ADVISORY BOARD ONENGLISH EDUCATION

© Gouvernement du QuébecMinistère de l’Éducation, 2003 — 03-00528ISBN: 2-550-41422-5Legal Deposit: Bibliothèque nationale du Québec, 2003

– iii –

Mandate

The Advisory Board on English Education (ABEE) was established by the Minister of Education inJanuary 1993, following a recommendation made the previous year by the Task Force on EnglishEducation. Its mandate is to advise the Minister on all matters affecting the educational services offeredin English elementary and secondary schools. The Minister of Education may also ask the Board foradvice on a specific topic.

The Minister of Education names the members to the Advisory Board on English Education. The termof office is normally three years. Candidates are nominated by various English education associationsand organizations that represent, among others, teachers, parents, school and board administratorsand commissioners, as well as individuals involved in post-secondary education. Nominations can bereceived at any time.

Advisory Board on English Education600, rue Fullum, 9e étage,Montréal (Québec) H2K 4L1

Tel.: (514) 873-5656Fax: (514) 864-4181cela-abee@meq.gouv.qc.cahttp://www.meq.gouv.qc.ca/CELA/anglais.htm

– v –

ADVISORY BOARD ONENGLISH EDUCATION

2002-2003

Chair Gretta Chambers

Members Carolyn Curiale

Neville Gurudata

Laiq Hanafi

Jessica Hand

Riva Heft

Keith W. Henderson

Ellen Jacobs

Diana Kinach

Irene Konecny

Mary Liistro-Hébert

Mary H. Maguire

Dominic Martini

Ainsley B. Rose

Josée Rourke

Johanne Smith

John Weideman

Ex Officio Noel Burke

Secretary Sam Boskey

Secretarial Support Services Mireille Laroche

Linguistic Revision Services à la communauté anglophone

Direction de la production en langue anglaise

– vii –

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

Ownership of the learning process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Professional status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

The enhancement of self-esteem among teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Encouraging innovative thinking, experimentation and collaboration in teaching methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Initial teacher education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Support for teachers: the school setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Control of the curriculum: subject specialists and curriculum design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Transition from Elementary Cycle Three to Secondary Cycle One . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Evaluation of student competencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Evaluation of teachers: enhancing the effectiveness of teaching and learning . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Professional development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

PART II

Special programs examined by the Advisory Board on English Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

PART III

Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

APPENDICES

� Individuals consulted by the Advisory Board on English Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

� Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

PROFILE OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOLTEACHER AS THE KEYSTONE IN REFORM IMPLEMENTATION

PART I

It would seem pertinent at this time to exam-ine how well teachers are prepared, or perceivethemselves to be prepared, to bring curriculumreform into their classrooms. The cross-disciplinary, competency-based pedagogyrequired to implement the reforms successfullywas not part of teacher education curricula whenthe majority of the teachers currently working inthe system were certified. The most experiencedamong them have had years to hone their skills,refine their teaching methods and develop theirown teacher-student relationships. They are nowbeing told they must share ownership of theirclassrooms and pedagogical control of the sub-ject matter for which they used to be solelyresponsible. For many teachers the requirementsof the new pedagogy are far from clear and cantherefore appear both confusing and threatening.

The fact remains, however, that of all theelements on which the successful implementa-tion of the reform of elementary and secondaryeducation depends, teachers are the key agentsin the process. Without their commitment tothe principles underlying the new curriculum andthe practices implicit in the development of itsobjectives, the reform will not produce the classroom practices required for substantive, student-centred change. The response of teach-ers to the challenges posed by the new curricu-lum and to the structural changes its imple-mentation will require is crucial.

Implementation of the reforms has comemore easily and naturally in the elementaryschool context where classroom structures andthe teaching of subject matter have always beenmore open-ended and child-oriented, wherelearning competencies take precedence overthe learning of hard facts and where the wholechild’s ability to learn can be measured andaddressed. Where leadership has been strongand supportive, the reforms have provided theimpetus for more effective teaching and learning.

The team-teaching and project-oriented thrust of“reformed” elementary education are facilitatingearly detection of learning disabilities that canhave a serious effect on the child’s academiccareer if they are not addressed in the most for-mative years. The division of elementary schoolinto cycles rather than grades has given teachersthe leeway to use the full range of their abilitiesas they share success and difficulties with theirpeers.

Implementation of the reforms has only justbegun at the secondary school level. Everysource consulted by the Advisory Board onEnglish Education (ABEE) in the course of itsexamination of the role of teachers in the reformhas shown that the majority of secondary schoolteachers — despite the efforts of school boardsand of committees and conferences set up forthe purpose — are not only ill prepared; they arealso insufficiently informed about what is expect-ed of them in the new scheme of teaching andlearning practices. The fact that the final cur-riculum documents have not yet been publishedhas further fuelled scepticism among secondaryschool teachers.

The reform challenge comes at a time whensecondary school teachers feel particularly vul-nerable. For most of the 2001-2002 academicyear they were involved in a labour dispute. Theemployment of pressure tactics included ateacher boycott of participation in reform-oriented activities. This resulted in little opendiscussion on reform-related issues that are cen-tral to teachers’ professional status, workingconditions and career expectations. Moreover, itproved to be an additional impediment to teach-ers’ reaching of a better understanding not onlyof how the reform would likely affect their pro-fession but also of how teachers could take theirrightful place in shaping the new educationalproject.

The difficult labour relations experienced byteachers led the ABEE to consult with a wide

– 1 –

range of individuals and groups responsible for orclosely connected to the organization and deliv-ery of education in the English-language schoolsystem. The general perception of those out-side but closely associated with the teachingprofession is that teachers themselves feel thattheir public image is shrouded in ambivalenceand that they are considered executors ratherthan active agents in the education process.Due to a perceived lack of public and profes-sional support, teachers in general do not havethe sense of ownership required to take on thechallenges of the reforms as managers of theprocess and its results.

This report addresses the key questionsassociated with the role of teachers in ourschools, looking at the experience of teachersinvolved in pilot projects for the implementa-tion of curriculum reform in secondary schoolsand what can be learned from the results of suchexperiments.

The following questions are those that comeup most often in connection with how teachersthemselves see their role in the educationprocess and how that role is interpreted in pub-lic opinion and by school and school board admin-istrations:

1. Who owns the learning process? Who hashands-on responsibility for results?

2. What is the basis for a perceived lack ofappreciation of teachers and the sense thatteachers are not seen as professionals?

3. Why do teachers, even those with the mostexperience, not seem to realize how goodthey are?

4. Why is their own evaluation viewed so nega-tively as a purely confrontational process?

5. New teachers have enthusiasm and a gooddeal of pedagogical knowledge. Is that enoughto manage a classroom?

6. How can teachers be brought to recognizetheir essential contribution in a learning-ori-ented school system?

Ownership of the learning process

Some teachers claim to have difficulty withthe classroom situation because they feel they donot have substantial control over the process, in

that much of that which determines what childrencan learn is decided elsewhere. Teachers knowthat they teach, but the students’ retention andthe utility of the subject matter is not really within the teacher’s power and control. The ABEEheard a good deal of opinion about the extent towhich teachers in general feel, or do not feel,they have an impact.

Negative attitudes about ownership issuesoften emanate from teachers themselves. Theysee little evidence of their empowerment. Asthe reform is reconfiguring the content and deliv-ery of education, resituating the role of theteacher in the school’s mission can be a wayfor teachers to gain rather than lose power.

Teachers appear to be increasingly concernedthese days with results-based education; thesuccess of a teacher is measured primarily onhow well his or her students perform. Demandsare being made on teachers for more interactiveinstruction and for more sophisticated class-room management techniques, neither of whichnecessarily suits the learning patterns of all stu-dents. Teachers are often frustrated by theirown acknowledgement that while the best stu-dents may find the classroom environment appro-priate for learning, students with problems willhave much more difficulty.

Education is not a complete science. Muchhas been developed in the area of transmittingknowledge but comparatively little on the learn-ing process. Teachers have to learn how theiractions affect student learning. Since most ofthem are not researchers by training, they maynot be aware of the effects on students of all thatgoes on in their classrooms.

Teacher educators in the Faculties andDepartments of Education in the universitiesfind that their students are generally quite opti-mistic, that they expect to have an impact. Themain thrust of university education is not to givestudents recipes, but to help them to work outtheir own goals and the means for reachingthem. Recent graduates are evidence of theemergence of a new breed of teachers whounderstand much better than their predeces-sors that they too are learners along with theirstudents.

– 2 –

There are classic conflicting pressures onteachers: on the one hand, the teacher is expect-ed to focus on a creative, sensitive approach toteaching and, on the other, to prepare studentsto deal with an external exam which may appearquite alien. Even the best, most enthusiasticteachers can get caught up in hackneyedapproaches to meet exam objectives and mayfeel awkward responding to conflicting expecta-tions when reform matters are being discussed,based on their belief that imaginative and sen-sitive teaching will hardly be appreciated, northe school’s culture valued, if the students rankpoorly in external exams.

