Teachers Grab the Mic

This is one of two articles which are meant to relate the positions of the two ‘sides’ of the teachers’ strike situation. Most of the information for this article was collected on October 22, when representatives from various departments spoke to concerned parents and students.

Reports in the media, and indeed statements by Mike Harris and Dave Johnson, have attempted to put teachers and their unions in a negative light. By portraying them as privileged, over-zealous and spoiled, the government has succeeded in turning a lot of public opinion against the unions. Harris and his government continually paint themselves as the logical reformers, simply trying to improve the system against a sea of unwarranted protest.

But according to teachers, Bill 160 goes much farther than simply cutting down on some of these alleged privileges. To teachers, Bill 160 represents a giant step backwards, and a huge destructive blow to the education system, reminiscent of the Third World.

Among the teachers’ chief concerns is the issue of preparation time. According the Mr. Pirk, prep time would be cut by 50% for all teachers. This would mean less time for marking assignments, preparing lessons, and a lot of other things (which the teachers summarized in a three page list that included, among others, wheelchair maintenance, and preparing meals (?!)). Because more time outside school hours would be used for marking, etc, teachers would be less willing to participate in extra-curricular activities. Mr. Pirk took our current system of a 5-period day, and forecasted that a teacher would teach 7 periods in two days.

The government’s argument that the reduction of prep time would allow students to spend more time with their teacher was also called into question. Assuming that the current system is not drastically altered, it would mean that teachers would teach one extra class every two days. An extra class does not mean that any one student would receive more instruction, it just means that a teacher would be teaching more students.

There were similar arguments regarding the proposed extension of the school day. Mr. Pirk guessed that no student would get any extra time with teachers, because, instead of spending more time in any one classroom, teachers would be teaching more classes. This, of course, would result in the loss of teaching jobs from our school.

A lot of debate also centered around the idea of uncertified teachers. Bill 160 would allow the Ministry to appoint uncertified teachers (i.e. those not trained to teach) to teaching positions in Ontario schools. This means that an electrician might teach a tech class, a musician might teach music. Although some aspects of this plan seem viable, the details are not spelled out in the bill, which makes teachers nervous. At any rate, the appointment of lower-paid, less-qualified teachers would definitely result in the loss of Woodlands teachers, most notably in Music, Drama, Arts, and the Library.

Many of these issues are too complex and far-reaching for me to cover an a one page article such as this. The underlying theme, however, is that the government plans to take control of Education, and they are doing it with the justification that they are improving the system. Teachers see an implicit deception here, as they feel the government’s real goal is to save money at the expense of the system. As Mr. Pirk said, “If you goal is to save money, say your goal is to save money”.

The public perception is that teachers are defending the status quo and are unwilling to change in any way. Teachers claim that they are willing to discuss change, but not wide sweeping legislation which centralizes virtually all power into one bureaucracy. Teachers feel that their cause is a righteous one (Mr. Pirk even went so far as to compare himself to Gandhi ... sheesh), but they realize that a compromise must be reached. According to teachers, students won’t know what they’ve got till it’s gone.