Thoughts on Education

This is not intended to be a comprehensive treatise on education but some thoughts on certain aspects of the education system. It is written within the context of the Ontario education system but it’s ideas are intended to be universal.

Education should not be political but in reality some of the policies governing our education system will have to be political decisions, hopefully based on expert advice.

The first political education decision I would make is to have one single education system that teaches Canadian values. I would go beyond just one secular publicly funded education system and establish one system overall, no religious or private schools, nor home schooling at the elementary and secondary level. Students should not be segregated by religion or wealth in school and home schooling is often just a means for parents to teach their own particular version of bigotry or hate to their children free of a counterbalance of Canadian values from the school system.

School boards are perhaps the most obvious political factor in the education system but what purpose do they serve as education is a province wide system governed by province wide standards with policies such as curriculum, class sizes, etc. set provincially and teacher and education worker salaries and benefits being negotiated on a provincial basis.

The one thing local school boards seem to get most involved in is school boundaries and school closure decisions. These are decisions that should be based on the facts of the situation and not politics and that is how they usually start out with reports provided by the experts. Then the community activists/lobbyists get involved, perhaps not a bad thing, but the result is usually in favour of the best organized who more often than not are the most affluent communities.

Though some school board members are indeed concerned with education many run for school board to gain political experience and campaign experience in order to run for what they are really interested in, municipal politics.

It is time to leave education to the experts and leave politics out of it as much as possible.

The most important education system decisions are curriculum decisions, which of necessity at the highest level are going to require political decisions. These are decisions such as: which courses should be offered provincially, the decision to stop streaming students into non-university and university levels courses at grade nine, and the decision to stop making Latin a compulsory high school course. The content of courses should be left to the experts, however they should reflect Canadian values.

Canadian values are the perceived commonly shared ethical and human values of Canadians.[3] The majority of Canadians believe they share specific values,[4][5] with a plurality identifying human rights, respect for the law and gender equality as collective principles.[6][7] Canadians generally exhibit pride in equality before the law, fairness, social justice, freedom, and respect for others;[8] while often making personal decisions based on self-interests rather than a collective Canadian identity.[9] Tolerance and sensitivity hold significant importance in Canada's multicultural society, as does politeness.[9][7] (Source: Wikipedia)

As far curriculum is concerned let’s start with teaching religion. The school system should not teach religion, but because religion is an important cultural and historical factor in the world schools should teach about religion, but should do it the same way we were taught about Greek, Roman and Norse gods, as cultural mythology.

Continuing the discussion of curriculum, I believe one way to engage students is to include room in the provincial curriculum for localized units in all subjects. This will provide students with local information they can relate to as well as an opportunity to do research using locally available original sources, like local newspaper archives, as well as an opportunity for field trips to local historical sites or distinctive local geographic and natural features.

The first and most obvious use of this is to learn about the first indigenous inhabitants of the area their school is located in, but it could also include the history of early local settlements. There will of course be localized study opportunities for all subjects, but particularly the social and natural sciences, as well studying local authors and writers in literature and other fields should also be included.

Beyond curriculum, there is a trend to an increased emphasis on testing and exams. I was lucky enough to start secondary school just after the province ended departmental exams, which were exams set and marked in Toronto so every student in Ontario wrote the same exam. There is an argument being made now to increase reliance on exams partly because AIs cannot write exams like they can papers. However, increased reliance on exams can lead to teaching that which can easily be tested by exams and marked by machines. Exam-based teaching can quickly become teaching students to pass tests rather than to understand the subject matter. I always learned more by writing papers than by trying to memorize facts. I would personally eliminate or make exams \optional as we did at Laurentian University for a few years in the 1970s.

I have not written about the hot button issues of sex education, or accepting students sexual orientation and gender identities because enough has been written about those issues and, as I wrote, this was not intended to be a comprehensive treatise on education policy.

Towards a Rational and Humane Immigration Policy

As the white supremacist regime to the south of us embarks on a policy of ethnic cleansing we should look at our own immigration and citizenship policy.

I have written posts about immigration previously but this post. rather than dealing with specific programs, will deal with the broader philosophy of immigration starting with some basic facts and values.