It is generally accepted that external account-ability in the form of exams will always be with us.The general public is not necessarily reassuredwhen teachers describe what learning processesare occurring in their classrooms. Schools them-selves try to establish their credibility throughuniversal exams, which is the traditional — albeitlimited — way to measure and evaluate learning.As the reform in education evolves, it will beincumbent upon teachers to find ways of pre-senting and explaining what the children in theircharge have learned: the difference betweenwhere children were at the beginning and wherethey are at the end of a term.

In the meantime, whatever the debate overexams, there remains the issue of how else toestablish the credibility of a teacher’s evalua-tion of student learning. Teachers do not want tobe put in the position of evaluating each other’sevaluation; a student’s exam is easier to dealwith.

Even though many teachers have taken partin the drafting of the new but still unpublishedQuébec Education program at the secondaryschool level, most teachers have not beeninvolved and many feel isolated. This feeling of disenfranchisement lessens the sense of ownership. That teachers on the drafting com-mittees are told not to share their developmentwork has not raised the level of confidence oftheir colleagues.

Professional status

Teachers point to much evidence that theirstatus is not considered truly professional.

Teachers’ pay is not comparable to that of otherprofessionals. No one spends substantial timeand energy questioning the number of hoursworked in order to decide whether or not workersin other fields are professionals. No one tries totell doctors or lawyers how to do their job or askthem how their holiday time is used. Teachersoften cite ministerial rigidity as a prime cause oftheir professional downgrading.

Teachers themselves, however, have notalways responded diligently nor taken a proactiveapproach regarding the negative images reflectedin public opinion. Many of the tasks required ofteachers in the course of their duties, althoughrelated to what goes on in the classroom, cannotbe performed in class time. While it is widelyunderstood that teachers work beyond 3:00 p.m.,those further tasks, if they were performed atthe school, would be more visible and teachers’arguments concerning their workload would bemore persuasive from a public relations point ofview. With the school day soon to be extended bysome five hours a week, increased opportuni-ties for teachers to do more of their administrativework on the premises may raise the profile oftheir professional presence.

There are, on the other hand, many encour-aging aspects of the reform as it relates to thestatus of teachers: teachers can become involvedin creating programs, assessment strategies andin-service sessions. Some teachers clearly enjoythese activities while others feel out of theirdepth and may become hesitant to share withpeers work they have always done alone.

Within governing boards, teachers should beassuming leadership roles in matters for whichthey are professionally qualified by helping toraise parental awareness about the content andthe intent of the reform. Teachers’ pedagogicalknowledge combined with their classroom expe-rience can make valuable contributions to enrich-ing programs, planning complementary activi-ties, exploring evaluation practices and forgingprivileged partnerships with parents. Parents seethemselves as experts in regard to their ownchildren; when they meet with teachers, it shouldbe seen as a meeting between partners whoshare many of the same concerns. Yet, for teach-ers who are insecure about their own profes-sional status, any questioning by parents can be

– 3 –

taken as an attack, thus generating an unpro-fessional defensive attitude on the part of theteacher. In this regard, administrators can provideimportant leadership by instilling confidence intheir teaching staff and encouraging trust betweenparents and teachers.

Comments have been made to the ABEEabout the effects of some union activities onteacher professionalism, leading some to believethat there is a lack of professional autonomy in aunion controlled environment. For example, whilemany recognize that there is a need to promotegood practices, unions have been known to dis-approve of the acknowledgment of individualteachers’ practices or the singling out of individ-ual teachers as examples for their peers. If aunion policy on workload has the effect of dis-couraging a teacher from spending time doingadditional work with students, it is seen as limit-ing that teacher’s exercise of professional respon-sibility, leading to a loss of respect for the pro-fession. In this context, certain actions undertakenby teachers in the course of labour negotiationshave angered parents who see their children,who have no say in labour conflicts, being used ashostages. An example of this was the case ofthe cancellation of extra-curricular functions dur-ing work-to-rule campaigns.

The teachers’ boycott of all reform-relatedactivities as a pressure tactic for several monthsthis past year also resulted in the loss of theirinput since certain reform-related activities with-in the Ministry and school boards continuednonetheless. The boycott was seen as unprofes-sional and tarnishing to the teachers’ public imagebecause it kept them from influencing a matter ofkey importance to them: the development ofteaching strategies to be used in the context ofthe reform. As it is difficult to require teachers toimplement what they do not understand or believein, development work in this area should haveinvolved the input of teachers at every stage.

The enhancement of self-esteemamong teachers

A consequence of teachers’ not feeling thatthey have ownership of the evolution of teachingand learning is that much bad press comes fromquoting teachers themselves. As a result, poten-

tial good candidates for the teaching professionmay look elsewhere, preoccupied as much bypossible negative images of the teaching pro-fession as by financial considerations.

Feelings of alienation are making many teach-ers reticent about investing energy in the plan-ning of a reform they consider they have littlepower to affect. One of the ways to encourageteachers is to give them time to participate in itsplanning. If time is created, it gives value to theoperation; if room is made for discussion aboutthe reform within the school’s organizationalplan, teachers will know that their contribution isimportant.

In the implementation of educational change,each school develops its own approaches,depending on its problems and its socio-economic context. Especially in areas wherethere are many needs, it is important for schoolsto develop an overall perspective of develop-ment rather than to conclude that, because of themany needs, change is impossible or too difficultto implement. Teachers are, and will continue tobe, the ones who find ways of crafting the pro-posed changes into realistic practices to whichtheir students can relate. As teachers exploresuch methods as team teaching, mentoringamongst teachers can play a useful role as ithelps them learn the skills needed to worktogether.

Encouraging innovative thinking,experimentation and collaboration in teaching methods

Many teachers hit a rut sometime in theircareers and lose confidence; even the most creative can feel stifled. Being exposed to theo-ries about creativity in the classroom while in uni-versity does not guarantee that teachers willfind outlets for putting these theories into prac-tice once they are on the job.

The reform has been characterized as a wayof bringing “kindergarten teaching methods” tothe whole school system: that is, as much valueis placed on process as on content. While imple-mentation has been proceeding relativelysmoothly in Elementary Cycles One and Two,modifying their teaching practices has been

– 4 –

somewhat more difficult for teachers in CycleThree.

It will be that much more difficult when thereform officially moves into secondary school.Pilot projects, of which there have been a con-siderable number, have shown that, given thetime, support and leadership, secondary schoolteachers have been able to work effectively inteams and to adapt their teaching habits to thereformed curriculum context without losing sightof the teaching and learning standards associat-ed with quality education.

The experiments, however, have also shownthat memorizing a simple formula does not bringabout the fundamental change the reformrequires of teachers. It is a process that willrequire ongoing reflection, fine-tuning, perse-verance and the wise choice of pedagogicalapproaches. That is not to say that “pre-reform”teaching is to be discarded, that it is no good.Rather, it is a question of adapting it to a new setof objectives. In the opinions heard by the ABEEthis year, it is widely felt that individual teacherswill not be able to meet the long-term chal-lenges of transforming their teaching on theirown.

One of the most frequent suggestions abouthow to provide continuing support for teachers isto give them curriculum design support on site,with release time to share their “best practices”with their colleagues. Were schools to adoptsuch a policy, fewer outside consultants would beneeded to map out strategies, although someexternal resources would always be required.The proposed extension of the school day willease pressure on the school’s time table andmay allow room for various forms of curriculumdesign activity, such as, for example, the orga-nizing of working groups of teachers with a rotat-ing curriculum coordinator to work on modelsof curriculum delivery with which they feel com-fortable.

One private school, with the latitude to exper-iment with change, tried to find significant timefor teachers to work on implementation and todevelop cross-curricular projects, all in a contextof uncertainty. The school examined restructur-ing its timetable and the school day to allow

teachers more planning time. That, however,came to be seen as having a detrimental effecton students who still needed the regular amountof class time to complete existing curriculumrequirements.

Initial teacher education

In the last decade, there has been a shift inteacher education away from a focus solely ondisciplinary content and towards an exploration ofinquiry and learning processes. There is now anemphasis on a socioconstructivist philosophy oflearning and less concentration on individual dis-ciplines. Education students learn to blend theoryand practice during their 700 hours of studentteaching.

School administrators are noticing that newcandidates for teaching positions are differentfrom their predecessors. Much scepticism hasbeen expressed about whether the recent grad-uates of university programs influenced by thereform will be properly prepared to assume thecomplex teaching loads that will be required ofthem.

Many administrators in secondary schoolsare now wondering if more emphasis is neededon curriculum content in the various disciplines.There is a fear that graduates of the new pro-grams will not be as marketable as their prede-cessors since they may lack a concentration in asecond subject area (which is no longer a require-ment). Principals are concerned because theyobserve that student teachers often do not havesufficient mastery of the subject matter and thatthey may demonstrate weakness in literatureand history, as well as in grammatical skills.

