Page Content
Alberta Liberal education critic Kent Hehr (left) and New Democrat education critic Deron Bilous address teachers at the Association’s political engagement seminar at Barnett House on March 15. Wildrose critic Bruce McAllister was invited but unable to attend the panel of education critics.
While Liberal education critic Kent Hehr and New Democrat education critic Deron Bilous agreed on most things when they took the stage at the Alberta Teachers’ Association’s (ATA’s) annual Political Engagement Seminar, they diverged slightly on the issue of curriculum redesign. More than 80 teacher delegates attended the seminar, held March 14 and 15 at Barnett House.
When asked about curriculum redesign, both critics distinguished readily between curriculum and instruction, and both identified teachers as instructional experts. Hehr pointed out that, while one-size-fits-all teaching methods, such as memorization, may work for some students, discovery-based learning is better suited to others. He characterized the debate over mathematics instruction as "much ado about nothing."
Bilous took issue with government’s self-imposed two-year time frame for curriculum redesign and the partners invited to the table. He pointed out that, while teachers’ partnership is limited to the K–3 curriculum, corporations, such as Suncor, Syncrude and PCL, are identified as partners for all four divisions.
Hehr brushed off the anomaly. "I’m a little bit less concerned about the people who are currently communicating with the government in regards to curriculum design. In fact, I think the minister [of education] should consult with a wide group of people when we’re talking about education," he said.
"We’re trying to get everyone in society, including business, to see the value in public education. We’re trying to create a bit of a social contract between everyone involved—at least that would be my hope."
While the critics had some difficulty pinpointing what government is getting right when it comes to education, Hehr complimented government on labour peace and on Inspiring Education, spearheaded by former minister of education Dave Hancock. The MLA for Calgary-Buffalo suggested that the initiative appears to be modelled on the Finnish education system.
"Finland has great results. They empower teachers to teach. They have one education system, all the public education system. Every kid in Finland goes to public school. There are no private schools there."
Bilous came up with a backhanded compliment. "Alberta does have some of the best schools, the best education in the country," he said, "but I would not give that credit to the Alberta government. I would give it to you. We have excellent teachers in Alberta." He also credited teachers for the province’s "amazing curriculum."
At the same time, the critics had no difficulty pinpointing the many challenges facing the public education system. For Hehr, those challenges included a lack of predictable, sustainable funding; a lack of commitment to class size; and a lack of commitment to building schools in communities where children live—all issues championed by Progressive Conservative leader Alison Redford in the 2012 provincial election, he said. "Two years into a mandate, we have seen no appreciable movement in solving those problems."
Challenges identified by Bilous included teacher workload, class size and a lack of respect for teachers as professionals. While curriculum redesign is not a bad thing in and of itself, "you need to be treated as professionals and experts in your field," he told delegates. "Nobody else should be telling you how to teach or how you deliver an outcome."
Funding lies at the root of many of those challenges, especially class size. Playing the devil’s advocate, moderator Jonathan Teghtmeyer, associate coordinator of communications, pointed out that Alberta spends $37 million a day on K–12 education, or $7.4 billion a year, and that education accounts for 18 per cent of the provincial budget. Revenue is uncertain, the "bitumen bubble" is omnipresent and the province has been ravaged by floods, he said. It is easy, but not practical, to say that government should continue to throw money at class size.
Hehr retorted that Alberta has a revenue problem, not a spending problem. "We’re the lowest-taxed jurisdiction by a country mile," he said. Were Alberta to adopt the tax code of Saskatchewan, the second-lowest-taxed jurisdiction, an additional $11 billion a year would pour into Alberta’s coffers, ensuring predictable, sustainable funding for education and other social programs.
Bilous concurred and put forward three solutions to the province’s revenue problem. First, Alberta could adjust its royalty structure—the lowest in North America—and still remain competitive. Second, the province could abandon the flat tax in favour of a progressive personal income tax. And third, the province could reverse its decision of a few years ago to reduce the corporate income tax from 15 to 10 per cent. He disputed government’s mantra that such a reduction would drive industry from the province. "If they’re all chasing the lowest taxes, then they’d all be moving to Alberta," he said.
