What is Canada’s Educational “Edge”? • John E. S. Lawrence

What is Canada’s Educational ‘Edge’?

John E. S. Lawrence

Resumen

Pocos asuntos son más importantes en estos tiempos que la forma futura de la educación como conductor esencial para el progreso humano. Canadá es destacado en este sentido, anticipando y acomodándose a los rápidamente cambiantes asuntos internacionales en la educación. Uno de esos asuntos, traído a la Organización de las Naciones Unidas en discusiones durante los años noventa, es la promoción de ingeniosidad en los jóvenes participantes de la fuerza trabajadora. Canadá busca alcanzarlo a través una articulación consciente de la política pública entre las instituciones educativas y el lugar de trabajo. Cuatro características principales del sistema canadiense son propuestas para la consideración de otros sistemas que estén buscando avenidas para una reforma educativa exitosa.

Abstract

Few issues are more important in these times than the future shape of education as an essential ‘driver’ for human progress. Canada is a standout in this regard, anticipating and accommodating to swiftly changing international issues in education. One such issue, raised in UN discussions during the 1990s, is promoting ‘resourcefulness’ in young labour force entrants. Canada seeks to achieve this through conscious policy articulation between education institutions and the workplace. Four principal characteristics of the Canadian system are proposed for consideration by other systems seeking avenues for successful education reform.

1. Introduction:

Few issues are more important in these times than the future shape of edu-

cation as an essential ‘driver’ for human progress1. In most advanced industrialized countries, as in Canada, educational policy is ultimately a provincial/local responsibility (though Canada is a standout in this regard, as explained later). But adapting educational substance and process must be set into a much broader global context of volatile socio-economics and developmental striving which demands higher productivity from labor forces worldwide. Also, social cohesion and domestic stability seem now to depend on literate, informed communities and on technical infrastructures that require clever, innovative design, production, management and maintenance by an ever more highly skilled workforce. Thus, shifts towards privatization in education, vouchers, stimulating and buttressing parental choice are all gaining attention in a climate of sharply tighter resource constraints.

Therefore, relationships between how people prepare for, then conduct their livelihoods, now dominate educational landscapes and national policies must provide practical guidance to local efforts.

‘Educating for ‘jobs’ ... while often controversial in the past, is today increasingly challenged by the need to build human capacity not only for employability, but for broader lifelong learning as well as for adaptive and ‘coping’ livelihood strategies in a fast-moving and complicated world’ 2 .

Like a valuable jewel-stone needing a supportive and elegant setting, education at its best requires political will and a strong under lacing policy framework across all sectors. This is the focus of new approaches transforming the old concept of human resources development (HRD) from simple corporate applications around training to complex national strategies for continuous learning throughout life. A bellwether for countries addressing these challenges is ongoing dialog in the United Nations General Assembly and its breakout committees, where ideas are shared and national policies explored in a collective framework among competing and collegial interests alike.

1 See Conference Board of Canada: Education & Skills. ‘Education drives success’. June 2011. 2 See Lawrence J. E. S. as quoted in Anderson D. Productivism and Ecologism. In Fien J., MaClean R., and Park Man-Gon.Work, Learning and Sustainable Development: Opportunities and Challenges. UNESCO. Springer Publications: Secaucus NJ. (2009) p. 51.

In the 2001 report of the UN, Secretary-General Kofi Annan argued for a more comprehensive inter-sectoral interpretation of HRD3. This followed a transformation of the HRD concept from just training, or adjusting of labor supply to a deeper more integrated and multi-sectoral construct around the idea of human development which was gaining traction in the UN system4 , 5. At the heart of that approach was developing human resourcefulness in maximizing concordance between aptitudes, competencies, education and livelihood...that balancing act between learning and working which has become a lifelong process for everyone6. This is called for convenience ‘new-HRD’ throughout this paper.

As a harbinger for national new-HRD strategies and capacity development in emerging young countries throughout the 2001-2010 decade7 , 8 this approach offers useful signposts for all regions, from large nations to small-island states, and at all levels of education. The most recent of the UN General Assembly resolutions on HRD points to inter-sectoral and comprehensive new-HRD strategies at national level as part of the solution to the current global financial and economic crisis and as a platform for more sustainable development9 .

