jlw

I think that the sheer number of GCSEs that students take nowadays is why they are struggling in some basic areas. Most students are sitting 12 or 13 GCSE subjects. That is alot! The skills being taught in schools today are much different to those in the 80's, and the core subjects are arguably being sacrificed.

Regarding the UK/Canada equivalents: I asked about this when my paperwork was being checked. The response I was told was that it had nothing to do with age but was based on a curriculum comparison in maths, english and science. (By the way, I wasn't 16 until grade 11. Any student born from July - December is only 15 in grade 10 in many of the provinces.)

Juliew

Hi there,

I must say that I am surprised by your comments. I am constantly feeling lucky that I was educated in Canada. Although I think the British system was probably good in the 80s (if you were a decent student) it is in pretty bad shape at the moment. If you don't believe the OPEC results take a look at the number of teaching positions available. The pay is not that bad in comparison to many jobs; it the conditions.

Both my husband and I possess a business degree from respected universities; mine in Canada and his in the UK. I believe that our education is comparable. My was longer and broader, while his was more streamed and more stressful. We both went to high school in the late 80s and early 90s.

I would not ever say that the British system was better than the Canadian. It is difficult to make comparisons as students start their education in the UK younger. Furthermore, the UK focuses on different skills. Thus a student studing A levels will only take 3 courses whereas a Canadian will often take 8. Thus you cannot compare a UK A level math to a Canadian Grade 12 math. You must look at the entire picture. Additionally, Canadian schooling is not as streamed as the UK. This makes a big different. Finally, the focus of the two is quite different. Canadian education focuses on many skills; not just academics. I am still completely shocked by the lack of group work being done in UK schools. Being able to work in a group is such an important skill - probably more important than being able to do advanced calculus.

Anyways, having taught in the UK system, but raised in Canada I could never send my children (when I have them) to school in Britain. This is not only because the system in the UK is in a terrible mess and the behaviour shocking but also because it is so class based and does not focus on the qualities that I value. At the same time many people, especially Britons would possibly disagree.

Tom Masters

Hi Julie

I was quite surprised by your comments regarding group work. I trained in Scotland (4 year B.Ed degree as opposed to the 1 year B.Ed degree here in Ontario - still don't know how anyone can call a one year course a degree??). Anyway, I found that there was a huge amount of differentiation and group work taking place in the UK. From my limited experience so far in Ontario, I have found that teachers do not differentiate work very often - in my children's classes, the teachers virtually always use whole class teaching and tend to teach to the middle. I have questioned whether differentiation is even taught in teacher's college over here?

However, in saying all of that, my children really like their school here and I'm sure that when they graduate from high school they will be just as able to go into a career of their choosing whether they are in Britain or Canada. I'm sure you will agree that while teachers play an important role, it is the parents and the students themselves who determine how successful a student will be.

I think a lot of the confusion that occurs with people moving between the UK and Canada is caused because children in the UK start full time school a year earlier than Canadian children. On the one hand I have been frustrated at my daughter's lack of progress (she is in SK) compared to what she would be doing by now if she were in the UK (she would be in Year 1 in England and Primary 2 in Scotland). However, she is happy and I know she will catch up. In the meantime, I do some extra work with her as I know she is capable of much more than she is getting right now.

I agree with you about the teaching to the test that occurs in the UK though. There does seem to be more pressure for everyone - students, parents and teachers. I certainly didn't like the government's Big Brother dictatorship approach towards the education system while I was there.

It is very hard to compare the two countries properly as there is such a variation in provinces in Canada and countries in the UK. Most people can only compare their personal experiences. Our children have been in good schools in both countries. Both have their advantages and disadvantages but overall our children are happy to go to school and we are happy to send them!!

Chris

AnyaT

Just to clarify, before taking a one- or two-year B.Ed, you must already have a bachelor's degree. So in essence a B.Ed takes 5 or 6 years in Canada.

dbd33

Surely you can directly compare schools where the Bac is offered.

Tom Masters

Most, if not all, B.Ed degrees in Ontario are only 1 year - the equivalent of a PGCE (Post Graduate Certificate of Education) in the UK. In Ontario, once you have completed a 3 or 4 year degree, you can then qualify to do a B.Ed. Incidentally, students are not interviewed for a place in teacher's college here at Western - it is purely based on grades. Once you have completed your B.Ed. you have two degrees - so essentially you are completing one of your degrees in one year. Very deceptive in my opinion.

Judy in Calgary

I don't know about that. Here in Calgary there are just a couple of schools in each of the two government-funded systems (public and Catholic) that offer the IB program. Those schools also offer standard schooling in parallel with the IB. They don't let just anyone into their IB programs. Kids have to have attained a certain level of performance to be allowed into the IB program at all. I imagine those schools' IB students perform to a level that looks acceptable when they're compared with IB students in other cities, provinces and countries. But I don't think that's a very revealing statistic, one way or the other, if you're trying to compare whole school systems with each other.

Helen Parnell

Now I am not attacking our Royal family. But Prince Harry had the best possible education, private from 5 years to 18. Eton and all the rest. He left school after 13 years of the finest education England has to offer with two A levels (I don't remember the grades but I remember fairly low) one in Art and the other Geography!!


