Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Education

More money not the answer for schools—just look at Alberta

Published

2 months ago

4 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Michael Zwaagstra

If you didn’t already know, higher government spending on schools doesn’t necessarily produce better results. Just look at what’s happening in Alberta.

According to Statistics Canada, from 2012/13 to 2021/22 (the latest year of available data), per-student spending in Alberta increased by 2.1 per cent from $13,146 to $13,421. After adjusting for inflation, this amounted to a 17.2 per cent spending reduction.

This stands in sharp contrast to most other provinces. During the same 10-year period, inflation-adjusted per-student spending increased in Quebec (by 24.6 per cent), British Columbia (5.1 per cent) and Ontario (0.5 per cent). By the raw numbers, Alberta now spends less per student than any other province.

The results?

According to the latest Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) tests, Alberta students scored second only to Quebec on their math skills and almost half a grade level ahead of their peers in B.C. (even though B.C. spent $1,468 more per student in 2021/22). Even better, Alberta students scored highest in the country on their PISA reading and science assessments. This is exactly the opposite of what we’d expect if less spending hurt student performance.

Of course, this doesn’t mean that money is irrelevant. In countries that spend considerably less on education than Canada, more spending does correlate with better academic results. Excessive teacher turnover harms student learning and students must be in a stable learning environment to excel. If teachers aren’t paid enough to make a decent living, they will not remain in the profession, and students will suffer.

However, things are quite different in Canada where all provinces including Alberta already spend a significant amount on education. Governments should spend more wisely rather than simply pour more money into the education system.

Since Alberta is a top-performing province, it’s worth asking what makes this province different. Simply put, Albertans have more educational choice than any other province. Not only does Alberta have fully-funded public and separate school systems, accredited independent schools receive 70 per cent of per-student grants available to public schools, which makes it easier for independent schools to keep tuition affordable for parents. And it’s the only province to allow charter schools, which are fully-funded public schools that operate independently from government school boards. This makes it easier for charter schools to offer specialized programming based on parental demand and creates an incentive for government school boards to diversify their programming options.

Alberta also has a rigorous standardized testing program. Grades 6 and 9 write provincial achievement tests in English language arts, math, science and social studies. Meanwhile, Grade 12 students write diploma exams in a variety of courses that are worth 30 per cent of their final mark. These tests and exams play an important role in holding schools accountable.

However, before Alberta politicians get too comfortable, it’s important to note that Alberta, despite its relative success compared to other provinces, saw a significant decline in academic achievement over the last 20 years. The latest PISA tests show that Alberta students declined in their math skills by 45 points from 2003 to 2022. To put this in perspective, PISA equates 20 points with approximately one grade level. In other words, Alberta students are (on average) approximately two years behind in their math skills than they were in 2003.

Getting to the root cause of this decline will take considerable effort. But one thing we know for sure—despite any rhetoric to the contrary, simply spending more money will not solve this problem. As another school year begins, policymakers in Alberta and across the country should keep this in mind.

Author:

Michael Zwaagstra
Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute
Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
International / 5 hours ago

Can We Finally Talk About United Nations Funding?

National / 5 hours ago

How Rick Perkins and Larry Brock Revealed a $330 Million Cover-Up While Liberal MPs Run Damage Control

Daily Caller / 10 hours ago

New York City Reportedly Seeking 14,000 Hotel Rooms For Migrants, To Spend Over $2 Billion As Crisis Rages On

Education

Fired Alberta Professor Largely Vindicated

Published on October 9, 2024

By

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Hymie Rubenstein

“There’s no reason why I shouldn’t be reinstated”

An arbitrator has ruled that Calgary’s Mount Royal University (MRU) acted in a “disproportionate” manner in late 2021 in its firing of Frances Widdowson, a tenured political scientist with a specialty in Indigenous issues.

Dr. Widdowson, an outspoken critic of the politically charged but theoretically simplistic notions of the academic culture wars at MRU was dismissed just before Christmas 2021 during what arbitrator D.P. Jones called a “Twitter War” between her and a few activist colleagues opposed to her views.

The hearing took 30 days, over ten months, as 25 witnesses gave evidence. Its main findings were on the appropriateness and fairness of the procedures used to dismiss her, not on the reasons given for her dismissal.

The latter concerned September 2020 comments from Widdowson that far from constituting genocide, aboriginal children gained educational benefits by attending Canada’s Indian Residential Schools, an outrageously scandalous opinion among some at MRU.

Her position on Indigenous issues would certainly have been considered heretical at MRU where extreme pro-indigenous, anti-colonial, anti-white privilege perspectives have long ruled.

Following her dismissal, Widdowson filed ten grievances, eight on procedural grounds and two on substantive ones. In his nearly 300-page decision, Jones threw out the grievances involving the improper procedures employed by the university in its dealings with Widdowson.

On discipline, Jones found that while Widdowson’s behaviour was “just cause” for discipline, her firing was “disproportionate” to that behaviour.

On one of Widdowson’s substantive grievances, Jones ruled that her two-week suspension was disproportionate, ruling that a letter of reprimand be substituted for the suspension.

When it came to Widdowson’s firing, Jones wrote that there was just cause for discipline based on Widdowson’s conduct, but that dismissal was an inappropriate penalty.

However, Jones said that Widdowson’s continued employment with the university would not be viable for several reasons, including Widdowson’s ongoing hostility toward the university and colleagues, witness testimony that stated her return to the university would be disruptive, and her “persistence” throughout the arbitration hearing that several tweets investigated did not constitute harassment.

Instead, the arbitrator suggested, “In my judgment, this is an appropriate case in which to substitute a monetary payment rather than reinstatement with lesser penalties.”