In this general effort towards more inter-sectoral, cooperative response to the challenges of human resources development, Canada has been among the leaders, anticipating and accommodating to swiftly change international issues with distinction. Despite an absence of direct federal administration in education, its federal agency, the Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC), is unique and deeply involved. This paper explores the ‘edge’ that Canada seems to have found, particularly in K-12 in this new-HRD context, through an overview of academic literature, technical reports, teacher interviews and examination of published statistics on educational progress, with particular reference

3 Which this author was responsible, as UNDP advisor, for preparing/presenting to the Second Committee, UN General Assembly 4 Lawrence J.E.S. “Literacy & Human Resources Development: An Integrated Approach”. Annals of the American Academy of Political & Social Science. March 1992. 5 Changing Perspectives on HRD. Report of the UN Expert Group Meeting on HRD in the Public Sector. June 1994 6 United Nations General Assembly A/56/162. New York 2001 7 “National Human Resource Development in Transitioning Societies in the Developing World: Concept and Challenges.” Lynham S.A. and Cunningham P.W. Advances in Developing Human Resources. February 2006 vol. 8 no. 1 116-135 8 McLean, G. N., Lynham, S. A., Azevedo, R. E., Lawrence, J. E. S., & Nafukho, F. (2008). A Response to Wang and Swanson’s (2008) article on national HRD and theory development. Human Resource Development Review, 7(2), 241-258 9 United Nations General Assembly A/RES/64/218. March 23, 2010 MAGISTERIO l 17

to the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Conclusions are drawn for policy implications for other educational systems, particularly the United States that are facing similar problems.

2. What is PISA?

Comparing cross-national educational statistics is notoriously complex, especially at primary and secondary levels, given differences in national systems, the way statistics are gathered and reported and definitions of both process and product. UNESCO has worked with these difficulties extensively and on occasions has found them, at crucial moments, insurmountable (e.g. the Amman Conference in 1995)10. Advances, however, have been made in standardization of indicators as well as definitions and reporting periods since inauguration of the UNESCO Institute of Statistics (UIS) in Montreal, Canada in 1999, which collects and disseminates information on trends at national and international levels.

The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is an OECD enterprise, headquartered in Paris, France, developed and supported now by more than 60 partner countries. Standardized tests are administered to a sample of 15 year old students, ranging in sample size from 4,500 to 10,000 students per participating country. The assessments are triennial and the most recent of the four so far completed was in 200911, data from which were published in December 2010. Through its approach, PISA is able to determine the skills/knowledge acquisition of students nearing the end of compulsory education. Participating countries can benchmark educational achievement nationally against international standards with the goal of informing policy at all levels.

“In all cycles, the domains of reading, mathematical and scientific literacy are covered, not merely in terms of mastery of the school curriculum, but in terms of important knowledge and skills needed in adult life”. 12

10 For example, UNESCO statistics provided the 1996 mid-decade Conference on Education for All in Amman, Jordan, were widely disputed. See Sauvageot and De Graca. Using Indicators for Planning Rural Education. UNESCO, International Institute for Educational Planning. February 2007 (p. 29). 11 Previous assessments were in 2000, 2003, and 2006. 12 http://www.pisa.oecd.org/pages/0,3417,en_32252351_32235918_1_1_1_1_1,00. html

Each of the triennial assessments, while maintaining the general measurements for comparative purposes, has focused on a different substantive priority. In general, each year focuses on one major subject and two minor subjects. Table 1 indicates this progression for major subject by year. In Canada, the students first measured in 2009 were just about entering primary school at the time of the first (2000) survey, so learning outcomes of the 2009 group, could be benchmarked to 2000 indicators, illustrating aspects of progress over almost a decade.