Firstly, 95% of Canadian residents are either immigrants or descendants of immigrants so, unless they are indigenous, someone claiming that they have more right to be here because their people immigrated here before people that immigrated later is making a baseless argument.

Also claiming that one’s place of birth gives someone more rights to a decent life and human dignity than someone born elsewhere is just as baseless an argument.

As I have written before in On Immigration:

Immigration has traditionally been a matter of consensus within Canada with everyone agreeing the country needs immigrants and has a responsibility to refugees. Political differences have been minor and over implementation rather than broad policy.

Change has come with strategists in the current Conservative Party thinking that the road to power is emulating Trump and cultivating a hard core right wing base. Unfortunately for the Conservatives this path will never lead the party back to the glory days of the former Progressive Conservative Party of Canada.

Canada’s immigration policy needs to be shaped by Canadian values.

Canada actively promotes inclusion and respect for diversity at home and abroad. Diversity is a natural characteristic of every society. Canada recognizes diversity as a source of strength and works to champion inclusive attitudes and encourage the adoption of inclusive approaches that lead to the full and meaningful participation of all. (Source: GofC)

The Canadian Multiculturalism Act serves as a legislative framework for promoting diversity, equality and inclusion in Canada, recognizing multiculturalism as a defining characteristic of Canadian identity. (Source: GofC)

Canadians do not fear the other, 95% of us were the other.

There are two major reasons people want to immigrate to Canada.

The most urgent one is fleeing conflict zones where a normal life is impossible or fleeing persecution by the authorities or others because of who they are. This group is known as asylum seekers or refugees. Canada has both a moral and legal requirement under international treaties to accept refugees and asylum seekers.

The second group are those seeking a better life for themselves in Canada. This group is often referred to as economic migrants. This is the group that Canada seeks as refugees as they are needed to fill jobs existing residents are not educated or trained for or simply not interested in doing. They are are also needed to provide demographic balance and support. an aging population. Of course, refugees more often than not, also serve this purpose.

There is another group, family members abroad of those that have already immigrated here and wish to be reunited with their family members in Canada. We could refer to this group as family values immigrants.

All immigrants provide much more than an economic benefit, they help build our communities and contribute to the diversity and multiculturalism that makes up the fabric of Canadian society and the core our value system.

Morally there should be no borders that determine that people deserve a better life based on where they are born and people would be able to move freely globally to try and make a better life for themselves.

But realistically, to maintain the society we have we need to limit immigration to levels our society and infrastructure can accommodate at any particular time, and we need to protect ourselves from those that pose serious criminal and national security threats to the country.

However immigrating is not a crime, so those entering the country without proper documentation or without following proper procedures are not criminals but have committed administrative offences, so while they should face due process they should not be treated as criminals.

I would also argue that anyone who has entered without following proper procedures and has established themselves as contributing members of society should be deemed to have earned their right to be here and provided a path to citizenship like all other immigrants.

I would further add that minor criminal offences should not be an automatic reason to refuse admission or deport people but should be considered within the overall character of the individual and their contributions or potential contributions to Canadian society.

Also “terrorism” should not be used as an excuse to exclude people based on their expressed opinions rather than any actual threat to Canada.

As Canada has only one class of citizen we should also have only one class of immigrant. We currently treat people who come here to do permanent continuing work, such as harvesting crops, differently by calling it temporary employment simply because the work is seasonal, even though the jobs continue from year to year and often the same people do the same jobs from year to year,.

This creates a category of underpaid work with little or no benefits where employees are subject to exploitation and cannot organize to improve their conditions because they can be deported at any time at their employers discretion. It is time to end this practice of exploiting workers then casting them aside till the next year and grant these workers permanent residence status. If we need people to do these jobs they should be able to do them as Canadians.

The only exceptions should be truly temporary jobs, such as foreign workers temporarily working here to install foreign purchased equipment or to train Canadian workers to use the equipment, as well as foreign performers touring Canada.

And it goes without saying that all immigrants should have a path towards full citizenship.

Canada needs to return to being seen as a welcoming society.