Kraftwerk posted:

So instead of tilting at the windmills on Facebook- I thought I’d ask you guys to help me brainstorm some ideas on how we can build a homegrown progressive movement here in Canada.

I’m talking about networks similar to how we have momentum in the uk or the Justice Democrat’s, DSA and our revolution in the US. How does one start building a movement and winning over followers for this idea?
Would it require us to have a progressive network similar to TYT in the USA?

infernal machines posted:

Teachers' Union Thug is one hell of a name.

Also, as someone who works with OSSTF, lmao.

Pixelante posted:

In practice, it really doesn't work this way. Even if Jimmy's designation brings in funding, it's not tied to him--which schools are very quick to point out. Of course, they use the argument the reverse way too: your kid's designation doesn't bring funding, so of course you can't have an EA 1-on-1 despite problems. I cannot count how many times I've had either argument while supporting parents in IEP meetings.

Last I heard, the new model is under review and the soonest anything will change is September 2020. I'd love to talk more about it, though. Hit me up at pixelant3@gmail.com if you want to talk shop.

quote:

Because of our strong economy, more families are choosing to make B.C. their home. Our public schools are growing, with more kids than ever entering our classrooms. We acted quickly to ensure school construction projects got underway, with more than $1 billion invested since September 2017. This historic funding will add thousands of new seats, so we can get kids out of portables in some of our fastest-growing communities.

By hiring 4,000 new teachers and 1,000 new educational assistants, students are also now benefiting from smaller class sizes. I often hear from parents who tell me they see a huge difference in their child’s learning development because they have more one-on-one time from their teachers.

Pixelante posted:

This year the big fight has been schools sending kids with disabilities home because the supports aren't in place for them. It violates the School Act, but it's happening in every single school district in BC.

Falstaff posted:

I'd be interested if you're willing to share. Just starting my teaching career now (finished my final evaluation today, in fact), and this is a topic of great interest to me.

quote:

[Prevalence funding is] funding allocated via predictive, statistical modelling based on population-wide prevalence rates instead. Such a model already exists in some provinces. For example, in Ontario, a large part of special education funding is distributed according to a “black box” statistical model that takes older provincial prevalence rates and tries to guess how many children in a given district will have special needs, based on chosen demographic information such as family income.”

Don't let the word “predictive” fool you. From a policy-making perspective, predictive funding creates new pressures and inequities. It doesn't mean meeting students' needs.

- In the current system, identification plays a key role in special education funding in classrooms and schools, despite funding ultimately not following the student. Under a predictive system, no link exists between students and funds. Greater pressure to ration funds results. No targeted funding means kids lose out and teachers burn out.
- Depending on how good the predictive model is, some districts will win, others will lose relative to their actual needs.
- A lot of identification will stop. If districts don't need to identify students to get funding, then parents with the means to get identifications will do so. It's possible their children will get services and others will not, perpetuating further inequities.
- We know teachers are already incredible advocates for getting services and supports for their students with special needs, but they will have to become even greater advocates.

Ontario and Nova Scotia already use statistical modelling to allocate funding for inclusive education. Economist Hugh Mackenzie summarizes major concerns in a report to the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario:

“The breaking of the link between funding and needs has had profound implications for students, parents, teachers, and special education administrators. For students and parents there is no longer a link between needs and funding that can serve as a guide to available services. For teachers, there is no longer any link between special education needs identified in a classroom setting and additional resources to address those needs. The role of special education administrators has been transformed from one of enabling access to needed services to a gatekeeping role of rationing scarce resources and cost containment.”

Pixelante posted:

Thank you. This must have taken you some time to assemble. I'm still interested in connecting if you ever feel comfortable emailing me--we might be able to help each other out. I'm also in the E/N Discord pretty often.

quote:

“... From the outset, unfortunately, the [funding model] review process [that recommended prevalence] has appeared to have serious flaws. For starters, Fleming appointed a review panel of senior bureaucrats to conduct a funding-formula review but didn’t include any representation from the BCTF, the B.C. School Trustees Association, or parent groups on the panel. Although senior bureaucrats have vast knowledge and experience, they tend to get to where they are by not rocking any boats or telling those in power things they don’t want to hear…

“The review ignored the biggest issue of all: there isn’t enough money to go around. Full stop. Spending months trying to figure out how to reslice a too-small pie will only create winners and losers. Instead, they should have done a review to determine what it would actually cost to provide optimal learning conditions and opportunities for all students.”

Arcsquad12 posted:

As long as our governments focus solely on surviving the four year election cycle the only thing we can expect I'd short term promises while kicking the ever growing ball of climate and economic problems down the road for the next government to ignore in favour of shirt term promises.

Leofish posted:

Holy poo poo they are so dumb

https://twitter.com/CTVNews/status/1123272287954796544

THC posted:

the BC NDP cabinet is good though

quote:

UPDATE: Here's some more insider info from the Ministry of Educ as was talking with someone working in there and a heads up. Basically, their intention is to drag out the bargaining process as long as possible into the following next year expecting the teachers to eventually strike instead of trying to settle right away by end of June. Thus seen from the late bargaining start and stalling tactics.

Then later they'll say they tried to bargain in good faith by giving time and dragging out the process. They may try to throw some breadcrumbs here and there as an incentive to try to drag out the bargaining process. Prevalence funding and cuts to the arts, music, etc. electives are coming. Rob Fleming has been a dismal failure so far. Remember during the last strike, on TV, the NDP were all going out to the picket lines supporting the teachers.

