The Great Homework Debate

Currently, the Toronto District School Board is putting the finishing touches on the draft of a new homework policy. As reported in the Toronto Star,

Based on thousands of interviews with parents, teachers, students and community members, the draft policy would ban homework in kindergarten, confine it to games and family activities up to Grade 2, allow a gradual move to independent homework by Grade 6, but keep it to no more than one hour right through Grade 8.
For the board's 89,000 high school students, the new policy would prohibit more than two hours of homework a night.

While the parenting public seems to largely agree with this proposal, citing family vacations, outside school activities, etc. as of at least equal importance to homework, as a retired educator I am ambivalent about the policy for a number of reasons.

First, when my kids were in high school, there is little doubt that much of their out-of-school time was spent on school assignments, although some of that time was allotted to term work such as essays, projects, etc. As a parent, I sympathized with the pressures they were under. However, with the support of both me and my wife, there was the virtue of their developing good work habits due to these demands and, I like to think, some character as well.

Next, the keen advocates of reducing homework time seem to be conveniently forgetting that much of the rigor of after-school work arises from the massive changes of the 1990’s that the Conservative Provincial Government, guided by the high school graduate Premier, Mike Harris, and his Grade 10 dropout Minister of Education, John Snobelin, imposed on the Ontario Curriculum. With the elimination of Grade 13, the curriculum expectations for all the other grades became much greater as compensation. In order to meet those expectations, homework inevitably increased.

As well, most high schools in the province operate under a semestered system, forcing the amount of material to be mastered into half-year units. Obviously, when the system doesn’t have a full year to inculcate a particular subject, much more is needed outside of the classroom.

Much of the discussion in Toronto has centred on penalties for late assignments, with the powers that be suggesting it is unfair to thus penalize students. What they fail to consider is that a lack of sanctions is only going to encourage more students to be tardy in their work habits. Couple this with current curriculum discouragement of teachers giving zeroes for assignments not done or plagiarized, and you have a potent recipe for encouraging both indolence and cheating.

Finally, what troubles me about the two-hour maximum for homework in high school is how this will be measured. Will each subject be allotted an equal number of minutes to assign? How does one measure how long it takes the average student to complete a set task? Will the slower student be automatically excused from class requirements, and if so, won’t he or she inevitably fall behind in the course? As an English teacher, if I assign 20 pages to be read, is that unreasonable for the slow reader? How do I teach the literature if it isn’t being read?

I know that all of the points I’ve raised are of a pesky and practical nature, the sort rarely considered by the visionaries who make policy. Unfortunately, it is the teacher who is left to contend with all of the practical difficulties that arise from the ensuing constraints, usually with little or no support and guidance from administration.

Bullying in the Workplace

For any teacher that has ever been bullied by an administrator, or is currently being bullied, there is an interesting article that provoked over 400 reader comments on the New York Times website. Check it out if you get the chance.

Obama's Race Speech

I've been sitting on the sidelines lately in the blogging department, largely because I've been busy with things around the house, projects, etc. However, after having watched the full version of the Obama speech, I felt like making a couple of observations.

1. Judging by the readers' comments on the L.A. Times, I'm surprised at the overwhelmingly negative reaction the speech is garnering.

2. I was struck by the fact that in the speech, what Obama is asking from his audience is rare in present-day politics: thought and reflection, not simple reaction to fiery rhetoric. In other words, he is doing what few politicians do today, treating his listeners with respect, inviting them to be both thinkers and participants in the process known as democracy. I wonder if, after almost eight years of demagoguery and fear-mongering by the Bush Administration, this is asking almost too much of the American people?

Check out the speech and decide for yourself.

Another Novel Recommendation

I've been doing a fair bit of reading lately. If you enjoy fiction, please take a look at my review of Before I Wake by Robert J. Wiersema on my other blog.

A Novel Recommendation

For those who enjoy fiction, I've posted a review of the novel Restless, by William Boyd, on my other blog.

An Emblem of Indifference

Perhaps more than any other time in the past, I have been thinking a great deal about the developing world lately. That is partly due, I suspect, from my involvement as a volunteer editor for Kiva.org, a group that promotes microfinance projects. My thoughts have lately turned to the issue of using corn as a biofuel, and after reading an article in The Independent, I am convinced that there can be no stronger symbol of the Western world’s indifference to poorer nations than corn as a substitute for oil. Recent research shows that it does not reduce carbon emissions, but perhaps more disturbingly, food -scarce nations in Africa, in their rush to become the green version of OPEC, are forcing their citizens into starvation.

But the truth is not quite that simple, is it? Where do we stand on the issue? Are we, as citizens of the West, not choosing the continuation of our own lifestyles and conveniences over the very lives of people in far off lands?

I hope you will read The Independent article.

Shedding Some Light on the Mentality of the Toronto District School Board

Today’s Globe and Mail has a story that illustrates the culture of secrecy of the Toronto District School Board and apparent consequences for breaching that secrecy. The bolded parts are sections I found of particular interest.

Demoted vice-principal sues school board
JAMES BRADSHAW
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
February 7, 2008 at 4:21 AM EST

A former vice-principal of a Toronto elementary school is going to court today seeking remedy for what he claims were failures by the school board and Ontario College of Teachers to act on alleged threats and aggressive behaviour by the school's former principal.

Gary Pieters, now vice-principal at Carleton Village Public School, also states in court documents that he was demoted and penalized for reporting his allegations.

The documents filed with the court detail alleged misconduct between June, 2005, and February, 2006, by Gordon Kingsmill, then principal of the Shoreham Public School in the Jane-Finch area.

Mr. Kingsmill's lawyer, Sarah Colman, told The Globe and Mail that Mr. Kingsmill denies all allegations and that he was already cleared by two investigations.
The accusations include uttering a death threat against a teacher, pushing a Grade 2 student into a chair, expressing a desire to kick another Grade 2 student and threatening to burn a complaint against a teacher prepared by a Grade 5 student.
Mr. Pieters, who had been Mr. Kingsmill's vice-principal at Shoreham, states in an affidavit that he exhausted all internal complaint processes at the Toronto District School Board.

He then appealed to the Ontario College of Teachers, requesting that they submit his complaints to the discipline committee. The College of Teachers rejected the request. Mr. Kingsmill is presently principal at Agincourt Junior Public School.

Ms. Colman said in an interview that "Mr. Kingsmill has been through two thorough investigations," and that both "have determined that Mr. Pieters' allegations are without merit."

Ms. Colman also said that Mr. Pieters "did not witness directly many of the incidents he alleges occurred." The factum filed with the court details Mr. Pieters's presence at only two incidents.

Spokespeople for the school board and College of Teachers both declined comment because the matter is before the courts.

Mr. Pieters alleges in the court documents that he "faced retaliatory actions for blowing the whistle and consequences up to and including a Letter of Record in his personnel file, home assignment without duties, and a partial demotion" from full vice-principal to part-time status combined with duties as an ESL teacher, for which he is not certified.

The request for a judicial review comes less than a month after publication of a report on school safety, chiefly written by lawyer Julian Falconer, claimed that a culture of silence in the city's public schools led staff to avoid reporting misconduct for fear of repercussions.

Mr. Pieters's submissions to the court also complain that the College of Teachers relied "on a materially flawed and procedurally unfair" report by a school board investigator, and that the college investigator failed to review evidence.
But Ms. Colman said the board investigator was "an independent third party," and the College of Teachers "spent months investigating the allegations and interviewing witnesses."