The Alberta Teachers’ Association

 
ILLUSTRATION BY MATEUSZ NAPIERALSKI

A look at the privatization of education in Canada

Nova Scotia teacher, UNION activist and author Grant Frost explains that “in examining the province as a case of neoliberal creep, this is a textbook example of how the ideology is spread” (2020, 112). In his book The Attack on Nova Scotia’s Schools, Frost explores 25 years of education reform. He explains how neoliberalism took root in Nova Scotia’s governance of public education and how it culminated in the release of the Raise the Bar report, authored by Dr. Avis Glaze, an education consultant.

Citing low international test scores and failing schools, the report recommended drastic changes to the governance of Nova Scotia schools, the teaching profession and accountability measures. The Glaze report engaged a powerful rationale that, on the face of it, is very difficult to argue against. Glaze wrote that “ultimately, it is about those children at their desks—and the grown-ups who must work together with common purpose, clear objectives, ambitious responsibilities and robust resources” (2018, 1). 

It is fair to say that parents, teachers and employers all want to see students flourish and develop their gifts and talents. However, Glaze’s statement joins the chorus of critics who wish to lay all of the problems of education at the feet of public servants, including school trustees and the teaching profession. 

The Liberal government accepted the bulk of Glaze’s report, introducing legislation in March 2018. The massive overhaul of Nova Scotia’s education system was not without context: the changes followed decades of concerted efforts by the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies, a conservative “think tank,” to diminish the work of the public education system; labour unrest by the Nova Scotia Teachers’ Union (NSTU) in 2016/17; and previous reviews of the education system (Frost 2020). 

‘EFFICIENCIES’ AIM TO BENEFIT PRIVATE SECTOR

One of the most striking aspects of the legislation imposed by the Liberal government in 2018 was the dissolution of English-speaking elected school boards in favour of a single appointed board. The restructuring of school board governance was done with the claim that it would create efficiencies by streamlining administrative functions. 

The “efficiencies” Glaze identifies are an opportunity to contract out to private corporations functions previously performed by public servants. This might include engagement of external payroll services and the procurement of computer software packages, testing modules or prepackaged professional development for education staff. The removal of democratically elected school boards effectively shuts citizens out of the education conversations when education reform is introduced. 

However, the government did not stop with school boards. It also ordered the removal of principals and assistant principals from the NSTU without clear justification. Ironically, the report emphasized the need to relieve principals and vice-principals of administrative tasks so that instructional leadership could be a more prominent part of their work. As such, a collegial model ought to have been the preferred pathway for the teaching profession. However, the removal of nearly 1,000 members of the NSTU served only to weaken the ability of the teaching profession to advocate for teachers, school leaders and public education in Nova Scotia. 

Finally, the Glaze report proposed that the Nova Scotia government create a student progress assessment office that was independent of government and establish an assessment division to develop high-quality student assessments, reporting directly to the public on provincewide results, and ensuring the assessments are aligned with the curriculum (2018, 36). To date, this recommendation has not been adopted by government, but reliance on student testing on a large scale has been a primary tool of education privatizers to justify ranking schools, defunding schools (for example, the No Child Left Behind policy in the United States) and evaluating teachers. 

PRIVATIZATION AN UNPROVEN STRATEGY

Education historian and public education advocate Diane Ravitch points out that education “reformers complained that student achievement has been flat for the past 20 years. They make this claim to justify their demand for radical, unproven strategies like privatization” (2013, 49). When student assessment data is reported to the public, it is usually not meant to provide assurance to parents that the school system is working; rather, it is a means to denigrate the work of teachers in order to destabilize public education.

While many other recommendations in the Glaze report could be analyzed, the three above illustrate the risk to public education of engaging education “experts” to provide policy advice. The Glaze report did not provide grounding in the academic literature for its conclusions, and the consultation process to gather public opinion and the report writing was done hastily—in less than three months—hardly sufficient time to justify such a significant overhaul to the Nova Scotia education system. Further, Glaze did not share how she gathered or analyzed her data. All this raises questions about the report’s legitimacy. However, if the goal all along was to marketize public education, the report becomes cover for what the government wished to do anyway. 

Sadly, policymakers in Canada continue to follow the same pattern of hiring external consultants to make sweeping changes to public education. For example, in Manitoba, a commission on learning was ordered, Dr. Glaze was hired as a lead consultant and a report was released in March 2020. Many of the recommendations within that report are similar to those made in the Nova Scotia report, including the elimination of publicly elected school boards, the removal of principals and vice-principals from the Manitoba Teachers’ Society and a heavy emphasis on standardized test results.

WHAT IS THE OUTCOME OF PRIVATIZATION IN PUBLIC EDUCATION?

Ball and Youdell write, “Privatisation in and of public education can have a significant impact on equality of educational access, experiences and outcomes” (2008, 16). The research shows that the privatization of public education increases social stratification, including racial segregation, and lowers equity and opportunity for students. Further, it diminishes the role of schools within communities. Ravitch points out, “Our schools will not improve if we continue to close neighborhood schools in the name of reform. Neighborhood schools are often the anchors of communities, a steady presence that helps to cement the bonds of community among neighbors” (2013, 227). 

Great schools for all is what public education is all about, and neoliberal approaches have been shown to benefit only corporate interests, not those of children and their families. 

References

Ball, S J, and D Youdell. 2008. Hidden Privatization in Public Education. Brussels: Education International. https://campaignforeducation.org/docs/privatisation/Endogenous%20Privatization%20Stephen%20Ball_ENGLISH.pdf (accessed January 12, 2022).

Frost, G. 2020. The Attack on Nova Scotia Schools. Halifax: Formac Publishing Company Limited.

Glaze, A. 2018. Raise the Bar. A Coherent and Responsive Education Administrative System for Nova Scotia. Halifax: Government of Nova Scotia. https://www.ednet.ns.ca/adminreview (accessed January 12, 2022).

Ravitch, D. 2013. Reign of Error: the Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America’s Public Schools. New York: Alfred A Knopf.