender issues, mental health, racism, and violence prevention.

That being said, the impact of socioeconomic status on achievement in Canada is less than the OECD average, particularly in mathematics (9.4% compared with the OECD average of 14%). In fact, “in every OCED country except Finland, the socioeconomic status of the neighborhood a student is born in and of the local school they attend has more of an impact on their academic performance than in Canada” (Parkin, 2015, p. 24). Achievement among immigrant children is a particularly remarkable aspect of the nation’s success as Canada is among only a few countries internationally where there is no significant achievement gap between its immigrant and nonimmigrant students on the PISA (OECD, 2015). It is also one of the few countries where there is no significant performance gap between students who speak the language of instruction at home and those who do not (OECD, 2011). These successes were recently highlighted by the Center on International Education Benchmarking (CIEB, 2015), who identified Canada as one of only three nations (with Finland and Estonia) whose education systems “are able to offer their students a quality education regardless of socioeconomic background at a low cost and still come out at the top of the international league tables for overall student performance.”

Nevertheless, while Canada performs highly in international comparisons, there are some variations across provincial and territorial systems. For example, 2011 data for the upper secondary graduation indicates: “The proportion of students who completed their education in the expected time varied considerably across the country: from 12% in Nunavut to 84% in Nova Scotia” (Statistics Canada, 2015, p. 41). A Pan Canadian Assessment Program (PCAP) is administered to a sample of students across the ten provinces every three years. The average performance Canada is high; however, several provinces demonstrate performance at or above the Canadian average—Alberta in science and math; British Columbia in science; Newfoundland and Labrador in science; Ontario in math, reading, and science; and Quebec in math (CMEC, 2014). Within an overall high-performing system, it is important to remember that school education in Canada varies by province and territory.

Governance of School Systems

Provincial and territorial systems are centralized and schools have less autonomy regarding resource allocation, curriculum, and assessment than many of their OECD counterparts (OECD, 2015). In all 13 jurisdictions, departments or ministries of education are responsible for the organization, delivery, and assessment of education at elementary and secondary levels. A minister of education, who is almost always an elected member of the legislature, is appointed by the government leader to lead the department. Responsibility for the overall operation of the departments, however, is with the deputy ministers, who belong to the civil service. The provincial/territorial ministry or department provides education, administrative and financial management and school support functions. It also establishes the terms of the educational services to be provided, including the policy and legislative frameworks (CMEC, 2015). The ministry or department of education typically lays out basic requirements around the assessment of students, with school boards and schools having the authority to establish their own assessment policies within the provincial/territorial framework. While format and structure vary across the country, students in most jurisdictions are required to participate in provincial or territorial summative examinations at key stages (typically grades 3, 6, and upper secondary) (OECD, 2015). The ministers of education collaborate through the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC), with key pan-Canadian educational policies focused around evaluation and assessment (OECD, 2015).

Typically, school boards (also known as districts, divisions or district education councils in different provinces) are entrusted with local governance of education. Members are elected by public ballot, and the authority for operational and administrational (including financial) duties is delegated to local leaders at the discretion of the provincial and territorial governments. Local authorities oversee the group of schools within their board or division, and are responsible for curriculum implementation, personnel, student enrollment, and initiation of proposals for new construction or other major capital expenditures.

Organization of the System

Primary and Elementary Education (Grades K–8)

Operated by the local education authorities, one year of pregrade one (kindergarten) for five-year-olds is available in all provinces/territories. Preschool classes may also be available from age four or earlier, although there is substantial variation between jurisdictions in terms of provision and operation (OECD, 2015). Across Canada, 95 percent of five-year-olds attend pre-elementary or elementary school, and over 40 percent of four-year-olds are enrolled in junior kindergarten. Emphasized in the primary and elementary school curriculum are the basic subjects of language, mathematics, social studies, science, health and physical education, and introductory arts, with some jurisdictions including second-language learning. In general, schooling is compulsory from ages 5–18 but, in some provinces, can begin at age four and continue until graduation from secondary school or age 21. In 2012, the average hours per year of total compulsory instruction time for primary and elementary students in Canada was 919—higher than the OECD average of 794 hours (OECD, 2014).