Another cause for concern is the ambiguitysurrounding the cross-curricular competencies tobe learned by secondary students. Presumably,teachers will require matching cross-curricularskills. On the other hand, sequences determinedby disciplines are not going to be abolished at thesecondary level, and the exam system will con-tinue to have an impact on the organization of thecurriculum.

The reform has revived the debate aboutwhether teachers should be trained as subject-

– 5 –

material transmitters or learning facilitators.Which takes precedence, subject matter or class-room management? There is mixed opinion as towhether a full four-year B.Ed. as the only entry toteaching results in more proficiency than a three-year bachelor’s degree in a teachable subjectfollowed by a one-year program of educationarts. These discussions take place primarilybetween universities and the Ministry; teachers’opinions on the issue are rarely heard, one way orthe other. And yet, it is the structures of theirprofession that are being designed and put inplace.

Principals who were consulted about require-ments for new teachers indicated they prefertheir new staff to have good management skills,an understanding of the reform and an ability touse technologies. On the other hand, in a studyundertaken in the U.K., knowledge of the subjectranked higher than teacher training, since prin-cipals felt that they could train teachers in theirown milieu to meet the needs of their schoolenvironment.

Regardless of the emphasis on content or onprocess, more people at all levels of teachereducation now have some knowledge of andfamiliarity with curriculum design. Postsecondaryprograms must make administrators aware ofand encourage them to be involved with cur-riculum reform.

The role that universities can play in accom-panying the reform in schools needs to be clari-fied. Universities need to rethink in-service anddevelop new types of professional programs orcourses that accommodate the current needs ofpractising teachers.

A university can also provide valuable supportover time. For example, in the “Agir Autrement”(New Approaches, New Solutions) program, uni-versity staff are monitoring and researching theimplementation of the school improvement pro-gram and will provide feedback and analysis tohelp the school assess its progress and improveits results.

Some observers consulted by the ABEE feelthat the Ministry should have involved universitiesin systematic monitoring and evaluation activities

from the inception of reform, rather than as anafterthought. If universities were to be invited tocarry out such a process, they would undoubtedlybe supportive, as it would provide them withvaluable teaching and learning material. It wouldrequire a long-term commitment from universityfaculty and would, of course, have to be eligiblefor funding.

Support for teachers: the school setting

Many of the rules and structures concerningteaching are decreed from outside the school. Ifteachers are to be recognized and appreciated asprofessionals, it seems reasonable for them to beallowed a considerable degree of autonomy,responsibility and accountability in the fashioningof their own education within accepted profes-sional guidelines. For teachers to be able to sus-tain and reinforce the role only they can play inthe school setting, there should be a moredependable support system. For instance, atpresent, where do new teachers go for help?Recent studies show that they approach otherteachers, not universities, school boards or con-sultants. Most new teachers did not know aboutavailable outside resources. Some found thatmore experienced teachers were helpful in manyways, while others found that more experiencedteachers tended to feel threatened by new ones.

Young teachers need to be introduced tothe politics of teaching, both in university andwhen they enter the profession. In a systemwhere new teachers interact with students, fellowstaff members, principals, governing boards,parent participation organizations, unions, theMinistry and the general public, a working knowl-edge of the Education Act is not in itself a suffi-cient roadmap. A clear understanding of admin-istrative procedures and process in all areas thataffect the teacher is an essential prerequisiteto any teacher feeling in control and at ease inthe system. Teachers should be encouraged toassure their own continuing education and toconvince their peers that keeping up their professional expertise is a form of pride in theprofession.

How do teachers make their case for theestablishment of norms for the much-needed

– 6 –

support in the form of nonteaching specialists,such as special education professionals, psy-chologists and speech therapists?

How should teachers in Québec’s Englishschools go about helping to convince the Ministrythat they have specific training needs notrequired by their colleagues in the French sector?In the past, English sector teachers have partic-ipated less in the development of Ministry-approved curriculum than their French-speakingcounterparts. Since programs are generally devel-oped in French, participation by anglophonesrequires a certain degree of sophistication inFrench. Ministry policies could encourage moreprogram writing by English teachers, translatingtheir work into French rather than, as is now thecase, translating much program material fromits original language into English.

Teachers in the English-speaking boardsmust deal with a growing phenomena not presentin the French school boards: widespread immer-sion programs in which not only a second lan-guage, but many other subjects are taught toEnglish-speaking students, in French. Manyimmersion teachers are francophones with exten-sive skills in second-language teaching, but withlimited depth in the subject they may be teach-ing. In other cases, especially at the secondarylevel where the subject material is more spe-cialized, there may be highly competent sub-ject teachers whose proficiency in teaching in asecond language could use some upgrading.

These are just some of the questions thatteachers will have to find answers to if they aregoing to have the impact on the school systemtheir numbers and station warrant.

Control of the curriculum: subjectspecialists and curriculum design

While teachers ostensibly have the freedomto choose their own methods and materials, theexistence of uniform exams in the core disci-plines in the last two years of secondary schooltends to concentrate teaching on the officialtextbook and leaves little room for creativity,little leeway on the use of materials and evalua-tion and little space for cooperation with stu-dents. The pressure to perform on external

end-of-year exams obliterates the freedom toexplore throughout the year because studentinput is lost and the top-down process, which thereform is aimed at redressing, is still firmly inplace as long as teachers remain conduits ofinformation and overseers of tasks.

The results are a sense of frustration andloss in the teaching profession. They are alsoindicative of a more distant relationship betweenteachers and the Ministry in which much seemsimposed and micro-managed from above, leavingthe impression that teachers are not consideredcapable or worthy of trust. This perception taintsthe reform. For example, the majority of teachersfeel out of the loop regarding the reform in secondary schools. They receive little or noexplanation of where the new policies come fromand little indication they will have much hands-oncontrol and input. Teachers with long experi-ence have tended to express the view that theyhave seen this all before — a pedagogical “flavourof the month”; the reform is seen as just anoth-er bridge to cross.

This reform, however, is different from others.The status quo is not an option: both collegesand universities are changing their own curriculaand implementing program and competency-based approaches.

The prevalent scepticism about the approach-ing reform in secondary schools is due in largepart to anxiety about the unknown. Even withthe occasional professional development day,there has been little real information available.Some teachers are aware of the reform onlybecause of what has been happening in the ele-mentary schools; a few have been involved incurriculum committees or writing teams outsidetheir schools. There is a wide consensus thatany implementation will be difficult as long asinformation on the reform, not only its princi-ples but also its practical realities, is inadequate.

The insecurity of secondary school teachersis exacerbated by the many divergent opinionsnow circulating about the future place of spe-cialists in the secondary school setting. Canspecialist teachers team-teach with non-specialists? Opinions are mixed. This is now hap-pening in CEGEPs. The problems encountered

– 7 –

While all schools have received the orientation forthe Cycle One program, there are very few copiesof these documents in the schools; the contentis being circulated slowly.

In those secondary schools where the reformis currently being piloted, teachers are beginningto become familiar with the assessment andreporting of competencies. As well, parents arenow starting to be exposed to these concepts.

Information, then, is the key to encouragingsecondary school teachers to get on board thereform and be receptive to its potential. Mostinformation today is made available only to consultants who are few in number and widelydispersed. Some boards do not have consul-tants who can discuss the pedagogical reformconcept with teachers. For staff at boards withlarge territories, access to meetings is prob-lematic. Information, no matter how scant, shouldbe transmitted to all concerned, even if all thedetails are not yet available. In fact, feeling thatone is part of a work in progress is preferable tofeeling as that one is being kept in the dark.

At this point in the implementation process,it is not difficult to see Secondary Cycle One as acontinuation of primary school. It is less evidenthow a competency-based, student-centredapproach can be applied in the later cycles ofsecondary school. How are cross-curricular activ-ities to be established within the organizationof the schools? How can teachers become archi-tects rather than victims of the changes thatthe reorientation and the reorganization willrequire?

There appears to be an urgent need tostrengthen communication within the teachingprofession as a whole and among individualteachers in their own school settings. Broadercommunications among teachers themselveswould help bridge the gap between viewing cur-riculum reform as extraneously imposed andrecognizing that teachers have actually con-ceived much of it. In the adult sector, forinstance, the new curriculum is being writtenalmost entirely by committees of teachersbecause they are expected to understand theneeds of students in different contexts.

– 8 –

there have been more administrative (timetableand budget) than pedagogical.

Teachers hear rumours; for example, thatthe Ministry does not know what will happen tosubject matter specialists after the interdisci-plinary approach is adopted. Some teachers feelthreatened by the perceived downgrading of subject specialties. One hears comments like, “I am not a teacher. I am a mathematics teacherand I wouldn’t want to have to teach anythingelse.” Most secondary school teachers are spe-cialists. The reform is perceived to mean thatteachers will be expected to change theirapproach in order to teach in areas where theyhave less confidence in their own abilities.