Now, they are about to do something that the BC Liberals have never done before and could be on the verge of doing so, which is to backstab their very supporters and backers, the teachers. Very unfortunate. I would suggest the teachers and public to contact their MLA's this month and prepare to save up and go on strike this summer or September as the ministry isn't even bothering to listen and planning to carry out the BC Liberal/BCPSEA agenda unfortunately.

quote:

The BCTF Bargaining Team needs your help

With only seven weeks to go until the end of the school year and the expiration of our current collective agreement, your provincial bargaining team needs your help. We need to take action now, so we don’t have to escalate later.

The Bargaining Team needs you to email your local NDP MLA and ask them to get the current demands for concessions off the table and increase the funding available to get a deal.

If you don’t have an NDP MLA, you can email the Premier.

Currently, the BC Public School Employers’ Association has made proposals that would undo our court win on class size, composition, and specialist staffing ratios. This would mean layoffs in more than half of BC’s school districts.

The specifics are still confidential, but members can access them by reading the bargaining updates on the MyBCTF portal.

If we’re going to get good deal by the end of June, the Bargaining Team needs your help to convince MLAs to pressure their team to change course and increase the funding.

There’s a simple online form ready for you to send that email. It’s loaded up and ready to go with a standard message. You can also add your own story before hitting “send.” The Minister of Education and the Minister of Finance will be copied on your email as well.

Let’s show this government that teachers stand behind our Bargaining Team.

Send the email today and let’s get those concessions off the table!

Glen Hansman
BCTF President

infernal machines posted:

Oh, word. Yeah, I'm all for Orange Crush 2019.

Maybe at some point before October Jagmeet will realize there's an election on and get in front of a camera somewhere.

quote:

Now, former Vancouver School Board chair and public education advocate Patti Bacchus says she’s hearing from multiple sources close to the bargaining that the [class size and composition] issue is once again front and centre.

“I think everyone knew it was still going to be a tough round of bargaining with the mandate government has put into place for public sector agreements, but I hear that it was rougher than expected,” she told CKNW’s Lynda Steele Show.

“What I’m hearing is there’s some real frustration that what is being tabled on the employers’ side would essentially kind of nullify what the teachers won in their epic court case in terms of stronger language around class size and composition in many of the restored agreements. And so there’s a lot of fear.”

Bacchus said the language being used refers to “flexibility” around class sizes, and one idea being floated would be to have a standard ratio of specialist teaching positions imposed across the province.

B.C. Finance Minister Carole James rejected the assertion that the province was asking for concessions from teachers.

“No one around the table is looking at concessions. We’re looking at change, positive change for kids. Positive change for teachers, making sure we improve the system,” James said Tuesday.

ARACHTION posted:

Thanks for that post, for what it’s worth, I emailed my mla after reading your post. Really looks like we’re going to have to strike in Sept?

THC posted:

K-12 is conspicuously absent as one of the predefined options on the BC NDP's annual survey asking supporters what we want the government to prioritize. I used the "other" and comment boxes to say they should implement teachers' recommendations on class size and composition. I have also contacted my MLA for whatever good that does.

Defenistrator posted:

It's got the wvurst name but the bvest food

flakeloaf posted:

Say hi to the tens of millions of humans who go there to escape unlivable conditions where their homes used to be.

vyelkin posted:

Rime posted:

Whoa, this is awesome. This has all the data I've been trying to find on statscan for weeks, in one convenient place! Considerable thanks, this is really fantastic.

E:

Postess with the Mostest posted:

She warned us yesterday

https://twitter.com/CBCTheNational/status/1143237354292781056?s=19

infernal machines posted:

Not to go all here, but do you think y'all could stop calling for the death of public figures before Lowtax gets a visit from the RCMP?

Pleads posted:

That's not it, juggalos are good now.

infernal machines posted:

You're surprised the ONDP can't capitalize on the simplest, most obvious ways of connecting with people and getting their brand out there?

painted into a coroner posted:

https://twitter.com/CBC/status/1145685990247411716

Normy posted:

This is the most progressive platform the NDP has put out in recent memory.

Helsing posted:

2) You're overestimating the freedom of maneuvre for rank and file MPs. In our current parliamentary system the leader is all that matters. MPs are creatures of the leader, typically with less authority than the party leaders staffers. Furthermore, MPs have fought so hard to get where they are that they became naturally conservative. They think that after everything they struggled to get where they are it must have all been in service of something, so they make compromises. They stay quiet. They get comfortable. They become used to towing the party line. They start to really think that whatever compromises they made to preserve their career were actually necessary for the sake of the movement.

Put a great activist into an MP's seat and all you did was remove a really good activist. The idea that individual MPs can go against the wishes of their party just doesn't reflect reality anymore. All that energy you're dumping into getting good NDP candidates elected is just reducing the supply of activists and increasing the supply of loyal NDP foot soldiers.

Jan posted:

Guillotines are a political instrument!



e: Joking aside, if an allegedly pro-labour NDP government isn't willing to negotiate in good faith, who do you think would? (I haven't closely been following your updates, mind you.)

Weird BIAS posted:

Also my mom is seriously considering the possibility of striking for the first time in her 30 odd year career as a teacher because of how scared she is of the UCP, and my stepdad is suggesting they do it with the nurses union.