Not to worry his fellow army officers had to have a degree to go on the officers course, but HRH Harry will be able to paint the landscape when the rest are giving orders. Wasn't there an episode from a Blackadder series where Blackadder was the official artist for the army!!

Butch Cassidy

Helen,
First of all arent you making the mistake that expense=quality? 50% of the 'value' of an Eton quality is the name of the school you went to.

Secondly it is highly unlikely that Harry (and now Wills) are in a 'class' full of potential officers who all hold degrees. Sandhurst is a military academy, as such it trains Army Officers it does not provide Post Graduate education.

Helen Parnell

I thought I read that most of the men with Harry and Wills are over 21 and most hold a degree and that they are all expected to be officer material. Hence they get called "Sir" all the time by the instructors. Of course there will be a drop out rate in each class. I did not think they have started as basic squaddie level, but if they have then I bow to your greater knowledge of Sandhurst.

Butch Cassidy

Helen I have just checked with the Sandhurst Site and it is possible (Probable?) that you are right that the group(s) the Wales are doing their training with are LE officers and as such hold tertiary qualifications. However, not all Sandhurst cadets are thus qualified (hey I have to maintain some repect here )

jlw

I trained to be a teacher in Saskatchewan and did a 4 year Education Degree, not a one year addition to a different degree. Every province is different. And we did learn about differentiation, amongst alot of child psychology and teaching pedagogy, which is more than I can say for the PGCE. The PGCE is really just an opportunity to get potential teachers in classrooms and teaches them how to write a lesson plan. Not very in depth at all!

I think that it is only natural for parents to want to see their child reading/writing/doing sums/etc. as early as possible. They want clarification that their child is clever and is advancing. However, there is no need to push children under the age of 7 in this direction. Much research into the brain, and in particular optimal learning times, has been done and the results demonstrate that we are pushing numeracy and literacy on kids too early.

To cut to the chase, the brain has (what are referred to as) "windows of learning opportunity", which is a time frame when the brain is at its optimal time to acquire particular skills. For example, it is very important for parents/carers to make consonant sounds to babies under the age of 6 months. Their brains are able to recognise and work these sounds and they will begin to use them to communicate. Obviously full sentences or phrases are not of use to the baby at this time, as the brain is not ready to deal that information.

Throughout life, there are different windows of learning for different skills - language acquisition, motor skills, spacial relationships, etc.

The optimal time for teaching handwriting (printing) in addition to reading and basic sums is 7 years old. Prior to this, the brain isn't quite ready and therefore it takes younger children alot longer to develop these skills. Think of how shaky a 5 year old's writing is. They can't print in a straight line and the letters are wobbly. It takes some time and much practice before this improves. If you didn't give the child a pencil until they were 7 you would see that they learn to write very quickly - with straight lines and well formed letters - and without all the effort and stress.

German kids do not start school until they are 7. The Scandinavians start later as well. They know what they are doing! And they are certainly not behind. In the international league tables, they are already significantly ahead of the British at the age of 8. After only one year of school!

Children do not benefit from being forced into these learning activities at a younger age. Let them play! Self-esteem and creativity are being sucked out of children these days. In the end, they all gain the skills that they need to blend into this world anyhow.

dingbat

Goodness. I wonder how generations of Brits coped with writing prior to age seven before the life-span theory hit the road running? I was writing clearly by the age of six and those older than me (fifties and early sixties babies) usually did so without any major traumas, effort or stress. We just did what we were taught I guess. By the way I have a PGCE. It taught me way more than how to write a lesson plan. In fact it helps me teach* the army of semi-literate, worldly ignorant grade 11 kids my daughter goes to school with.

* teach as in open their eyes to the world outside and heaven forbid make them think critically, a skill that is acquired through...reading...articulate discussion...writing and observation. These skills are distinctly lacking in the three BC school districts I have put my children through.

dbd33

Agreed that it doesn't compare all the students but, if it gives a measure of the better students then the proportion of students successfully taking the IB program would, I think, say something about the quality of the system. Otherwise I suppose we could look at entrance eligibility for universities in third countries. What do colleges in, for example the US, required in the way of grades from Canada and the UK ?

Tom Masters

It is good to know that other provinces do the 4 year B.Ed. I agree with most of what you have said regarding optimal times for learning etc. and I am certainly not in favour of pushing kids before they are ready to learn. That just creates a lot of stress for teachers and students alike!

However, each child is different and each child is ready to learn more formal reading and writing skills at different times. While I agree that pushing children to do these things from a very early age isn't the answer, I don't think that holding everyone back until the age of 7 is the answer either. This is where differentiation comes in. My daughter is ready to start writing and she is 5 and a half. Some children are ready sooner, others aren't ready until later. However, as she is only in school for 2 and a half hours a day there is not much opportunity for her skills to be developed. I volunteer in her class and believe that her teacher is missing out on lots of potential in her class. She could probably do more if she had EAs but in Ontario EAs are only used for safety issues now. In the UK, I had two EAs in my early years class.

At the end of the day though, I agree that children in both countries are able to do well in school if they have the necessary back up from their parents and the motivation/ability within themselves.