Table 1. PISA subject emphasis by cycle year major subject

2000 2003 2006 2009 2012* Reading literacy (Knowledge & Skills for Life) Mathematical literacy/problem solving Scientific literacy Reading/electronic texts Reading literacy

*planned

3. How has Canada been involved in PISA?

In Canada, PISA is conducted jointly by a consortium of interests, specifically HRSDC along with the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada and Statistics Canada. Representing a broad perspective spectrum, such cooperation has maintained public (and international) attention to human resources issues, and has supported governmental decision-making based on empirical evidence and data13 .

In addition to participating in each PISA assessment, Canada initiated a Youth in Transition Survey (YITS) in 2000, during the first PISA cycle. This was a longitudinal research effort which followed up a cohort of the almost 30,000 Ca-

13 Knighton, T, Brochu, P, and Gluszynski, T. Measuring up: Canadian Results of the OECD PISA Study. The Performance of Canada’s Youth inReading, Mathematics and Science. 2009 First Results for Canadians Aged 15. December 2010. P. 10.

nadian participants in the original PISA 2000 to determine educational progress and/or occupational experience. In accordance with the overall strategic newHRD approach mentioned above, this is a joint undertaking by Statistics Canada and Human Resources and Skills Development Canada14, including local participation of provincial and territorial ministries and departments of education and labor. Complementary to, but different from PISA, the survey is on a two-year cycle, six of which have been conducted to date.

The value-added of the YITS lies in its provision, to policymakers and citizens alike, the advantages of current, empirical information on the relationships between education and employment (See Figure 1). Thus the knowledge and skills assessments available through PISA are effectively complemented by YITS data which can help in identifying trends, bottlenecks, signposts and major pathways in the successful development of human resourcefulness throughout Canada.

Canada has consistently ranked high in the PISA order of participating countries and was in the top ten on all rankings in the most recent results (higher than the US and the UK for example) as shown in Table 215 .

Figure 1. How YITS compliments PISA in Canada

14 Youth in Transition Survey (YITS) Detailed Information for 2008-9 (Cycle 6). June 2011. 15 It should be noted however that although Canadian results have remained high, its

Table 2. 2009 PISA scores for selected (high-performing) countries16

COUNTRY Mean PISA score on the reading scale 2009 Mean PISA score on the mathematics scale 2009 Mean PISA score on the science scale 2009

Finland

536 Singapore 526 Japan Canada 520 524 Germany 497 United Kingdom 494 United States 500 Brazil 412 541 562 529 527 513 492 487 386

554

542 539 529 520 514 502 405

OECD mean 494 497 501

In view of Canada’s success in a multilingual and diverse social context, it is instructive to ‘unpack’ some of the reasons. The remainder of this paper explores the results from PISA and YITS data analyses in the context of the Canadian unusual education system and new-HRD strategies and offers recommendations for consideration.

rankings have slipped between 2000 and 2009, due to the entry of new countries with high performing systems. 16 Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education. Lessons from PISA for the United States. OECD Paris. 2011. Table 1.1. (p. 16)

4. The canadian context for HRD.

Canada has for many years been a fore-runner in constructing broad, heterogeneous national platforms for the development of its human resources, respecting provincial diversity in many ways (language, national origin, and socioeconomic status). In 1993, in recognition of the importance of cross-sectoral policy and planning, as well as streamlining government, HRDC was created as a separate department. In late 2003, HRDC was transformed and now functions as Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC). This evolution of governmental vision underlies the entire YITS process, since Canada was the first to pioneer a measured approach to understanding empirical links between education and work as a national priority17. The combination of PISA and YITS data provide a unique window on these relationships and mark an unusual degree of potential for policy coordination between education and HRSDC departments.

Notably, there is no federal education department in Canada, which is the only country in the industrialized world which can claim this distinction. Canadian public education is administered independently by each of Canada’s ten provinces and three territories. Constitutionally, ‘[I]n and for each province, the legislature may exclusively make laws in relation to education’18. So not surprisingly, as in any federal system, there are major provincial differences, in legislation, curricula, administrative procedures, accountability and governance. A Canadian Council on Education was founded in 2004, but according to some sources, ‘never found its footing’19. Currently, a Council of Ministers of Education (CMEC) founded in 1967, and representative of all provinces and territories, serves as: • a forum to discuss policy issues • a mechanism through which to undertake activities, projects and initiatives in areas of mutual interest • a means by which to consult and cooperate with national education organizations and the federal government

17 Pathways to Success: How Knowledge and Skills at Age 15 Shape Future Lives in Canada. OECD 2010. (p. 19) 18 Canada’s Constitution Act of 1867 19 Austin D. Federal funding cut for the Canadian Council on Education. Globe and Mail. Jan 15, 2010.