Everyone consulted by the ABEE was of theopinion that it is necessary to maintain specialistsat the secondary level for students to be wellgrounded in the subject matter. It isn’t everyteacher who can successfully teach, for example,Secondary I or II Mathematics. An inspection ofstudent exam results has shown that the passrate is higher in the later years of school, pre-cisely in those years when there are subjectspecialists. Teachers who know their subjectthoroughly are considered a pillar of secondaryeducation. They have, however, become a scarcecommodity. Schools are having difficulty recruit-ing and retaining specialists and most generalistsdo not feel comfortable or confident in specialistareas.

Examples are cited of subject specialistswho have become enthusiastic about workingwith teams at the Secondary Cycle One level inpilot schools. It is expected that others will findthe same satisfaction once they become morefamiliar with the reform. But until they can seethe larger context, there will continue to be resis-tance. At present, the typical teacher receivesvery little information about “best practices” orabout research in other schools and school sys-tems. As a result, the frontline teachers regard allnew changes with trepidation, as they have noknowledge of how the changes can be beneficialto their teaching or to student learning.

The curriculum for Secondary Cycle One iscurrently being validated in 16 schools acrossQuébec, four of which are in the English sector.

In the youth sector, committees of teachersalso worked on the curricula of disciplines to betaught. The average teacher, however, does notsit on such committees, either for lack of interestor the contacts to get onto them. Anglophoneteachers who do find their way onto curriculumcommittees often feel very isolated. What ismissing is communication between those teach-ers who participate and their colleagues to fostera broader understanding that teachers do haveinfluence in curriculum development.

Very few teachers are qualified to designcurriculum. It is a fallacy to think that any groupof teachers can design or even adapt curriculum.While the Education Act gives schools the right todesign curriculum, not all teachers are equippedor willing to take part in such an exercise, citinga lack of experience. Currently, courses con-centrating on curriculum design are dealt withalmost exclusively at the masters’ level in uni-versity faculties and departments of education.

Transition from Elementary CycleThree to Secondary Cycle One

Elementary school teachers are concernedabout how their students are going to fare inthe transition to secondary school. Studentsemerging from a much less stratified elementaryschool where they have become accustomed tobeing treated as collaborators in their own edu-cation may find the transition to current rigidsecondary school structures and pedagogy dis-orientating. Moving from a reform-oriented ele-mentary school where they learn to explain whatthey have learned — for example, how theyarrived at their math answers — to a more regi-mented secondary school where only final resultsare considered important appears problematic.

Teachers in elementary school who havealready embraced the reform tend to feel incharge of the learning/teaching process. By andlarge, except for a chronic lack of time in which toperform their multiple tasks, they feel in control.They are trying to teach their students aboutlifelong learning and in the process, they them-selves tend to apply the concept to their owndevelopment. They speak with conviction about“keeping up” with the latest developments andtechnologies. A measure of ownership is

described as the extent to which a teacher is ableto develop programs of study based on studentneeds. Generally, at the elementary level, thereis a lot of opportunity for creativity.

At the secondary school level, that flexibilityis still nonexistent and creativity has but smallpurchase on teaching, especially in the context ofobligatory provincial exams. As well, many teach-ers are overwhelmed with special needs stu-dents (oppositional defiance, learning disabili-ties, autism, dyslexia, etc.) in their classrooms.The ability of teachers to work as teams is not yetpart of the culture or organizational structure ofthe schools. This more rigid structure and the culture it breeds become more entrenched assecondary schooling progresses.

There is some optimism that students them-selves will help integrate the reform into secondary school education. Those who havecome through elementary student-orientedcycles will be better prepared for taking moreresponsibility for their own learning. It is theywho will force teachers to learn how to look at dif-ferent aspects of success, to focus on how farthey have brought students along rather thanconcentrating solely on the final grade.

A teacher should be in a position to celebratehaving reached a child that no one else hasmanaged to reach. For example, recognizing astudent’s ability to express him or herself math-ematically will help that student to solve themath problem. Administrators could improvemorale by supporting and recognizing all victo-ries, large and small. The school’s attitudetowards student improvement, at whatever stageor in whatever form, will be an important factor ingetting parents to understand, adapt to and sup-port the reform at the secondary level.

Evaluation of student competencies

The long-awaited Ministry policy on studentevaluation in a competencies-based curriculumhas not yet been issued at the time of writing ofthis document. However, as soon as it appears,together with the final policy documents outliningthe reformed curriculum at the secondary level,teachers will be required to start evaluating theirstudents according to new guidelines.

– 9 –

– 10 –

Teachers are attempting to adapt their teach-ing to the learning styles of students, to presentthemselves and their learning in different ways.Teachers know intuitively and practically howtheir students are doing. On the other hand,there is a political agenda on evaluation, knownas standardization of objectives and competen-cies, which is different from the pedagogicalagenda. It is far from clear to teachers how thesetwo approaches can be reconciled, how individ-ualized learning can be assessed if everyone isobliged to be on the same track. How does onedeal with the need to demonstrate objectivelythat all the pertinent ground has been covered?

Some current attitudes towards evaluationare based on a desire to meet provincial stan-dards, which allow comparability and transfer-ability of marks and credits. At the same time, inthe classroom, teachers are expected to adoptstrategies adapted to individual students. Thequestion of real needs is often raised. What arethe real needs that one must deal with in basiccore education as compared to courses that pre-pare students for higher levels? Should therebe more flexibility with each school’s educa-tional project determining the curriculum andthe evaluation? Evaluation tools used for select-ing those who move to the next level, however,are going to continue to have a major influenceon what is taught in the classroom. Standardexam results and the subsequent comparison byoutside agencies do not encourage concern withclassroom processes. Finding ways of managingto make the secondary school curriculumprocess-driven is still to be worked out.

The guidance-oriented approach to learning(GOAL) fosters working with students and parentsin order to sensitize them to different careerpaths before the end of secondary school. Whilea secondary school diploma is important for theentrance requirements at the next level, will italways be necessary? The CEGEPs have insti-tuted their own competency-based system. Not all programs have the same profile of pre-requisites. While matriculation results are para-mount, a “relevé de compétences” is part of thereform underway at the CEGEP level.

While some feel that only an exam can pro-vide credible evidence of student learning, port-

folios are becoming an increasingly importantelement in the process. Students can becomemore involved in their learning. With an ongoingevaluation, students get to know what they havelearned. Portfolios must be continuously keptup, and not just for the purpose of report cards.With current technology, it is easy for both thestudent and the teacher to keep up-to-daterecords. By comparison, in other classes withoutportfolios, students may have very little idea ofwhat they have gained as the term progresses.

The reform is still weak on supporting teach-ers on student evaluation. There are few exam-ples of what reform evaluation should look like.The expectations for each level or cycle haveto be carefully defined. Students must be edgedout of a warm, fuzzy environment familiar tothem from preschool levels and introduced to themore realistic world of summative evaluationwithout it thwarting their spontaneity or confi-dence.

Evaluation of teachers: enhancing the effectiveness of teaching and learning

In the modern school, evaluation involvesnot only how the administration sees the teach-ers, but also how colleagues see them and howthey see themselves.

The evaluation issue raises many questionsfor teachers. To whom are teachers accountabletoday? To their students, their governing boards,their school boards, their unions, the Ministryor the Essential Services Board? The list of thosewith power over teachers is long. While there issome ongoing evaluation, a regular systemicevaluation process for teachers is still not inplace, except in the case of new teachers orthose who appear to be having trouble. To helpteachers feel they own the teaching process, afeedback loop is crucial. In some schools, a regularly scheduled session with the adminis-trator in a “how is it going” debriefing context canhelp significantly. Principals have to be trained tolisten to teachers and to act on the basis ofthose discussions.

Teachers are very leery of being evaluated.They perceive the purpose of the evaluation

process to be a search for the weak link in thechain. Can evaluation of teachers exist in a formthat is not confrontational? There is much evi-dence that the process can be confidence build-ing rather than the reverse. By defining outcomegoals not in terms of pass/fail but in terms oflooking for areas for professional improvement,one can facilitate goal setting and finding themeans to get there. The reform itself shouldhelp in this regard as it is aimed at putting lessemphasis on pass/fail results in the classroomand more on a continuum of lifetime learning. Theculture of evaluation in the schools should bemore focused on feedback in order to encouragemore constructive involvement in improving theteaching profession.

Teacher evaluation is more advanced at theelementary level where many teachers areinvolved in team teaching and small groups ofteachers are linked to foster both their personaldevelopment and school improvement. Much ofthis self-evaluation is quite successful and isbeing endorsed by principals. Elementary teach-ers, being less geared to the pressures of exter-nal exams and deadlines, have the power toimplement changes; the new flexibility allowsthem to be more creative.

At the secondary school level similar exper-iments have so far failed; teachers didn’t want tobecome involved or were afraid to refer to eachother’s teaching or modelling.

