PUBLIC EDUCATION INTENDED TO BENEFIT ALL
STUDENTS
The London Free Press
Tue 13 Sep
2005
Page: A6
Section: Opinion Pages
Byline: BY JOE WILSON, SPECIAL
TO THE FREE PRESS
Column: Rebuttal
Source:

Columnist Rory Leishman's ill-informed musings about
class size, Smaller classes don't reflect better education (Sept. 9), reveal
more about his right-wing biases than they do about the realities of education
and the needs of our society.

His main target seems to be teacher unions, with his rather bizarre
implication that they are being self-serving in fighting for smaller class
sizes. He goes so far as to assert that "hiring thousands of new teachers . . .
is more likely to debase than improve the quality of education in public
schools." Yikes!

His claim that small class sizes make no difference beyond Grade 2 may have
some truth if one considers only those academically inclined students who learn
well by direct instruction in large classes.

However, public school systems teach all students, including the many who
will not sit and listen to a teacher or do rote learning for 70 minutes at a
time. In fact, all students will benefit from smaller class contexts where group
work, presentations and other, more engaged, interactive learning activities
help spur involvement, creativity and more active, integrated education.

Perhaps the right-wing sources Leishman selectively quotes -- such as Mark
Holmes, the C. D. Howe Institute and the Organization for Quality Education
-- in fact want to produce more compliant graduates, children from privileged
backgrounds who will comfortably take their entitled place in the narrow,
stratified society so favoured by that crowd. Is it so threatening for them to
have working-class children and non-academic learners also benefit themselves
and our society with a quality education?

I suggest Leishman stop begging the question with bland assertions that
public schools are "generally mediocre" and that parents who "prefer to pay
(will) obtain a superior education for their children." I wonder if he sees
public schools as being mediocre because they are for all students, of all
backgrounds, social classes, learning styles and ability, and do not cater
exclusively to his self-perceived elites. Is the real agenda to keep public
money out of education, to make sure that the entitled stay entitled, and that
the rest of us don't get uppity ideas about our proper station in life?

He also touches on "comparative tests" (code for standardized testing to
ensure a narrow, controlled curriculum) and charges that the government wants to
"stifle competition" (code for restricting spending to the privileged and
entitled).

I agree that more resources should go to professional development
opportunities (one of Mike Harris's first cuts to public education), but not as
a replacement for smaller classes (i.e. more teachers and educational workers to
better serve our students' many needs).

Properly funded and focused public education is one of Canada's greatest
strengths, a defining feature of what makes our country as tolerant, democratic
and economically strong as it is. We cannot afford to abandon it to appease
right-wing political parties and elitist ideologues such as Leishman.

Edition: Final
Note: Joe Wilson is an Ilderton
resident and president of the London and District Labour Council.
Length:
480 words