• an instrument to represent the education interests of the provinces and territories internationally20 .

Provincial governments share with locally elected school boards the responsibility for educational policy and governance, including establishing the role of unions. Teachers’ unions operate more effectively in Canada than in most modern economies. In contrast with general union decline in many countries (e.g. the USA and the UK), union density in Canada, with some exceptions (e.g. the Alberta Teacher’s Association, which experienced deep retrenchment between 1990 and 200421) has remained relatively stable, with an overall penetration rate of around 30% in 200722. Collective bargaining is either at provincial or local levels for compensation, benefits and other aspects of teacher employment.

Teacher training is offered by universities and certification standards are province-specific. Again, Canada directs resources to capacity development and a strong support system to teachers, and is among high-achieving PISA countries, which “routinely prepare their teachers more extensively, pay them well in relation to competing occupations and give them lots of time for professional learning. They also provide well-trained teachers for all students--rather than allowing some to be taught by untrained novices--by offering equitable salaries and adding incentives for harder-to-staff locations.” 23

Provincial differences also include student attendance requirements, for example to age 16 years in all but two provinces (Ontario, the most populous province and New Brunswick), where the completion age is 18. Provinces are further disaggregated into ‘districts’, each of which has its own school board. Inone province (Alberta), independent charter schools are authorized, with their own boards, further disseminating local autonomy.

Since Canada formally recognizes the current relevance of its multicultural, bilingual history, its constitution recognizes two official languages (French and English). Although the substantial majority (>80%) of French-speaking citizens lives in one province (Quebec), the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms respects the situations of both English-speaking students living in Quebec, and

20 http://www.cmec.ca/ 21 Rose J.B. Canadian Public Sector Unions at the Crossroads. Journal of Collective Negotiations. Vol. 31(3) 183-198, 2007. 22 Briskin L. Cross- “Constituency Organizing in Canadian Unions.” British Journal of Industrial Relations 46:2 June 2008 pp. 221–247 23 Darling-Hammond L. `How they do it Abroad’. Time Magazine Thursday, Feb. 14, 2008 MAGISTERIO l 23

those French speakers living in any other province. Ways are specified in the Charter as to how students have the right to access free education in either language.

About 93% of all Canadian students attend public elementary and secondary schools24 (as compared with around 88% in the USA25), and most of the Canadian private schools are concentrated in major metropolitan areas close to the USCanadian border. However, there has been a significant tilt towards privatization in recent years.

‘The proportion of Canadian students enrolled in private schools grew by 20 percent over the past decade; the corresponding percentage in Ontario, Canada’s largest province, was 40 percent.....

The steepest growth is occurring in a new sector of academically intensive private schools that are neither part of an established elite nor religion-oriented’26

Apparently paralleling this trend is also a steady emphasis on private tutoring. The number of private tutoring businesses grew over 200% in major Canadian cities during the 1990s decade27 and shows yet no signs of decrease.

This autonomy notwithstanding however, the federal commitment is considerable, if unobtrusive, maintaining a limited oversight role, respectful of diversity, standards of equity and the need to develop human resourcefulness nationwide. Federal efforts include statistical services, support of reforms and special programs, as well as pilot initiatives28 .