The ABEE learned of the teacher evaluationpractices at a private-sector school where insti-tutional goals are shared with all members ofthe staff. The administration meets with everyteacher to set individual goals. Together, theyselect professional development opportunities tofoster development and growth as indicated byboth the teacher’s and the school’s objectives.During the year, the teacher keeps a portfolio andcollects material on each of the goals set forthe year. The teacher and administrator meetat the end of the last term to evaluate whetherthe goals have been met and to make plans forthe next school year. For many teachers, this isthe first experience of its kind. They had neverbefore been encouraged to think in terms ofgoals on which to focus — in a non-threateningcontext — for the purpose of achieving personalgrowth.

There is evidence that an evaluation pro-gram for teachers is a good way to direct pro-fessional development. The process doesn’thave to be called “evaluation.” The administratorlooks at the teacher’s competency in the class-room and suggests ways for him or her to workon any perceived areas of weakness or discom-fort. This focusing on areas for improvement is auseful way of encouraging teachers to seek outrelevant pedagogical development programs thatcater to specific needs rather than those that takea blanket approach to professional development.

Much as teachers feel anxiety about beingevaluated, they miss it if it isn’t present. If atten-tion isn’t paid to someone, he or she doesn’tcount. Evaluations are not there to weed peopleout, but to make them see how they can performbetter in their jobs. If everyone were evaluated,defensive attitudes might fade away. (Teachersoften wonder how their principals are evaluat-ed. This information should be widely accessible.)Perhaps evaluation should be renamed “diagno-sis for professional growth.”

Experience in some private schools validatesthe practice of taking care of teachers, particularlynew ones. New teachers’ demands receive highpriority in many of these schools. Mentors areassigned to new teachers and a professionalevaluation process is put in place for at leastthe first two years while they are getting accli-matized. New teachers are expected to be sup-ported by others in their department. Teachersare allowed to visit each other’s classes and areencouraged to offer support to help the newteacher in goal setting. Assignments and work-load are determined using criteria for equity,with the input of teachers and the administration.There is less rigidity and more leeway comparedto the public school system, even though theircollective agreements call for local negotiation ofworkload.

The nurturing of new teachers is less appar-ent in public schools where mentoring and extraperiods for course preparation have been phasedout and where new teachers are often givenimpossible workloads. It is important that newteachers not be given classes with a high con-centration of students with multiple problemsor serious disciplinary issues, those very classes

– 11 –

that some experienced teachers quite naturallytry to avoid. Under the circumstances, it is per-haps not surprising how many new teachersleave within the first few years on the job.

Professional development

Professional development is seen as the keyto making the reform a success and having itviewed in a more favourable light. Teachers needan environment in which they can work collabo-ratively. One of the advantages of team teachingis that it brings new perspectives into play, givingthe teacher the opportunity to review and toreflect on what works and what does not.

There is no single description of what thereform looks like or should look like. There is amisconception that teachers must learn “thebrick” by heart. It is more important for teachersto develop their own goals in order to feel com-fortable in the exercise of their professionalduties. The educational project is a means for aschool — teachers and parents and administra-tors together — to define its goals and imple-ment its vision using the principles found in thereform.

In the context of the reform, professionaldevelopment should be, to the greatest extentpossible, determined and implemented locally. Aprincipal can set the tone and the pace of aschool. Each school has to develop its own imageand its own way of experiencing its educationalproject.

Schools should try as much as possible touse professional development days to provide in-house training for their staff. It is cheaper thansending people to conferences and helps outthose without access to professional develop-ment budgets. Improvement of professional skillsis, or should be, an ongoing part of professionalstatus.

There is growing conviction that profes-sional development should be an obligatory con-dition of employment, but that the employershould cover the cost. (Teachers may be reticentabout taking courses during the summer, espe-cially if the employer does not cover the cost.)With every school expected to institute a pro-

fessional development plan, it should be possiblefor schools to pool their resources, includingfunding for Professional ImprovementCommittees (PIC) and Success Plans. The bud-gets for reform are also available to the schoolsfor releasing teachers to learn about reform-related matters. Professional development planswould be geared to the needs of each school.

The Education Act gives teachers the right tohave a say in their own professional develop-ment. Ideally, a school’s program should bedrawn up after discussion between teachers andthe administration. A problematic aspect of indi-vidual training for teachers is the absence of agroup dynamic. In a group setting, everyonecomes away with the same language. A climatethat reinforces further improvement is generatedthrough a common experience.

There are other systemic impediments toteacher participation in professional develop-ment activities. The high cost of providing accessto teachers in remote areas is a major issue.Videoconferencing may change this in the future.The more teachers participate, the more it willbecome a custom, a habit and an accepted pro-fessional requirement.

It may become easier for teachers to findways of setting their own professional develop-ment goals. Longer presence time for teacherswill allow for more meetings among teachersduring school hours. If universities follow thetrend and change their offerings to allow formore mini-certificates rather than full master’sprograms, there could be more teachers willing toregister for them.

The ABEE was told of several innovative pro-fessional development approaches currentlybeing undertaken.

• Bishop’s University made special arrange-ments with teachers from one school board, asit was difficult for them to register in a master’sdegree. A made-to-measure program wasdesigned, involving forty-four teachers.Professors came to the school to meet withthe teachers. The course and the networkingand motivation it generated were much appre-ciated by the teachers.

– 12 –

• McGill University’s Department of IntegratedStudies in Education and Western QuébecSchool Board have begun a collaborative pro-ject to create a teacher training partnershipwith hands-on in-house learning. To date,twenty-four McGill education students havespent their entire second semester on-sitein the Western Québec School Board whilestudying and doing their required placements.The partners see this as a beneficial relation-ship: students will have firsthand experienceliving in the community in which they workand study and will gain valuable knowledgeof school values and basic operations; theschool board will contribute to shaping thestudents’ cultural knowledge and will be able toobserve their aptitude for teaching.

• This past fall (2002) the Western QuébecSchool Board engaged Dr. Barrie Bennett fromthe Ontario Institute for Studies in Education(OISE), an affiliate of the University of Toronto.Bennett’s program, titled InstructionalIntelligence, is a five-year project to engageschool teams in the craft of expanding theirinstructional repertoire.

Using the book Beyond Monet, which wasauthored by Bennett and associate CarolRolheiser, the school teams are engaged in twodays of training at least three times a year. Inaddition, they participate in a summer institute.

The Instructional Intelligence programinvolves strategies, skills and tactics that teach-ers should have as part of their repertoire, regard-less of the teaching level. A combination of any ofthese research-proven approaches delivered bya skilled professional has identifiable significancein student learning. Only five other school boardsin Canada and Australia are involved in this pro-ject. The expectation is that as each schoolboard develops their data sets of instructionalmaterial, it is shared with the other boards in theproject.

Bennett models the approaches he is teach-ing by taking a participant's actual classroom, stu-dents and all, regardless of level, and adaptingthe teacher's lesson using the approaches ofInstructional Intelligence. Teachers are invitedto view Bennett in action, after which there aredebriefing sessions.

After three two-day visits in the first year,there is already tangible evidence of the impactthe program has made with participating schoolteams. Six new school teams have applied to par-ticipate, and Western Québec has extended aninvitation to the other English boards in theprovince, as well as the public boards in theOttawa region.

– 13 –

PART II

Special programs examined by theAdvisory Board on English Education

1. The Ministry’s “Agir Autrement” program tar-gets secondary schools with low socioeco-nomic status and low graduation scores.These schools draw up experimental and inno-vative projects to improve academic resultsand their students’ attitudes towards learning.The program has been piloted at James LyngHigh School (EMSB) with dramatically positiveresults.

2. The Ministry has offered sixteen schools theopportunity to become pilot schools for theimplementation of the reform in SecondaryCycle One. The implementation process hasbeen very encouraging at PierrefondsComprehensive High School (LBPSB) andVilla Maria (private school).

3. School initiative: Pontiac High School,Shawville, Québec (WQSB)

1. James Lyng High School (English-Montréal School Board)

The projects implemented in the school arefar reaching. Students have been divided intocore groups of 22 students each. There arethree core teachers at each level. These smallgroups allow teachers and students to get toknow each other. In order to effect the transitionfrom traditional teaching, it has been important tocreate an environment that is as friendly as pos-sible. While most middle-class students havealready acquired the social skills that a schoolwould like all students to possess, many of thestudents at James Lyng have weak interper-sonal skills in areas such as being able to shareinformation or work cooperatively. They haveproblems with self-esteem and difficulties inaccepting failure.

The environment must also be teacher-friendly since the same few teachers must estab-lish relationships with many students and providethose students with a consistent approach.Teachers at this school and in this program arevery enthusiastic and have felt empowered: theyhave been given the freedom to create a newenvironment in which both they and their stu-

dents can find more room and incentive for cre-ativity.

