The Canadian Education System Part II - Revelations

After teaching for two years, I have come to two conclusions (specifically about the Secondary system, as I'm fairly ignorant about how the Primary system works). 1 - The education system runs in two separate ways. The first being how the teachers actually run it, and the second is how the Ministry wants it to be run. 2 - The Ministry is full of idiotic personel who create jobs for themselves by giving traditional teaching methods new names, and packaging them as "revolutionary". Now, while these conclusions may not seem all that novel to some (and perhaps even to me), there are a few new conclusions I have reached as a result of these two, which I will come to in a moment.

Before I shed light on this new epiphany, I must say that, after having taught for about two years now in Canada's public education system, I can honestly say that I believe there are few jobs I would enjoy more than teaching. The secondary school sytem in Canada, while being funded by bureaucrats in the Ministry of Education, is built on the backs of teachers; teachers with a common goal, and fueled by common sense. And as a society, we should be grateful for this. Grateful that there are people out there with enough sense to ignore the passing fancies of an ignorant bureacracy. Harsh words, perhaps, but one must really be a part of the system in order to truly understand the depths of stupidity achieved by this particular administration.

Unlike what they would have you believe, teaching has not changed much in the past thousand years or so. Teachers teach, and students learn; in all honesty, that's all there really is to it. There's no "trick" to it, despite what some might have you believe. Anyone can do it, as long as they have the necessary knowledge, and they have the ability to control a class of 30 children. The only true difference between a good teacher and a bad teacher is that a good teacher cares about the success of his/her students, and a bad one doesn't. A bad teacher is not defined by their "teaching style or method", and a good teacher is not defined by following Ministry guidelines and curriculum, and being able to incorporate Ministry buzzwords into their job interviews (the latest being "differentiated instruction" and "implementation of IEPs" and "student success"). In fact, for those in the business, it's worth noting that the most effective teachers, the older, more experienced teahcer, will NEVER buy into what the Ministry sells. EVER. These teachers have seen it all, have done it all, have tried it all, and have always gone back to what has worked, which is whatever works for them. Unlike what Ministry lapdogs will tell you, there is no right and wrong way to teach. There are no fundamental skills that you need in order to be able to teach. Even wild animals, who do not have the cognitive capacity to logically solve problems, still manage to teach their offspring, and their offspring, who are equally unevolved, are able to learn.

This brings me to my next revelation, and that is, while the Ministry of Education hass clearly been selling sour milk for a while now, it's only the young, inexperienced teachers who are dumb enough to buy it. Much like inexperienced travellers in foreign countries who get fleeced by local vendors because they are unaware of the local market, young, inexperienced teachers often get "brainwashed" into believing that there is a right and a wrong way to teach. This was made abundantly clear to me after another session of "Professional Development", hearing about young new teachers playing psychologist, and Ministry lapdogs spewing buzz lingo.

While the sessions was specifically for "new teachers", it was presented entirely by persons under the age of 35. How could a person of the age of 35 possibly have enough experience to reveal the truth of the business to a crop of equally inexperienced teachers? For those new teachers out there who are wondering why they never see teachers over the age of 45 doing a "Professional Development" presentation on new Ministry mandates, here's a hint: they're not that dumb.

Which brings me to my next revelation. I've always wondered why the Ministry never hires experienced teachers (and when I say experience, I mean a minimum of 10-15+ years) into positions of influence, the general public might learn the horrible truth; that teaching isn't that complicated. Now, this is not saying that it doesn't take a "special" person to teach, because it does, and this isn't saying that teaching isn't a difficult job, because it is. However, I'll be the first (amongst hopefully many) that will tell you that teaching is not rocket science. Now, you ask, "What would happen if this terrible, dark secret ever got out?" Simple; the hundreds of Ministry created positions to address progressive teaching would be defunct. And in case you're thinking that I'm a backward thinking traditionalist, this couldn't be further from the truth. I understand that these people truly believe that they are forward thinking, and are constantly trying to improve our practice. However, they are trying to improve on a practice that has been established for thousands of years. It's something akin to trying to improve a tire by making small improvements here or there in it's SHAPE. Every time they spend hundreds of millions of dollars to "try something out", only to find that the original way worked better every time.

So what can we conclude about this age-old conflict of head versus wall? There are two conclusions we can reach from this sort of behaviour. The first is that they are cunning, evil, avaricious bastards who are creating a market to support their own financial gain. The other is to conclude that they are making well-intentioned, but childish, ignorant, artless, and inept attempts at improving something they know very little about, and are too obtuse to find out anything about it. They are the only two logical conclusions one can draw when seeing this kind of behaviour. If one were to see two people about, one running into a brick wall again and again, and the other standing there laughing, there are only two conclusions one could draw about the one standing there laughing. Either he's really callous and mean, or he's just as dumb as the one crashing into the wall.

I prefer the latter, because I truly believe these government lackeys truly have the best of intentions. That leads me to my final revelation. The singular truth about the Ministry and their initiatives and mandates. While it has become abundantly clear that the Ministry has no clue as to how to properly run the education system, I have come to the conclusion that they cannot be held at fault for the many poor decisions they have made in the past. How can this be, you ask? Think about this: A dog cannot be blamed for it's actions, such as biting in self defence, or barking when the doorbell rings. It's just a dog. We cannot expect the dog to understand logical thinking processes because it is well beyond it's cognitive means; it is impossible. By the same token, the Ministry cannot be held repsonsible for it's mandates. Understanding what truly goes on in the Education system is simply impossible for people so far removed from it. Much like a dog will growl, bark, and bite in self defense when threatened in a corner, the Ministry is simply making reactive actions based on public appeal, political philosophy, and positive intent. There is no malice behind their idiocy. They are not actively trying to destroy the Canadian education system. This is simply a case of what happens when people who are not sufficiently intelligent nor qualified get into a position to make decisions which affect the whole.

Still don't understand? Think of it this way. There are hundreds of thousands of "average Joe" sports fans out there possessing an average intelligence, and an average understanding of their particular game. Each one of them is an "armchair GM", believing that they could do a good job of creating a winning team. However, they are so far removed from the game (that is, they do not actively play the game at any marketably competitive level, they have never been involved with the professional side of the game, and do not possess an understanding of the game deep
enough to warrant making a decision which could affect the future of a big market club), that allowing them to make the kinds of decisions that would affect the success and future of the club would surely be suicidal. No proper owner in their right mind would ever allow one of these "average Joe armchair GMs" to make a decision which could affect their club at a critical level... yet these decisions are made every day. Every day, there are "average Joe armchair GMs" who possess neither the intelligence nor the understanding to make critical decisions, yet make them
day in and day out.

Wesley Snipes (aka "Blade") said it best. "Some motha-fuckas always tryin to skate uphill". Instead of actually testing their methods out in a controlled, scientific environment, the Ministry spends billions of taxpayer dollars trying out new initiatives, and when they realize that they don't work, move on to the next big thing. And, of course, the ironic thing is, they must be held blameless. Would you blame a dog for being a dog? No. Then why would you blame an idiot for being an idiot. Ignorance, in this country at least, is not a crime. Whether we can cast blame for remaining willfully ignorant is another story. It's the difference between blaming them for bumping into furniture in the dark, or blaming them for not having the wherewithal to turn on the light.