In terms of public expenditures, Canada ranks about average among OECD countries in percent GDP for on primary and secondary, and above average on post-secondary education29, and about average in per centtotal public expenditureson education (just over 12% in 2006)30. Although in recent years, specific

24 Education at a Glance: 2008 Indicators, OECD, Paris. 2008 25 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2011). Digest of Education Statistics, 2010 (NCES 2011-015), Chapter 1. 26 Davies. S. “School Choice by Default.” American Journal of Education. Vol. 110, No. 3, May 2004. 27 Davies, Scott, Janice Aurini, and Linda Quirke.“New Markets for Private Educationin Canada.” Education Canada 42 (September 2002): 36–41. 28 Lykins C.R., Heyneman S.P. The Federal Role in Education: Lessons from Australia, Germany, and Canada. Center on Education Policy, Washington, D.C. 2008. 29 Pathways to Success (p 32). 30 OECD, Education at a Glance 2010, Paris 2010, p.243. 24 l MAGISTERIO

data to OECD on these expenditures by level have been scarce31, Canada has been a standout in the importance it gives to a nationally supportive policy posture towards education at all levels. As confirmed in current research, Canada (and other relatively successful PISA countries e.g. Finland) tend `to focus their resources where the challenges are greatest’32, instead of facilitating inequalities through dependency on local wealth - or lack of it - for school district financing (as in the USA). As discussed below, incentive systems are developed to encourage/ reward quality in lagging schools. Central to this approach is clear, practical recognition of linkages between education and an engaged, productive workforce.

On the employment policy side, conceptual articulation between the PISA and YITS surveys allows for some ‘scanning’ of labor market outcomes. According to the Seventh Report (2011) to Canadians on the Implementation of the Economic Action Plan33 (EAP), the Canadian economy has begun a strong recovery from the global recession, having fully recouped initial output losses with a labor market performing generally better than its G7 peers. The EAP provided a comprehensive stimulus package including income tax relief, enhanced unemployment benefits, new infrastructure and housing initiatives and advancing the national ‘knowledge economy’ through institutional support for both education and commercial enterprises.

A further special characteristic of Canada’s education system is the extent to which women have succeeded. Gender differences have been particularly high in Canada, notably in higher education, where the gender gap in favor of female graduation has been among the highest in developed countries (14%, as compared with 12% in Russia, and 10% in France for 2007)34 .

5. How well has Canada performed on PISA/YITS?

With the initiation of PISA, Canada took the opportunity of inspired creation through YITS of a new window on how people prepare for, and then conduct their

31 See Canada’s missing data in OECD Family Database www.oecd.org/els/social/family/ database OECD - Social Policy Division - Directorate of Employment, Labour and Social Affairs Last updated 20/12/2010 1. PF1.2: Public spending on education (p. 2). 32 Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education. Lessons from PISA for the United States. OECD Paris. 2011. p. 53. 33 Canada’s Economic Action Plan Year 2. Built to keep our economy going. Public Works and Government Services Canada. January 2011. 34 Miller D.C. Comparative Indicators of Education in the United States and Other G8 Countries. National Center for Education Statistics. 2009.

livelihoods. While some PISA analyses seemed overly concentrated on Ontario, Canada has received wide acclaim for its steady balance among competing education priorities. It found itself consistently not only well above OECD averages on all three PISA knowledge indicator mean scores (reading, mathematics and science) across each of the four triennial assessments, but also outranking the comparable performance of its much larger southern neighbor (Table 3). Mean scores are illustrated in the table across multiple PISA sub-indicators35 .

Table 3 - Summary of PISA scores for Canada, OECD average, and USA 2000-2009

PISA indicator

Mean score 2000 2003 2006 2009 Reading 534 (500) [504] 528 (494) [495] 527 (492)[NA] 524 (493) [500] Math 532 (500) [483] 527 (498)[474] 527 (496) [487]

Science 519 (500) [491] 534 (500)[489] 529 (501) [502]

(OECD Average in round brackets (); USA score in square brackets [ ] Source: OECD Statistics 2010. Because of changes in the assessment framework, averages are not strictly comparable across survey years.

In 2009, Canada was one of only seven countries which performed better than the OECD average on reading scores36. Furthermore, nine of Canada’s provinces scored at or beyond the OECD combined average reading score. But these were not the only measures of Canadian success.

Examining how achievement is distributed across and within provinces provides useful information on equity.