Rearranging the timetable has made moretime available for teachers to do planning. Every period has been extended by several minutes;students do not miss total instruction time but itaffords the possibility of freeing up a half-dayfor weekly staff meetings to plan, coordinate,etc., which is critical. Teachers are so enthusiasticthat they are contributing extra time of theirown.

In certain disciplines, students have beengrouped according to gender and these classesare working well. So often, students are con-fronted with stereotypical images of themselves.Their expectations are often limited to earlymotherhood, a small dead-end job and similarunambitious goals. The school is trying to fightsuch low expectations by helping students toaim higher and by giving them reasons and toolsto change the dynamic.

The “Agir Autrement/New Approaches, NewSolutions” (NANS) program that was piloted herehas allowed the school to bring about certainchanges in attitude in a short time period. It ledto the reorganization of school life and the imple-mentation of a project-based approach. Therehas also been the addition of support staff and ofchild-care and community workers who havebeen of enormous support to teachers and with-out whom teachers would have had more logis-tical and time-related problems.

The school provides a variety of other supportservices for students: laundry can be done atschool; community organizations provide in-school food programs. Teams of teachers workwith students to learn to understand a blue-collar environment and how it influences thestudents’ family life. When students start to seethemselves as having their own roles to play,they discover that they too have something tobring to the table.

“Agir Autrement” has allowed the school toorganize pedagogical days devoted to the dis-cussion of modalities and challenges. Awarenessof the need to change was very present before“Agir Autrement” came along. Ministry statisticshave shown only a 50% success rate for some

– 14 –

time. The latest statistics show a success rate of77% to 80%, due in great part to the students’newly-found belief in their ability to function.

“Agir Autrement” is well named. The money isbeing spent differently in different schools. AtJames Lyng, the focus has been on curriculumreform. In rural areas, since it is hard to getfamilies involved, money may be used to busparents and families to the schools.

The thrust of the reforms at James Lyng hasbeen to actively support teacher initiatives and towork through the structures to allow for those ini-tiatives to flourish. The school’s principal actively recruits teachers with specific qualities tobuild his school team, which he then supports atevery turn. His leadership has acted as a catalystfor dialogue: he provides the leadership to getthe message across and the resultant dynamic isdoing the rest.

Great efforts are being made to maintaincontact with parents. A liaison agent has beenhired thanks to “Agir” funding. Parents are con-tacted every two weeks and house calls aremade, when necessary. Parents are encouragedto visit the school to see for themselves whattheir children are producing. The school wasvery happy this year when 75% of parents attended a meeting on a particularly cold night.Parents who show an interest in their children’sschool life have a noticeably beneficial effect ontheir children’s attitude and performance.

James Lyng has received $400 000 of “AgirAutrement” money each year for the past threeyears. Two hundred and forty students areinvolved in the program; it has not been possibleto involve everyone. Since much has been donewith the extra funding, the school is now askingitself what happens when this source dries up.While there are other programs available whichcould fund some of the current activities, it is alsohoped that the results of the experience will beconsidered so worthwhile that activities that havebeen generated by the extra “Agir” financed staffwill be integrated into everyone’s work plan.

The school has made great efforts to involveother community partners, such as communitygroups and local employers. As an example, the

school invited the Women’s Y to introduce itskickboxing program into school activities. Theprogram is designed to give adolescent girlsself-esteem and is enjoying considerable successwith the often-troubled 14- to 17- year-oldyoungsters. Activities in the school have gener-ated energy outside the school. Ex-Lyngersremain supportive and many have even con-tributed to funding.

The program’s curriculum designer was for-merly the coordinator of the school’s literacyprogram. Forty-five per cent of the school popu-lation is coded (some degree of learning difficultyor disability). All are integrated into regular classes. Teachers need strategies to be able tointeract well in the classroom. As an example,some parts of the Secondary IV curriculum arebeing introduced to students as early asSecondary II and III so that they are familiar withthe material when they get to Secondary IV andhave to master it and write exams in it. The taskof the curriculum designer is not to modify thecurriculum but to adapt or redistribute it to easethe learning difficulties it can present.

Since many teachers are retiring, eighty percent of today’s teaching staff have come to theschool only in the last three years. For the prin-cipal, this presents a plus and a minus. The newpeople are a blessing; on the other hand, it is evi-dent that very few of the realities occurring in hisclassrooms are being taught in university.

There is also much concern among teachersin Secondary IV and V about how the reform canbe applied in the absence of a new evaluation policy. Traditional modes of evaluation are con-sidered inappropriate to the reform. The newinstruments and instances of evaluation wouldonly be considered valid by teachers if they wereto allow students to demonstrate competencies.

The school is working hard with teachers inSecondary I to avoid a difficult transition from ele-mentary school. Already teachers are noticingthat students are becoming much moreautonomous by the second half of their firstyear. They are responding better to parts of thecurriculum that traditionally proved difficult;ancient history is a course that was alwaysreserved for “others” but since they are now

– 15 –

exposed to it as an obligatory subject, they are jumping in with a certain enthusiasm.Shakespeare has become of interest becauseit is “so weird.” By engaging students’ currentinterests (what did Michael Jordan study when hewas at university?) new doors can be opened,since the competency-based curriculum is open-ended.

To the sceptics who ask whether a project-based approach to curriculum is sufficient and ifa wider foundation of knowledge, a commonbase shared across the board is not an essentialpart of schooling, the advocates of the JamesLyng approach argue that it is working. The schoolhas existed for 37 years and throughout thattime emphasis on content was at the heart of theprograms. The results were that students, lackingmodels and support, were dropping out in largenumbers and more than half were not graduatingat all. Evidently, the system was not workingwell for the students.

Now the school is working at getting aheadusing the means at its disposal based on theprinciple that progress is unlikely if based onthe continuation of what has not worked in thepast. The project-based approach has produceda 75% success rate. It is attempting to generatethe student’s ability to access information, ratherthan just retain it. For the coded students withlearning problems that they will take throughlife, learning to use technology is an extremelyuseful tool. Knowledge bases and databases areavailable to these students. Dropouts in earlieryears had no such learning aids.

The educators at James Lyng have embracedthe reform; the “Agir Autrement” program hasallowed them to break their school out of themould of constant failure and their students tofind new interest and purpose in “getting throughschool.” They had little to lose and they feelthey and their students have gained much.

2. Pierrefonds Comprehensive High School (Lester-B.-PearsonSchool Board)

Last year, there was a vote taken among theteaching staff as to whether or not to become apilot school for the reform. The teachers were

told that there would be additional money tocover the costs of release time for reform activ-ities. An Implementation Committee was formedin September with members from the junior andsenior sectors of the school. All teachers, eventhose on the verge of retirement, were encour-aged to read the QEP “brick.” An informationsession for teachers was held with a speakerfrom another school board providing backgroundimplementation information. Activities for teach-ers took place in the afternoon to familiarizethem with cross-curricular competencies.Teachers were grouped according to their teach-ing subjects and worked on the elaboration ofcompetencies and goals. At the end of the day,each group was asked to define its priorities.

The two principal priorities that emergedwere time release for planning and sufficientfinancing for implementation. A retreat was heldin February to examine team teaching. The schoolis in the process of looking into how to adjust theteaching schedule for next year to allow teacherstime to plan and coordinate their concertedefforts. At present, it is mostly the Middle Schoolthat is involved but soon all sectors will bebrought into the process. Teachers have begun tocooperate on materials and to share responsibilityfor expanding the scope of the pilot project.

Villa Maria (Private school)

This year, each of the school’s five levelshas a team of teachers with a project manager.Participation has been voluntary but most teach-ers have volunteered. Last year, there was timefor them to brainstorm and suggest projects;for example, a movie made by Secondary II stu-dents, a puppet show produced by Secondary IVstudents, a project on physics and economics inSecondary V. Each project had to be approved bythe principal to ensure that it fitted into theschool’s overall planning.

One project, the Secondary II movie, is nowunderway. It requires a lot of work for the teacherwho manages the team, who organizes work-loads and types up the documents. The workinggroup of Secondary II teachers consists of historyteachers who are responsible for the content onthe history of ancient Egypt, English language artsteachers who work with the students on

– 16 –

scriptwriting, the French teacher who helps stu-dents research roles and produce descriptionswhich must be written in French, the scienceteacher who helps students learn about cameraangles, and explains optics and the finer techni-cal points of photography.

The question arises as to the effects of timetaken up by filmmaking on the required subjectmatter. For instance, how does the mathematicsteacher, who is also the project manager, makeup the time she is not spending in the class-room? The teachers involved in the project, all ofwhom have a good deal of teaching experience,feel they can better manage their time now thanwhen they were beginning teachers. They arefinding ways of covering the curriculum require-ments even though the regular course loads arestill in place because reform implementation hasnot yet been officially set in motion.