In an interview with CBC News on Friday, October 4, Widdowson said she’s pleased with the arbitrator’s ruling that she was wrongfully terminated but that she continues to be upset about how the arbitration approached the issue of harassment.

“People continue to think that I engaged in harassment, which I did not. I’ve done extensive analysis of the different findings which were put forward by the different investigators,” she said.

“There were four different investigators hired by MRU, and these investigators all had different, contradictory findings. What we need from the decision is for there to be a neutral person who makes findings of facts about this.”

“There’s no reason why I shouldn’t be reinstated,” she said during a phone interview with a national media outlet.

“The people who don’t want me to return to MRU, I don’t work with those people,” she replied.

She doesn’t “work with those people” because she shares nothing with them intellectually.

The irony is that Widdowson is an old-school leftist, a classical Marxist whose views on inequality focus on inter-class conflict having little to do with racial, ethnic, sexual, or gender identity, the preoccupation of contemporary identity politics, also known as wokeism.

Traditional Marxists and disciples of wokeism are both on the left, often the hard left. But they support incompatible paradigms about the causes and consequences of social and economic inequality, hence their mutual loathing.

Widdowson said she is appealing the decision to regain her tenured faculty position. It seems likely, however, that she’ll end up accepting a huge payout instead.

In his ruling, Jones found that although Widdowson has “controversial views on a number of topics … there has never been a complaint about the quality or ethics of her scholarship; she has never received performance management counselling for either her teaching or scholarship; and the University has supported and recognized her scholarly activities.”

Mount Royal officials said, “While the formal process continues, we will have no further comment.”

Hymie Rubenstein is editor of REAL Indigenous Report, a retired professor of anthropology, and a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Continue Reading

DEI

CA school taught 5th graders gender identity, had them teach it to kindergartners

Published on October 3, 2024

By

From The Center Square

By 

Plaintiffs “were especially bothered that they had to push the idea that individuals can select their own gender to a kindergartener, knowing this kindergarten buddy looks up to them as role models and trusts their opinions.”

A California school district allegedly had a teacher teach a lesson and read a gender identity book to fifth graders, then have those fifth graders watch a video version of the book with their kindergarten mentees and teach them the lesson they just learned.

Outraged Encinitas parents are now suing the school district and demanding a notification and opt-out program for all objectionable content; currently, content notifications and opt-outs are only available for the health unit.

The fifth grade students’ parents had first asked to review a health unit with lessons on “puberty, health reproduction, media influences on health habits and body image, hygiene, boundaries and bullying and diseases and their transmission, including information about HIV/AIDS.”

After finding the unit’s  “instruction on gender identity and transgenderism” was “affront to their religious beliefs,” the parents tried to opt out of just the gender section, but were told they would have to opt out of the entire unit, which they did.

But this opt out did not cover the school’s buddy program that pairs older students with the same younger students every week for one class.

The lawsuit says “with the buddy relationships in place and well established, [school district staff] planned a unique event for May 1, 2024. During this “buddy” program, the District would use fifth graders to help kindergarteners learn about gender identity.”

The school district used My Shadow is Pink, a picture book for young children in which a boy “wonders about his gender and how he believes it differentiates from his father’s gender” and says he “loves wearing dresses and dancing around.” The boy wears a dress to school, making the father “anxious and stressed” until he too wears a dress after his son has a difficult day. The father then tells his child, “pick up that dress! Your shadow is pink. I see now it’s true. It’s not just a shadow, it’s your inner-most you.”

Before the buddy session, one staff member said to another, “We might just inspire some sweet things to fly toward their shadow tomorrow,” suggesting the lesson had a desired outcome, according to the lawsuit.

At the start of the session one teacher allegedly read the book to the fifth grade class, which students found unusual because “It was rare for [him] to read any book to them, and he had never read a book to them for the ‘buddy’ program.”

Immediately after, the fifth graders each sat next to their kindergarten mentees, and shown a read-along video version of the book, leading one 5th grade plaintiff to allegedly say “[he] wanted to cover his buddy’s eyes and ears to protect him.”

Next, 5th graders were allegedly told to have their buddies choose a color representing their buddies’ gender, and draw their buddies’ outlines in chalk in that color to communicate “gender was determined by an internal feeling.”

Both plaintiffs “were especially bothered that they had to push the idea that individuals can select their own gender to a kindergartener, knowing this kindergarten buddy looks up to them as role models and trusts their opinions.”

“The blatant promotion of gender identity in the My Shadow is Pink book is self-evident and obvious,” says the lawsuit. “The book is marketed as “a rhyming story that touches on the subjects of gender identity, equality, and diversity.”

A petition to require parental notification for controversial curriculum items at Encinitas Union School District, but the school did not respond to the petition or its concerns, aside from sending a template letter describing the district’s opt-out policy.

The lawsuit is claiming the students’ First Amendment  rights were violated by compelling them to speak messages to kindergarteners that violate their religious beliefs and consciences, and that the school districts’ policy of allowing opt-outs only in some parts of schooling but not in others is a violation of the 14th Amendment. Among other demands, the plaintiffs seek opt out and parental notification policies for “curriculum, activities, or any other instruction related to gender identity or other LGBTQ topics.”

“You have the absolute right to opt your child out of any program out there,” said Lance Christensen, Vice President of the California Policy Center, to The Center Square. Last month, the CPC issued an “opt-out toolkit” explaining to parents how they can protect and expand opt-out policies.

“These parents have the right to not have their children subjected to a radical ideology,” continued Christensen. “We’re talking about elementary school kids. What’s wrong with these teachers, and these schools?”

Continue Reading

Trending

X