What Do Politics And Education Have In Common?

With apologies for writing yet another post about education, I cannot escape the conviction that in considering the seamier side of education, with its sometimes immoral and concealed actions, its use of 'spin' and its willingness to overlook or minimize wrongdoing when it suits its purposes, there are many parallels to the kind of unethical, expedient and corrupt behaviour we often find among those we elect to public office.

The other reason for my preoccupation is that I have always detested the existence of double standards in the meting out of justice.

Two events involving two school boards, one current and one going back several years, suggest that justice is not only not done, but not seen to be done.

In today's Toronto Star, a story about a former Kingsville, Ont., principal, Wendy Lynn Liebing,

admitted misusing school board funds over three years and resigned from the association on June 14, the college said on its website. Her certificate of qualification and registration to teach were then cancelled. The case was detailed in the latest issue of the college’s magazine, Professionally Speaking.

“At the time of the resignation, a professional misconduct investigation was in progress wherein the member was alleged to have mismanaged and misappropriated school and board funds,” the website said.

Despite the College of Teacher's euphemistic reference to Liebling's having 'mismanaged and misappropriated' school money, the fact is that she embezzled over $50,000 from her employer, a crime that in most cases would result in criminal charges. I will offer my opionion on why that did not happen in a few moments.

The next case, which goes back several years, involves a former school principal named Glenn Crawford, who was employed by the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board.

Like Liebling, Crawford 'misused' school funds and assets for personal reasons, as he admitted to during the investigation. Amongst the fraudulent acts he admitted to were the following:

a) receiving unauthorized personal advances;

b) receiving reimbursement for meal and hotel expenses that were personal;

c) falsifying receipts from Ontario Principals’ Council in order to be reimbursed by the
school;

d) billing both the Ontario Principals’ Council and the school for expense claims;

e) using school funds and assets for personal reasons;

f) authorizing payment of expenses by the school for expenses not related to school activities, such as expenses related to events involving his son including the International Children’s Games and the B’nai Brith Sports Dinner;

g) using the school van for personal reasons and submitting the expenses to the school;

h) receiving reimbursement for the purchase of tires claimed but not installed on the school
van;

i)obtaining the personal services of landscaping company, where his son is a landscape contractor, and billing the school; and

j)authorizing landscape expenses for the 2001/2002 fiscal year higher than those for similar size schools.


The penalty for this malfeasance?

Essentially, Crawford was permitted to resign and had his teaching certificate suspended for one year.

You can read the full decision here.

So why were neither Liebling nor Crawford charged with a crime, something that usually happens to those who embezzle from their employers? The most benign explanation is that the board, being heavily influenced by institutional behaviour, wanted to minimize the publicity surrounding these odious deeds, publicity that would both diminish the institution's reputation and seriously damage the career advancement to the many who put their own fortunes above the good of education.

The second possibility, and admittedly a much more sinister one, is that people who commit crimes but are dealt with softly often have knowledge of things within the organization that no one wants exposed to public scrutiny.

While the latter explanation may seem rather paranoid and conspiratorial, my own years in education were witness to some very questionable things which, while I am not prepared to discuss them here, would never have passed 'the smell test'.

An Update On Lynden Dorval, A Teacher With Integrity

A few months ago I wrote a post about Lynden Dorval, the Edmonton physics teacher who was suspended for giving zeroes on uncompleted assignments or exams in contravention of his school's (Ross Sheppard High School) 'no-zero' policy that was designed to avoid discouraging students.

The public outcry of support for this teacher who dared to say that the emperor has no clothes, a defiance that few career-driven school administrators would tolerate, has apparently not deterred the board from beginning proceedings for his termination:

...on Tuesday, the letter from the superintendent of Edmonton Public Schools informed him his principal, Ron Bradley, requested his termination for “his obvious neglect of duty as a professional teacher, his repeated insubordination and his continued refusal to obey lawful orders.”

As is often the case with politicians who masquerade as school principals, Ron Bradley is attempting to conceal his vendetta against a teacher with professional integrity by claiming other reasons for calling for Dorval's termination:

...the principal said Mr. Dorval was repeatedly absence in staff meetings — a claim Mr. Dorval says is untrue.

The veteran teacher also sent a staff-wide email condemning the no zero policy, Mr. Bradley said.

“I advised Mr. Dorval that I was not disputing his professional right to express his opinion but … I found his tone and method of communication insubordinate,” Mr. Bradley wrote.

Following the suspension, the principal reported that Mr. Dorval entered the school without requesting permission — part of the terms of his suspension — twice to return unmarked quizzes and assignments, and once to voice concerns about his replacement teacher, Mr. Bradley wrote.

While politics is a fundamental part of our society, it is truly regrettable that its seamier side cannot be kept out of education.

Fact-Checkers Be Damned

It would be comforting to think that the disdain for facts apparent in the current U.S. Presidential campaign ads were confined to that country. Unfortunately, experience with the Harper propaganda machine suggests otherwise.

H/t Ryan McGreal

A Sage Observation

Paul Kahnert of Markham has an uncommonly apt observation in this morning's Star, one that I'm sure the ideologues leading us both federally and provincially will choose to ignore:

Re: Canada’s idle threat, Business Aug. 25

It’s time to reverse corporate tax cuts. David Olive’s article was proof positive that tax cuts don’t work. Weren’t tax cuts for corporations supposed to make them “competitive” and create lots of job for Canadians? We’ve been conned. The only thing tax cuts created was massive wealth for corporations and the top 1 per cent.