Secondary Education (Grades 9–12)

Almost 98% of elementary students progress to the secondary level. Here, students are required to take primarily compulsory courses in the first years with access to specialized courses in later years to prepare for the job market or meet the entrance requirements of postsecondary institutions in specific areas of interest. Typically, vocational and academic programs are offered within the same secondary schools, but sometimes technical and vocational programs are offered in separate, dedicated vocational training centers. A number of jurisdictions also offer apprenticeship program at the secondary level that offer hands-on learning with a career focus (OECD, 2015). Students who complete the requisite number of compulsory and optional courses are awarded secondary school diplomas. In 2012, the average totally compulsory instruction time for lower secondary students in Canada was 924 hours—just above the OECD average of 905 hours (OECD, 2014). The upper secondary graduation rate for students below the age of 25 in 2011 was 81%, which was on par with the OECD average of 80% (OECD, 2014). In terms of the number of 25–34 year olds who have attained upper secondary qualifications, however, Canada ranks 10 percentage points higher than the OCED average at 92%. (OECD, 2015).

Separate and Private Schools

Legislation and practices concerning the establishment of separate educational systems and private educational institutions varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In many jurisdictions separate school systems are publically funded and include both elementary and secondary education. These separate systems are public schools that reflect the constitutional right to religious education for Roman Catholics or Protestants, when either group is the religious minority in a community. Some jurisdictions also provide partial funding for private schools if certain criteria, which vary among jurisdictions, are met. In other jurisdictions, there is no public funding allocated to private schools, although they are still be regulated by the government. Government-funded school systems, both public and separate, however, serve about 93% of all students in Canada (CMEC, 2015), and the private system is relatively small in size.

Educational Funding

Funding for public education is overseen by each provincial/territorial government and sourced through a mix of government transfers and local taxes collected by either the government (in jurisdictions which have centralized funding) or by school boards themselves (in jurisdictions where school boards have retaining taxing rights). Revised annually, provincial/territorial regulations set out the grant structure that establishes the level of funding for each school board based on factors such as the number of students, special needs, and location. Provincial funding to districts is typically divided into three categories: block grants based on number of students; categorical grants—either for funding specific programmatic needs (for example, special education), or helping districts meet particular challenges in providing basic services (for example, funding transportation for more remote districts); as well as equalization funding for districts to equalize less wealthy districts (CMEC, 2015). The primary allocation of government transfers to school boards is based on a per-pupil funding level that is consistence across the jurisdiction. Some inequity in funding does exist in jurisdictions where school boards have retained the right to directly collect education tax. In these jurisdictions school boards in more affluent neighborhoods tend to generate higher revenues per capita than those based in less affluent communities. In most jurisdictions, however, governments often provide additional funding to smaller school boards and school boards with a large proportion of high needs students or students of minority languages in order to provide more equitable service.

Student Expenditure

The average per pupil expenditure in 2010 was $10,166US in secondary education—approximately 6% higher than per pupil expenditures in primary/elementary education ($9580US). This represented 6.7% of Canada’s GDP and 13.2% of all public expenditures (up from 5.9% and 12.4% in 2000). This varies from province to province, however, partially influenced by the size of the school-age population and enrollment in education, as well as the provinces’ relative wealth. The portion of expenditure per student allocated to core services represented 95% of the total expenditure per students. This is consistent with the proportion on core services in OECD countries (94%) in elementary through postsecondary nontertiary education (Canadian Education Statistics Council, 2014). The highest per-pupil spending typically occurs in the northern territories where remote locations make the delivery of quality education more costly. Outside of the territories, in 2010, the highest expenditure (across primary/elementary and secondary education) was Alberta ($10,423US) and the lowest was Nova Scotia ($8,719US).

Working Conditions

Teacher Pay