All the teachers involved in these projects areenthusiastic about what students are learningfrom each other through teamwork. The processtakes time, but its positive effects continue todevelop as interest is high and the collectivedetermination to succeed continues to growrather than lessen throughout the academic year.Teachers see the project as a luxury not availablein regular classes and as a plus for them ratherthan a drain. They are confident they will be ableto cover the parts of curriculum not included inthe project per se. For instance, since the Englishlanguage arts teacher’s contribution concernscompetencies involving script and writing skills,the study of novels will be taken up in regularclass time.

At the end of the academic year, an assess-ment of the Secondary II pilot project will deter-mine the size and scope of future projects. Areasto be studied are adjustment of workloads, gen-erating the energy and the interest among teach-ers and students to continue developing pro-jects, the incipient dangers of a project not beingspecific enough for academic program needsand the questions raised about the overall eval-uation of the learning generated by such a pro-ject.

In the movie project, the film itself does notget marked but the various steps in its productionare. The students must produce materials relat-ed to the project, which will be marked in history, in English language arts, etc. The eval-uation of cross-curricular competencies is lessevident as is ensuring equity of assessmentbetween different projects. Not all projects will beof the same calibre and assessment will have tobe different for each child, unless some satis-factory method of group assessment can beworked out. Looking at individual students’ han-dling of the relevant aspects of putting a projecttogether — not simply its content — needs time,attention and measurement methods on the partof teachers. Measuring cross-disciplinary com-petencies is an area that the individual teachercannot cover alone, for it needs close collabora-tion between teachers.

Teachers already embarked on the reformsee the necessity of changing the curriculum inorder to help students change themselves. Withthe current curriculum still in place, teachersare providing most of the structure for thesepilot projects. To be able to feel comfortable in areform environment, a teacher has to know thetextbook really well and periodically go through achecklist of what remains to be covered. Thoughthas to be put into assessing competencies andinto developing new ideas of evaluation. Teachersin secondary school cannot as yet read elemen-tary school report cards. If faced with a decisionabout whether or not a student can handle aspecial project, the secondary school teachermay be at a loss.

For the teachers consulted, the biggest chal-lenge facing implementation of the reform inthe secondary sector is time: finding time formarking, supervision, the learning of new skillsand how to work in teams.

3. Pontiac High School (Western Québec School Board)

Pontiac High School has taken a page outof the reform book and set up a student-orientedprogram that suits the needs of its school pop-ulation in the areas of motivation, academic

– 17 –

– 18 –

improvement, acquisition of competencies andoverall school improvement. The program inquestion is an ambitious project to turn out grad-uates who are qualified and employable welders.

Why welding? Because it offers good employ-ment possibilities and the necessary teachingexpertise was already present in the school.Successful students receive a certificate issuedby the Canadian Welding Bureau with which agraduate can find an entry-level job in a weldingshop and be eligible for admission to a full-scalediploma of vocational studies (DVS). The pro-gram has received support from the schoolboard; the local Lions’ Club donated the moneyfor the purchase of equipment. At present, thereare eight work stations, costing $75 000, whichis far less than the average cost of such normalvocational training shops which can rise to over$500 000, putting a lot of financial onus on theschool board.

To remain in the program, which is consid-ered a prestige position, students must maintaingood academic standing or be obliged to returnto the regular academic program. The target setfor the academic performance of each student is,in effect, a pilot project in mentoring. Soon allsecondary students will be involved in similartarget setting.

Mentoring is particularly important in schoolswhere parental backing for academic successmay be limited. Mentoring can also help in under-standing the students’ target “numbers,” i.e.how to understand the qualitative differencebetween a 75 or 77 in history or English lan-guage arts. The program, however, does not setgoals by numbers. It is the students themselveswho like to see their progress in terms of num-bers. The actual onset of the reform may bringabout a paradigm shift towards a set of compe-tencies. In the meantime, numerical marks arewhat denote success or failure. The school’smission is unequivocal: the school must ensurethat all students achieve. Every student has oneor two meetings with a school administrator.

To facilitate a shift towards the culture ofreform, the school moved to a team model ofteaching to break up teacher isolation andencourage collaboration. Adjustment to sched-uling made this possible. The course loads of theteachers who have been freed up for the pilotproject have been spread amongst the remainingstaff. All staff members are contributing to theproject, some by teaching more periods. Today,there are three teachers working with groups ofstudents on a pilot project. Emphasis will now beplaced on cross-curricular projects with the stu-dents learning to work in groups.

– 19 –

PART III

Recommendations

This report focuses on the role of teachers inthe reform process and practice. Whereas thepedagogical and school governance principleson which the reform of elementary and sec-ondary school are based have found wide accep-tance, the practical implementation of the newcurriculum at the secondary school level is ofgrowing concern. The implementation plan as itnow stands leaves more questions unansweredthan practices clearly defined. It is perceived asbeing both too complicated and too imprecise.

Much of the same kind of criticism was beingvoiced when the new elementary school cur-riculum was about to be implemented and theimplementation plan was considered indeci-pherable to the point of needing extensiverethinking and rewriting. The implementationdocument was sent back to the drawing board.Since being simplified and clarified, the blue-print is proving to be encouragingly workable forelementary school.

The substantially more complex content of asecondary school curriculum requires a greaterdegree of precision and attention to pedagogicalpriorities. The working documents for the imple-mentation of the new curriculum at the sec-ondary school level leave many basic pedagogi-cal and organizational questions unanswered; itshould not be surprising that teachers are con-cerned, sceptical or in denial.

In the opinion of the Ministry’s Commissiondes programmes d'études, the program in ques-tion “lacks clarity.”1 It suffers from “imprecisionand a persistent incapacity” to define or describethe relationship between the learning of specificand required subject matter and the acquisition ofthe broader-based “competencies” called for inthe reform. The problem of how this mixed butnot yet matched dichotomy is to be evaluatedremains unresolved. There continues to be wide-spread concern about the fundamental questionof which takes precedence, specific knowledge(subject matter) or the development of attitudi-

nal competencies, as how these concepts com-plement each other are neither articulated norweighted. And as the Commission points out,teachers need the program to be “unequivocallycomprehensible.”

Le Conseil supérieur de l’éducation has alsovoiced its disapproval, not about the principlesunderlying the reform but about the dangers oflaunching such an important and fundamentalreworking of the school system in the class-room in such an ad hoc fashion.2

The ABEE believes that all parties — theMinistry, schools boards, teachers, parents,unions, administrators — must develop com-mon strategies to ensure that ALL teachers havea sound understanding of the new curriculumreform, based on a common language and acommon perspective of the imperatives of thereform.

In view of these reservations, but believingthat the concepts underlying the reform are ped-agogically sound and institutionally workable andthat the successful implementation of the reformwill, in the end, depend on the constructive par-ticipation of teachers, the ABEE recommends:

11. That the implementation of the reform atthe secondary school level not be undulypostponed.

12. That the implementation pilot projects nowunderway not be abandoned and thatschools wishing to undertake similar imple-mentation trials be given the resources to doso.

13. That pilot programs in Secondary I beextended through Secondary V so as tounderline the ongoing purpose of the exper-imentation

14. That the Ministry make it a priority to clarify,in conjunction with practising university edu-cators, the meaning and scope of “cross-cur-ricular competencies.”

15. That public discussion of the potential ben-efits of a rigorous yet flexible reform cur-riculum be encouraged.

1. http://www.cpe.gouv.qc.ca/synth_progform_ensseccycle1_a.htm2. http://www.cse.gouv.qc.ca/pdfs/abA-refo.pdf

– 20 –

16. That the Ministry, in conjunction with prac-tising educators, define and describe theappropriate methods for evaluating the cross-curricular competencies that are required ofstudents by the reformed curriculum.

17. That the Ministry, the school boards andschool administrators recognize that beforethe reform can benefit students, the teach-ers from whom they learn must have under-stood its requirements. To this effect, pre-sentations on the experiences in pilotschools should become mandatoryPedagogical Day professional developmentactivities.

18. That the evaluation of competencies beingexplored in the various pilot programs beshared with other schools as examples ofhow the new approach can be dovetailedwith the acquisition of subject matter.

19. That, for the purpose of encouraging col-laborative approaches to the teaching ofspecific disciplines, it would be helpful ifsubject departments were grouped intobroader units by cycle.

10. That school boards, school administratorsand unions recognize the necessity of givingteachers in-school time and opportunity toshare their pedagogical preoccupations andwork-related concerns with their colleagues.As teachers’ in-school time is beingincreased, some significant part of it couldbe allocated to periods for teachers to worktogether.

11. That in the areas of curriculum design andadaptation — areas in which most teachershave little experience or expertise — schoolteams enlist teachers in the role of rotatingin-school coordinators and, when neces-sary, outside experts.

12. That school boards become more activelyinvolved in both initial and ongoing teachereducation.

13. That, to anchor curriculum design projects inthe short run, links be established by schoolboards and schools with university facul-ties/departments of education. Amongst theactivities to be examined are assigningappropriately qualified education students,under the supervision of their professors tohelp teachers in schools with the changefrom a positivist to a constructivist approach

in the classroom and with the evaluation ofcurriculum content.