Corporate tax cuts have been one of the main contributors to the $526 billion of profits sitting idle in their bank accounts. Right now provincial and federal deficits are running at about $65 billion a year. All governments are crying poor and say they can’t afford to pay for public services like health care, education and infrastructure like water, sewage roads and bridges. Baloney.

We don’t have a deficit problem. We have a distribution of wealth problem. Governments need to tax that money back and get on with the job of building this country with good jobs.

And all of us need to stop voting foolishly for politicians who keep promising us tax cuts.

Is Oil Our Economic Salvation?

Interesting, isn't it, that despite the propaganda coming out of both Alberta and the Prime Minister's Office about oil being the economic engine and saviour of Canada, that our Western friends are finding themselves experiencing some economic malaise?

McGuinty's Craven Manipulations Continue

There is no evidence of a slow-down in the craven practices of Ontario's slickster premier, Dalton McGuinty. With some uncertainty over whether his gambit to buy his way to a majority government by bribing Liz Witmer to vacate her seat to become head of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, thus opening the way for a September 6 byelection, dauntless Dalton is relentless in his efforts to impress upon the public his ability to be a tough guy when it comes to public service workers.

His latest musings about ending bankable sick days for firefighters and police, a benefit he is currently legislating way from teachers, is especially transparent and disingenuous. This will occur to those rational enough to think straight after the 'education premier's' latest embrace of the politics of division and his goal of public outrage if they remember that police and firefighters are under municipal, not provincial jurisdiction.

Of course, facts apparently are intended to play little role in this demagogue's thirst for majority government.

A Retired Administrator Sets The Record Straight

As he tries to appear tough for the upcoming byelections, Ontario's self-proclaimed Education Premier, Dalton McGuinty, has been indulging in the kind of demagoguery that is an affront to critical thinkers everywhere. I was therefore pleased to read this article by Tom Roden, a retired vice-principal, attempting to puncture some of the myths about teaching:

Just don’t tell me teachers are overpaid

Don’t make savings on our backs: End Catholic school funding This opinion article is in response to Ontario’s Liberal government as it attacks public school teachers in an attempt to alleviate some fiscal problems and increase their chances in two byelections. It is also in response to those praising Catholic teachers for accepting unreasonable demands from the provincial government.

It comes from the perspective of a retired teacher who has a reasonable pension because I paid for it my entire career. I believe my teaching career was relatively routine and will use examples from it to illustrate.

Teachers are not well paid given the academic requirements, responsibilities, and stress of the job. They are required, as a bare minimum, to have at least five years of university. Most have more. In addition, any of the considerable numbers of teachers that I know work far more than the standard 2,000 hours per year. Any of their male friends in industry, with comparable responsibilities and academic qualifications, have far greater salaries. This income disparity is not as obvious with women because teaching is one of the few areas in which salaries are not gender-dependent.

I knew salaries in teaching were not great when I entered the profession, so I am not whining about it. Just do not tell me that I was well paid.

After graduating from McMaster University, I worked in the hourly personnel department at Ford Motor Company for nine and a half months. It was not until my fifth year of teaching that my salary equalled my earnings at Ford. This income disparity is the reason that it is very difficult to attract technical teachers. Most tradesmen/women are not willing to accept a decrease in their salary of approximately 50 per cent.

Just as I was retiring, I was kidded by a pick-up hockey teammate, who works in management in industry, with the often-used “overpaid, underworked school teacher” line.

I replied: “I just retired as a vice-principal of a school of 1,600 people (including students, teachers, secretaries, caretakers, cafeteria staff). My salary was $75,000. If I were assistant plant manager of some factory that has 1,600 employees, would I have made $75,000?” He replied that I would have been paid at least double that.

Again, I am not whining because I knew what I was getting into when I started teaching.

Retirement gratuities are common in industry, as are sick leave plans. My golfing buddies who retired from industry have their benefits paid, most until death. The minute I retired, I had to pay for all benefits. Because of cost, I did not pick up a dental plan. Again, I am not whining. However, if teaching is to be compared to industry, make a fair comparison.

It should be noted that teaching is considered more stressful than almost any other job in society.

Also, much of the media mislead the public because, I believe, they are afraid to raise the issue of public funding for separate schools.

It is just plain wrong to fund Roman Catholic schools but deny that funding to all others. The United Nations has twice condemned the Province of Ontario for this discriminatory practice.

As well, the duplication of services squanders billions of dollars annually. William J. Phillips of the Federation of Urban Neighbourhoods of Ontario (urbanneighbourhoods.ca) presented a study estimating the duplication of services costs Ontario taxpayers between 1.27 and 1.59 billion extra dollars annually.

In addition, separate school students cost more. Using Ministry of Education figures for 2009-10, Catholic students use 38 per cent of education funding, but comprise only 32 per cent of the total of students in Ontario. Each separate school student costs $12,4440.42 while each public school student costs $9,468.46, a difference of $2,971.96. For the 659,392 separate school students in Ontario, that is an annual $2 billion ($1,959,686,648) more than would be spent if they were public school students.

Combining those two facets, and because some of the extra per pupil cost for separate schools is included in the figures in Phillips’ study, we could save approximately $2.5 billion to $3 billion annually by having one publicly funded, secular school system while maintaining the same quality of education. That saving would negate the need to attack teacher contracts.

Anyone who feels the need to have their child attend a religious school can do it on their own dime, as is done with Christian, Jewish, and Muslim schools, among others.

Is it possible that Catholic teachers are willing to give up so much in order to retain their privileged position?

Tom Roden lives in Grimsby.