‘Equity in performance can be measured by examining the relative distribution of scores or the gap that exists between students with the highest and lowest levels of performance within each jurisdiction’37

35 For details of PISA methodology and statistical assumptions and procedures, see the technical reports from the various surveys, summarized in OECD PISA 2009 Assessment Framework - Key Competencies in Reading, Mathematics and Science. OECD 2010. 36 Australia, Canada, Finland, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Republic of Korea. 37 Knighton, T, Brochu, P, and Gluszynski, T. Measuring Up: Canadian Results of the OECD 26 l MAGISTERIO

Canada is one of the few PISA countries which has both high performance and high equity scores. National reading scores overall, and in the majority of provinces, were notable in that they were among the few in the study that showed higher reading performance and lower variation in student performance. This is an important characteristic. Management of the diversity facing most school systems today requires building in to pedagogical policy and practice the kinds of resources, training and supervision that can both attain and sustain these results.

Yet another critical aspect of Canada’s success has been its linkage from PISA to YITS as crucial in interpretation of the progress of young Canadians through the educational maze into the workplace, or into higher education. For example, PISA has shown across cohorts that strong skills, especially reading skills at age 15 have clear and lasting positive effects on later achievement38. While this conclusion seems intuitively reasonable, lack of attention to its predictive implications -with comprehensive remedial actions as a matter of public policy- still proves challenging even to Canada.

‘Canadian students in the bottom quartile of PISA reading scores were much more likely to drop out of secondary school and less likely to have completed a year of post-secondary education than those in the high quartile of reading score. In contrast, Canadian students in the top PISA level (Level 5) of reading performance were twenty times more likely to go to university than those in the lowest

PISA level (at or below Level 1)’39 .

Although YITS has completed its final year in 2010, the linking of such a large sample complementarily to the PISA effort has enabled some strong empirical evidence for not only the advantages of the methodology, but also for suggestions as to substantive policy interventions. Data shows that most young Canadians follow `a linear pathway’ from secondary school to post-secondary education of various kinds, although many also take non-linear tracks, combi-

PISA Study The Performance of Canada’s Youth in Reading, Mathematics and Science 2009 First Results for Canadians Aged 15. Ottawa. December 2010. 38 Knighton, T, Brochu, P, and Gluszynski, T. Measuring Up: Canadian Results of the OECD PISA Study The Performance of Canada’s Youth in Reading, Mathematics and Science 2009 First Results for Canadians Aged 15. Ottawa. December 2010. 39 OECD Pathways to Success: How knowledge and Skills at age 15 shape future lives in Canada. Paris. 2010.

ning school and work as a means to complete post-secondary education40. Individual socio-economic status, particularly parental education levels have strong, positive and predictable associations with educational achievement. Canada has over the last decade noted a 40% increase in the numbers of students taking advantage of opportunities for tertiary education41. However those students not going onto college/university tended to be those with lower reading skills, who stood to be vulnerable in highly competitive local labor markets, and less likely to be able to benefit effectively from training. Also, students who had disruptions to their schooling progress, or repeated grades had less beneficial schooling/work outcomes.

It is not that these findings are particularly innovative or surprising. But the ability of institutions to access, interpret and act on these data as they affect their own local conditions is a major policy tool, allowing intervention to be timely, targeted and adaptive as circumstances and resources warrant. The details of the data sets also help optimize and specialize such interventions, by detecting for example important gender differences42 in outcomes, and key factors in parental backgrounds (educational levels, ethnic origin, immigrant etc.) that may require tailoring to specific cases.

6. Why has canada performed so well on PISA?

This is an intriguing question and not easily answered. Furthermore, as noted earlier, Canada’s comparative ranking has declined in each of the three PISA subject domains, while still remaining high. However, several independent measurements endorse the relative excellence of the national system43. Canada seems to have managed to successfully operationalize a pragmatic mix of policy prioritization of cross-sectoral new-HRD with energetic and committed public engagement in education. Decentralization, accommodation to diversity and provincial variations further permit flexibility and local adaptation to different

40 Pathways to Success: How Knowledge and Skills at Age 15 Shape Future Lives in Canada. OECD 2010. 41 Ibid (p. 54) 42 E.g. ‘by age 21,women who had obtained high reading scores at age 15 earned 12% more than those with low scores. Therelationship was weaker for men. Overall, gender-based earning disparities were evident at age 21, since menearned 23% more than women.’ Ibid p. 115. 43 Education Indicators in Canada: an International Perspective. Canadian Education Statistics Council. Toronto 2010.

characteristics and local conditions44. But among the most important, if less tangible variables are Canada’s collective national commitment to quality public education for all.

