Dear fellow petitioners, My meeting with the new Education Minister Gordon Dirks is just a month away. I and the team will do our best to ensure that the ministry goes through with making standard algorithms compulsory, not optional, and that teachers explicitly know that they are not obligated to teach multiple strategies. In the meeting, we will also be making our case against the Inspiring Education agenda. I am grateful to know that I will be walking into that meeting with your support and voices being loud and clear as to what we don't want for our children. I believe our voices are the checks and balances for a system gone awry. https://www.change.org/p/honourable-education-minister-gordon-dirks-knowledge-is-power-stop-the-breakdown-of-our-children-s-education For those not familiar with the Inspiring Education document, I have copied verbatim the text of their vision below. You can see that their plans are not to build on the successes of the past, but rather to replace it entirely with their "progressive" new ways to "education". Note that the total number of participants was only about 2500 (community conversation kit approx 1000, online conversation 122, provincial forum 1433), but their write-up keeps insisting that it is “Albertans” who are suggesting the changes. How can they justify changing everything when there are at least 17,000 math petitioners and a growing 800+ Knowledge is Power petitioners wanting otherwise, ie. a balanced education for our children? "-Inspiring Education is charged with addressing the highest level of policy: to recommend an overarching and forward-looking policy direction that will shape Alberta's approach to education to 2030. - Most adults today grew up with an industrial model of education. This is especially true in high schools, where school systems base education on the principles of the assembly line and the efficient division of labour. Schools divide the curriculum into specialist segments: some teachers install math in the students; and others install history. They arrange the day into standard units of time, marked out by the ringing of bells, much like a factory…Students are educated in batches, according to age, as if the most important thing they have in common is their date of manufacture. They are given standardized tests at set points and are compared with each other before being sent out into the market. - While the industrial model has been successful in educating past generations, will it be enough in a knowledge-based society? -The school is an icon. We traditionally think of education as what happens through a prescribed curriculum within the walls and regular hours of a school. - To achieve the vision of the educated Albertan in 2030, Albertans said we must abandon our image of what school is, and attend to what education really is and what it must become. -Albertans suggested using technology to connect schools with parents in their homes and workplaces. They also suggested more flexible school schedules to give parents more opportunities to participate in learning-related activities. -The power of technology should be harnessed to support innovation and discovery, not simply to aid teaching. We need to engage learners to use these new technologies as designers and creators of knowledge. -Albertans see the role of the teacher changing from that of a knowledge authority to an architect of learning - one who plans, designs and oversees learning activities. -expected changes in education would include: greater emphasis on experiential learning both in and outside of the classroom. -In the Alberta Education system, like others, learning is structured by the Carnegie Unit. It was developed in 1906 as a measure of the amount of time a learner has studied a subject. For eg, a learner may currently study science four times a week for 40-50 minutes over the course of a school year. The teacher must cover a set amount of content during that time (curriculum) and the learner earns a credit for the course. Some consider the focus on time to be a deterrent to innovation in the education system. It forces schools to equate educational experience with time spent in class, without recognizing the unique needs, strengths, challenges and passions of individual learners. Perhaps there will be different start and end times to a school day, class or year. Perhaps school will be available around the clock, seven days a week. Perhaps the current grouping of learners according to fixed age and grade will no longer be relevant. - In times past, a person was considered knowledgeable if they merely possessed information (or “content”). As technology makes information instantly available, it is no longer possessed solely by experts. Additionally, as the pace of change increases across the globe, the meaning of the word “knowledge” is changing. - As we focus more on competencies, there will be less emphasis on knowing something, and more emphasis on knowing how to access information about it. There is also greater focus on how to think and do things…move beyond learning formulas…a person is considered knowledgeable if they can gather, analyze and synthesize information in order to create knowledge or find solutions to problems. - The overall focus on competencies will shift education away from a process of disseminating information to a process of inquiry and discovery. - IE recognizes that learners will acquire competencies on a continuum with each learner starting and ending at different points. Learners will make progress when they master competencies like critical thinking, problem solving, innovation and creativity—not necessarily by age and grade. The current required hours of study for each subject area might not be applicable. Likewise, our current way of credentialing – using grade levels and required hours of study – may lose relevance. " Kindest regards, Dr. Nhung Tran-Davies (mrgranthd@yahoo.ca) ps This is only my thoughts as a concerned parent: http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2015/01/04/213073/ pps. While here is THE voice of authority, the teacher: "Curriculum redesign is getting mixed reviews from educators. More negative than positive, but an inability to publicly speak our minds forces teachers to remain silent. Young, inexperienced teachers and those hoping for permanent contracts, career advancement, or recognition are jumping onboard. Experienced and well-read teachers know these trends come and go - the pendulum swings - and it is just a matter of waiting them out after all the money has been spent. There is nothing new in this curriculum design per se. Please check out "Discovery Learning" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_learning What is new is the single-mindedness and absoluteness regarding what is best for our students and their futures. I love and embrace change in the classroom when it benefits the learning of my students. I know how to focus on the important need-to-know outcomes of the curriculum to ensure that my students have a broad base of background knowledge in order to apply what they know to think critically and creatively. However, this new curriculum encompasses all-or-nothing thinking with statements like "direct instruction is ineffective". Then how would you explain the success of Khan Academy or Ted Talks? It also goes against basic neuroscience (as proven in your math challenge): if "facts" and information are not easily recalled from long-term memory, one's "working memory" will not be freed up to expend its energy on critical thinking or problem solving. Personally, my biggest fear is that the freedom given to teachers and students to design and select classroom curriculum is dangerous. Personal biases, "favourite topics" or activities, pop culture, and a lack of insight on the part of many teachers are going to weaken academic rigour and leave huge learning gaps in student acquisition of skills. Students choosing their own content? Get ready for an abundance of projects on Minecraft or The Hunger Games. There is just too much that is unproven and left to chance with the future of our students at stake. In my other piece, I have mentioned that inquiry based learning can be an excellent and effective teaching strategy for some content. But it should not become the basis of an entire curriculum."