14. That, using the lessons learned in theprocess of reform implementation about theimportance of curriculum design on teachingpractices, initial teacher education in futureinclude appropriate knowledge and experi-ence in the area of curriculum design.

15. That school boards and schools be giventhe option of reallocating funds from variousbudget categories for the purpose of engag-ing part-time staff to assist teachers in curriculum design and the development ofpedagogic materials.

16. That school boards be mandated to carryout continuing teacher in-service training inorder for teachers to integrate specializa-tion and pedagogy under the supervisionof experts.

17. That each school’s pedagogical programshould allow for teachers to be involved indetermining their own professional devel-opment.

18. That days set aside in the school calendar forprofessional development be used for theiroriginal purpose. Each school calendarshould give priority to the implementation ofthe reform and to professional developmentneeds throughout the school year

19. That the evaluation of teachers and principalsinclude a professional and personal growthplan and goal setting.

20. That the Ministry develop a policy that wouldprovide incentive for teachers to updatetheir professional qualifications periodically.

21. That the Ministry and school boards encour-age the use of technology, including Websites on reform issues for developing self-guided programs for teachers’ professionaldevelopment.

22. That the Ministry and school boards examinethe issue of the professional upgrading ofsupply teachers whose initial teacher trainingdid not expose them to the concepts of thereform.

23. That secondary schools with over 500 stu-dents be invited to incorporate into theirprograms courses that expose their stu-dents to vocational and career options andlife experiences.

– 21 –

Appendix I

Individuals Consulted by the Advisory Boardon English Education

2001-2003

Joce-Lyne Biron Secretary/Coordinator, Comité d’orientation de la formation du personnelenseignant (COPFE)

Martine Boivin Comité d’orientation de la formation du personnel enseignant (COPFE)

Rob Buttars Place Cartier Adult Centre (LBPSB)

Pompea Cardone John F. Kennedy Business Centre (EMSB)

Carolyn Clarke Pierrefonds Comprehensive High School (LBPSB)

Wayne Commeford Principal, James Lyng High School (EMSB)

Carmela Dilorio John F. Kennedy Business Centre (EMSB)

Michael Dubeau Principal, Pontiac High School (WQSB)

J.-P. Dubois Pontiac High School (WQSB)

Jean Fillatre Partnership for School Improvement

Denyse Gagnon-Messier Présidente, Conseil pédagogique interdisciplinaire du Québec (CPIQ)

Anne Heenan The Study, Montréal

Ronald Hughes Quebec Provincial Association of Teachers (QPAT)

Tania Journeau Massey-Vanier High School (ETSB)

Patricia Lamarre Groupe de recherche sur l’ethnicité et l’adaptation au pluralisme en édu-cation (GREAPE)

Kate LeMaistre McGill Faculty of Education

Marina Lesenko Villa Maria School

Christopher Lyons Student, McGill Graduate School of Library Science

Marilyn MacLean Place Cartier Adult Centre (LBPSB)

Marie McAndrew Groupe de recherche sur l’ethnicité et l’adaptation au pluralisme en édu-cation (GREAPE)

– 22 –

Judy McBride Lecturer, McGill (Education); Teacher, Macdonald-Cartier (RSB)

Kim McGrath Teacher (RSB)

Wendy Moore Pontiac High School (WQSB)

Bill Nevins St. George’s School

Kevin O’Donnell Télé-Québec

Michel Pagé Groupe de recherche sur l’ethnicité et l’adaptation au pluralisme en édu-cation (GREAPE)

Kerri Payette Lakeside Academy (LBPSB)

Ron Silverstone Association of Administrators of English Schools of Québec (AAESQ)

Marie-Claire Skrutkowska Macdonald-Cartier High School (RSB)

William Smith Groupe de recherche sur l’ethnicité et l’adaptation au pluralisme en édu-cation (GREAPE)

Don Stevens Pontiac High School (WQSB)

Carol Swiston Principal, Royal Oak School (RSB)

Pierre Weber President, Quebec Provincial Association of Teachers (QPAT)

Purpose and scope

11. This Code sets out the ethical principlesand rules of conduct applicable to the mem-bers of the Commission de l'éducation enlangue anglaise (hereinafter referred to asthe "Advisory Board").

Ethical principles

12. The mandate of the Advisory Board is toadvise the Minister of Education on all mat-ters relating to the educational services pro-vided in English elementary and secondaryschools. For these purposes, the membersof the Advisory Board shall perform theirduties in the public interest and act impar-tially and objectively, as is incumbent uponany person who participates in the accom-plishment of the mission of the State.

13. The rules of conduct provided herein do notlist all appropriate actions or describe allinappropriate actions. The members of theAdvisory Board must perform their dutiesto the best of their abilities and knowledge,with diligence, application, integrity, hon-esty and judgment, in accordance with lawand in keeping with the public interest.

Rules of professional conduct

Discretion

14. The members of the Advisory Board arebound to discretion in regard to facts orinformation that come to their knowledgein the performance of their duties and are atall times bound to maintain the confiden-tiality of information thus received.

Dealings with the public

15. The chair of the Advisory Board is the onlymember who may act or speak on behalfof the Advisory Board, except where by del-

egation another member is expressly man-dated to act or speak on behalf of theAdvisory Board. By tradition, individualsauthorized to speak on behalf of the AdvisoryBoard do not comment on the news or theMinister's statements but explain only thepositions of the Advisory Board.

Neutrality

16. In the performance of their duties, the mem-bers of the Advisory Board must act withoutbeing influenced by any partisan politicalconsiderations or any pressure group.

Political activities

17. The chair of the Advisory Board must informthe Secretary-General of the Conseil exécutifbefore running for an elected public office.

18. The chair of the Advisory Board with a termof office of fixed duration shall resign fromhis or her position if he or she is elected toa full-time public office and agrees to theelection.

Conflict of interest

19. The members of the Advisory Board shallavoid placing themselves, in the perfor-mance of their duties, in any situation involv-ing a real, potential or apparent conflictbetween the members' personal interestand the public interest.

10. The members of the Advisory Board maynot use for their own benefit or for the ben-efit of a third party confidential informationobtained in the performance of their duties,unless expressly so authorized by theAdvisory Board.

11. To prevent conflict of interest, no contract orother form of financial contribution may bemade by the Advisory Board to obtain ser-vices from its members, except for the

– 23 –

APPENDIX II

CODE OF ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

(adopted March 21, 2002)

17. The chair of the Advisory Board shall beresponsible for the implementation andapplication of this Code. He or she shallensure that all members of the AdvisoryBoard comply with the ethical principles andthe rules of professional conduct set out inthe Code, and shall inform the competentauthority of any cases of violation of thoseprinciples or rules.

18. Any member of the Advisory Board accusedof a violation of an ethical principle or a ruleof professional conduct set out in this Codemay be temporarily relieved of his or herduties by the competent authority, in orderto allow an appropriate decision to be madein an urgent situation or in a presumed caseof serious misconduct.

19. The competent authority shall inform themember concerned of the violation of whichhe or she is accused, of the possible penal-ty and of the fact that he or she may, withinseven days, provide the authority with his orher observations and, if he or she sorequests, be heard regarding the allegedviolation.

20. Where it is concluded that the member hasviolated an ethical principle or a rule of pro-fessional conduct set out in this Code, thecompetent authority shall impose a penalty.

21. The penalty that may be imposed on themember is a reprimand, a suspension with-out remuneration for a maximum of threemonths in the case of an administrator ofstate, or dismissal. Any penalty imposedshall be presented in writing and give thereasons.

– 24 –

remuneration to which the chair is entitled inrelation to the performance of his or herduties.

12. The members of the Advisory Board maynot solicit or accept a favour or an undueadvantage for themselves or for a third party.

13. The chair of the Advisory Board may not,on penalty of dismissal, have a direct orindirect interest in an enterprise or associ-ation the nature of whose activities entails aconflict between the personal interest ofthe chair and the performance of his or herduties.

14. Any other member of the Advisory Boardwho has a direct or indirect interest in anagency, enterprise or association entailing aconflict between his or her personal interestand that of the Advisory Board shall, onpenalty of dismissal, reveal the interest inwriting to the chair of the Advisory Boardand, where applicable, shall withdraw fromthe meeting whenever a subject on theagenda could place the member in a situa-tion of conflict of interest.

Period after the holding of office

15. The members of the Advisory Board whohave completed their term of office shallnot disclose confidential information obtainedin the performance of their duties on theAdvisory Board or use for their own benefit orfor the benefit of a third party informationunavailable to the public that they obtainedin performing their duties.

Application

16. The authority competent to act in the case ofthe violation of an ethical principle or a ruleof professional conduct set out in this Codeshall be the Associate Secretary-General forSenior Positions of the Ministère du Conseilexécutif.