This seems to mark it as a standout among other countries, notably the US, which seek various kinds of segmentation (e.g. privatization, or charter schools) as options in favor of parental choice. Notwithstanding the great strengths of the US system, especially at post-secondary levels such as the community college, which allows for widespread second-chance opportunities, critics are legion. The collapse of experiments in privatization such as the Edison Project 45 is a matter of record.

A comment on a Canada School Boards Association site discussion on the US documentary ‘Waiting for Superman’ is instructive in emphasis on the difference between Canadian and US systems:

I am a Canadian citizen completing my graduate studies in the

U.S. in educational policy. I find it interesting that there is no mention of charter schools or the privatization of the public system in this post. I think that is another major difference between the American and Canadian systems, and was a focus of Waiting for Superman. I am proud that the Canadian system is a strong, public education system and hope that we do not follow America’s example of dismantling the public system and replacing it with a choicebased system of vouchers, charter schools and private schools.......46 .

One example of Canada’s practical approach to involving citizens in decision-making at local levels is HRDC’s cooperative effort with YMCA to help young voluntary sector leaders to have direct influence on public policy. An e-learning module is available in the form of a simple toolkit outlining an 8-step procedure from initial assessments of community support to implementation and monitoring of progress47 .

But in the end, it is the teachers who can likely make the most difference.

44 Pathways to Success: How Knowledge and Skills at Age 15 Shape Future Lives in Canada. OECD 2010 45 Saltman K.J. The Edison Schools: corporate schooling and the assault on public education. New York. Routledge. 2005 46 http://cdnsba.org/all/education-in-canada/waiting-for-superman 47 http://www.ymca.ca/media/59241/be_hipp_manual.pdf

As Howard Gardner said this year, `the low status of teachers and lack of a career path in the US are problems, perhaps fatal ones’48. While US teachers spend more time teaching on average (1080 hours per year as compared with an OECD average of around 700 hours), their pay level is less. The US is ranked at 22 out of the 27 OECD countries on teacher pay49 (Canada is not included in that OECD analysis). Finland shares several aspects of teacher quality with Canada, and is the single non-Asian country that outranks it by 2009 PISA measures. Teachers in both countries are required to complete a university-based, professional program prior to employment, and enjoy a respected status, good working conditions, compensation, and professional development, and considerable autonomy stemming from the national commitment to the kind of new-HRD noted above.

In the Canadian system, much effort is expended in coaching, guidance and ensuring students do not fall behind. Differences in learning styles are recognized and to every extent possible, accommodated. Teachers are trained specifically to diagnose student problems early and act to remediate quickly. Programs such as the Student Success Initiative in Ontario are exemplary of this special focus50. In a recent nationwide survey, 60% of teachers reported that they were “very” concerned about “ensuring that students achieve their potential”51 .

A final point concerns availability and use of computers and their valueadded to K-12 education. The PISA process involved questions to students via computer to assess their capacity to answer effectively in the domain of digital text52. Indices of computer availability and internet access have been developed, but are not adequately addressed yet as a major measure of progress. According to Haché (2006):

`Although there is non-agreement on how technology should exist in Canadian schools, there is much evidence to indicate that [the] na-

48 ”The Global Search for Education: What Do We Value Most?” Education News. Aug 31, 2011. 49 Building a High Quality Teaching Profession.Lessons from Around the World. OECD Paris 2011. 50 Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education. Lessons from PISA for the United States. OECD Paris. 2011. p. 77. 51 The Voice of Canadian Teachers on Teaching and Learning.Survey of the Canadian Teachers’ Federation. 2011. 52 PISA 2009 Results: What Makes a School Successful? Resources, Policies & Practices. Volume IV. OECD, 2010.

ture of technology that is in the schools responds to local needs, because long-standing accepting of diversity has made this possible.’53

