In last week’s column, instead of freaking out over the latest shenanigans being orchestrated by Canada’s very own “Four Horsepersons of the Apocalypse”, wannabe Conservative leader-in-waiting Pierre Poilievre, Alberta premier Danielle Smith, Saskatchewan premier Scott Moe and, for the moment at least, Ontario premier Doug Ford, I decided to switch that focus onto an area of universal concern, that being the worth of a public educational system, and how its “standard” determines our intellectual progress, thus influencing those abroad to consider our nation to be a place where one day they may want to live.
At the moment, Saskatchewan has no idea as to how to create our own educational standard; however, in viewing this task’s undertaking from the perspective of first being a non-accredited teacher to eventually taking the accreditation course, I understand the cynical reasons as to why provincial Departments of Education would want their potential graduates to write standardized exams at year-end. Simply, they don’t “trust” teachers to cover the full potential of the curriculum – and, unfortunately, there is some truth in that distrust.
Saskatchewan students have been writing provincial examinations since at least the mid-1930’s, so why has the Moe government now decided that this program no longer has any relevance and should be discontinued, as opposed to either being expanded or improved – especially when it advertises the reality that it has no ability to tell our students how they stack up against the world. My answer is much like that of many others who stubbornly voted for a Sask Party potential MLA last year: the government is looking at ways to cut the educational budget, and is secretly becoming frightened by how far past the border of fiscal incompetence they’ve come, (beset upon us by the Devine Tragedy – $24 billion, allegedly; theirs now well past $31 billion and still growing).
And therein lies the problem: most teachers will welcome the removal of an “examination” process that many see as a “Big Brother” overlord and hold-back on the reins of utilizing pedagogical breakthroughs that then affords opportunities to delve deeper into ideas within that curriculum that are clearly being illustrated within today’s contemporary societies. Such an approach is mind-shattering, as it then truly underlines the “relevance” of curriculum content. Except…
Such an approach to education within the classroom is highly relevant within social science topics of study; however, when it comes to the sciences, or mathematics in particular, such an approach is immediately stifled by the linearity of subject matter, a polite way of saying that IF you want to understand the subject in the next highest class, you shouldn’t be “recycling” your classroom notes once you’ve finally passed the course, as you may need them next year to refresh your “level of subject understanding”.
Unfortunately, the “relevance” of social science programs being taught in such a fashion is that the ideas so being expressed too often run afoul of personal belief and prejudice, whether they be inculcated in one’s brain through religious dogma or political indoctrination, in turn becoming labeled as “woke”, therefore signalling to parents that such an approach to teaching must be constrained, even though there is no justifiable reason as to why this should occur.
Equally unfortunate, teachers too aggressively employing such pedagogical practices are often perceived as being “progressive” in their views. They’re not; they’re simply trying to be “trendy”. Laugh at them, as you would watching an overopinionated Millennial pointing to the “Golden Arches” in trying to explain to some racist why “THAT Prime Minister” (Sir John A.) is responsible for the excesses and abuses incurred by Indigenous students while attending residential school, even though their names are spelled differently.
At the moment, our “stubbornness” in being “trendy” in supporting “halfway solutions” allows the autocrats within our midst to then denigrate terms we’ve been using with pride to describe beliefs we uphold, in particular, diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI. In doing so, we then hand the autocrat his best weapon to ridicule our beliefs is to suggest our “kind” are simply “anti-white”. Better still, take solace in the knowledge that the anti-intellectual’s usage of “anti-whiteness” betrays their own lack of understanding, for anyone who has taken even a basic Grade 9 Science class knows that “white” is formed by the bonding of every colour imaginable into one shining beam, and as such demonstrates their own stupidity in refusing to take even one more step along the educational highway.
In short, we finally need to define what are our “standards” as weighted in the educated universe – and more in keeping, when is Scott Moe going to wake up and take the first steps in having that objective being reached.
Your guess is as good as mine…
