Sometimes it鈥檚 not so much what you do, but how you do it that makes all the difference. The B.C. government introduced legislation this week that will give it the power to set teachers鈥� professional development standards and to force school boards to co-operate in cutting costs. For a government that made so much of its efforts to secure long-term peace with teachers, it seems peculiarly intent on continuing to make education a battleground.
Professional development and sensible frugality are desirable components of the education system, but achieving goals in those areas should be done in a spirit of collaboration, rather than the top-down approach the government seems intent on following.
Education Minister Peter Fassbender is correct in saying teachers should be put on a similar footing as lawyers, accountants and nurses, professionals with detailed standards for continuing professional development.
鈥淭eachers work very hard. They do a lot of good work,鈥� he said, 鈥淏ut what is clear 鈥� [is] international research has shown us the quality of professional development directly translates to the job satisfaction and the ability of teachers to be successful and for their students to be successful.鈥�
But, he said, there are no 鈥渄etailed requirements鈥� for teachers to keep their skills up to date.
To his credit, Fassbender said the plan is to work with the B.C. Teachers鈥� Federation to develop appropriate standards, but it might have been more helpful to have consulted the union before tabling the bill.
That鈥檚 not merely a courtesy. As BCTF president Jim Iker points out, the union has a long history of promoting professional development. Its expertise could have been helpful in crafting the legislation, in preventing efforts being wasted on reinventing wheels. This could have been an opportunity to build bridges.
Instead, the process has begun with an adversarial tone.
鈥淲e take professional development very seriously,鈥� said Iker. 鈥淲e don鈥檛 need anybody telling us that we need to do this or that it needs to be mandated, because we already do it.鈥�
Let鈥檚 hope the government and the BCTF can work together on professional development standards, and that time won鈥檛 be wasted protecting turf and scoring points. They need to work out who will pay the costs 鈥� it is quite normal in the business world that if an employer requires further training, the employer picks up the cost.
The legislation would also allow the government to make school districts take part in cost-sharing arrangements such as group buying and shared legal services. Again, a sound principle, which some school boards are already following.
But school trustees are still angry about Premier Christy Clark鈥檚 鈥渓ow-hanging fruit鈥� remark that seemed to imply that district offices were laden with goldbrickers who sat in back rooms doing nothing, or that administrators were overlooking obvious ways to economize.
Still reeling from the government鈥檚 edict that they cut $54 million in administrative costs over the next two years, boards are given more reason to ponder why they even exist, as the province continues to erode local autonomy.
They are unlikely to enjoy lectures on thrift from an Education Ministry that spent nearly $100 million on the B.C. Enterprise Student Information System over 10 years. The system, which tracked student attendance and grades, was widely criticized by teachers as unreliable and poorly designed and is in the process of being replaced.
Insisting on certain professional standards is a commendable move, and it can be good for teachers and students, but achieving that goal will require the willing participation of teachers and their union. Keeping education costs under control is the government鈥檚 responsibility, but those efforts will be more successful if measures are worked out collaboratively.