Each province has an approval process for learning resources, outlining what is needed for achieving `recommended status’ for various types of classroom media. In British Columbia for example, under the School Act legislation54`, the Minister may make orders for the purpose of carrying out any of the minister’s powers, duties or functions under this Act and, without restriction, may make orders…governing educational resource materials in support of educational programs’. Under the Computer-for-Schools BC program, over 100,000 refurbished pieces of computer equipment have been provided to schools, realizing not only the goal of accessing computer technologies as part of the educational process, but also the ethical recycling of these kinds of materials55. Success stories are cited especially with special programs for learning disabilities, graphic arts and video programs, and of course, the Internet.

7. Conclusions: some implications for other national education systems?

In these times, education systems seem worldwide to be in more or less continuous cycles of reform. Canada is no exception, but is in many ways holding its own and better than most in terms of both quality and achievement by broadly accepted (OECD) measures. In terms of what makes schooling successful and although the uniqueness of its administrative structure makes it a difficult model to clone -even if that were a workable option- Canada has four principal characteristics which lend themselves to careful consideration by other countries. 1. Ensure education for all, not just some.

In 1990, in Jomtien, Thailand, a major global initiative was launched by representatives from 155 countries changing the focus of basic education entirely. This became the Education for All (EFA) movement, shifting focus and ultimately resources from secondary and post-secondary to the crucial educational base through which all children must progress, and be ensu-

53 Haché, G. J. (2006). “Developments in technology education in Canada.” In M. de Vries & I. Mottier (Eds.), International Handbook of Tehcnology Education. Reviewing the Past Twenty Years (pp. 171-177). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. 54 Section 168. 2 (e) 55 http://www.cfsbc.ca/

red equal opportunities to learn. Canada has recognized the power of this principle, through an interesting, provincially organized composite, crosssectorally and implicitly around the new-HRD concept. The engagement of HRSDC, for example in generating informative data via the PISA/YITS connection for policy-making is evidence of this national and intersectoral commitment to EFA. Parenthetically, one of the central findings from the

PISA research is that successful school systems notably address this issue of equity directly on measures of which Canada ranks consistently high. 2. Focus resources on areas of challenge.

Another central finding from PISA is that successfully performing education systems spend `large amounts of money’ on education’56. Not only does

Canada meet this expenditure criterion, ranking as average in education expenditure among the world’s wealthiest countries, but its system also is notable for its close attention to students most at-risk of failure. Understanding that its human resources are the essential foundation for a prosperous future, Canada invests carefully and with specificity in both educational process and substance, engaging both teachers and communities in this effort. 3. Preserve local autonomy, but without sacrificing equity

While Canada has about 10% of the population, and nowhere near the complex diversity of the US, it has managed to construct a unique education system next door and significantly with no federal hand on the controls.

This more `bottom-up’ approach to organizational unity around nationally agreed-upon goals seems to work in Canada. Provincial flexibility in all aspects of administration and practice allows for more accommodation to local needs of teachers, students and administrators alike. Although education in the US is constitutionally reserved, by exclusion of explicit assignment, to the states, the role of the federal education agency has always been strong and often controversial. Major arguments in the past for federal oversight (despite only a small, if rising, resource presence of <10% of total public expenditure on education) have rested primarily on promoting both equity and accountability across the states and territories. Canada achieves both of these without a federal role.

56 PISA 2009 Results: What Makes a School Successful? Resources, Policies & Practices. Volume IV. OECD 2010.

4. Build capacity through teacher professional development

Notwithstanding recently voiced concerns by the Canadian Teachers’ Federation on effects of the ongoing financial crisis on educational administration57, teachers continue to be the central and most constructive resource in the system. In the most recent survey of a sample of over 400 teachers nationally, they have expressed particularly strong opinions concerning staff cuts as affecting class size and the essential role of new technologies in the classroom58. In particular they point to the need to maintain and strengthen opportunities for professional development to permit them to keep pace with these challenges.

57 The Voice of Canadian Teachers on Teaching and Learning. Survey of the Canadian Teachers’ Federation. 2011. 58 Ibid