Do Fraser rankings “really” reflect the quality of schools?
Posted by Sandy on May 17th, 2008
When families move into new communities, what is one of the first things parents ask their real estate agent? You guessed it. They ask: Where are the best schools and how do you know they are the best? And, on the basis of the answer, the parents decide then and there where they want to rent or purchase housing.
Now, just how do people find out where the best schools are located? In the past, they speak to everyone they know who lives in the community where they are moving. Then, they make an informed decision. Now, it seems, the Fraser Institute’s school rankings is the primary source parents are using.
But, is that all there is to a school? Do the rankings alone “really” reflect the quality of a school? Or, should other criteria be used as well? For example:
- Is there a strong emphasis on academics?
- Is there a good sports program?
- Are there extra-curricular activities in the arts?
- Is there a school choir or band?
- Is there a strong school spirit?
- Do children like attending?
- Do the teachers communicate well with the parents?
- Are the staff dedicated?
- Do the staff undertake professional development?
- Is the principal approachable?
- Does the principal treat parents with respect?
- Are there a lot of parent volunteers?
- Is the school council effective?
And, so on. Or, do the rankings themselves mean enough — as in – if the children do well in the annual tests, then that means there are good teachers and the school is good. Is that a fair analysis? Or, is this whole process a self-fulfilling prophecy?
Not long ago I wrote about the Ontario school rankings and how the teachers’ unions and Ontario trustees association did not like them one bit. They complained that the tests are designed to be used to improve teaching practices but not to compare one school with another. That to do so was demoralizing to everyone concerned — staff, students and parents. Now, we find out that they may have had a point.
In today’s National Post there is a very long, well researched, article by Natalie Alcoba. It is called “Making the Grade” and it makes very clear that parents are not only comparing one school with another, totally based on the Fraser Institutes school report rankings, but they are actually selling their homes and moving to school catchment areas that have the highest performing schools. And, while this article is about Toronto parents, it is completely within the realm of reason to generalize that behaviour across Ontario and Canada.
While some may say it is all about parent choice and that they are making decisions with their feet. There is another side to this argument. If you empty out urban schools completely, what is going to happen to entire communities? When businesses move out of the core of cities and towns, what happens? It is called the donut affect. Entire downtown communities die and are filled with boarded up stores and run down streets — becoming a situation of the haves versus the have-nots. In the U.S. they are called “ghettos.” That is not what I think publicly funded education is supposed to be about.
In the print version (that I have not been able to find online) of today’s National Post, under the Alcoba article, is a table of the Fraser Institute’s rankings — showing “some of Toronto’s hottest public schools.” I am sure many parents will cut that out and hold on to it because it very clearly shows 18 city schools that ranked anywhere from 7.4 to 10.0 with 8 ranking 9 or better.
While I have more questions than answers on this topic, it is certainly something to think about.
[...]
May 18th, 2008 at 7:44 am
I do appreciate your thoughts about tests and quality schools.
I supply teach in the Toronto area. I will say that in my board, the teaching practices are similar among schools. The EQAO tests alone do not determine quality schools. Your bullet points listed will help parents decide the quality of schools.
The Fraser Institute rankings are not always a good indicator of school performance. I have taught at one school that has a gifted program but no lower level special education classes. A neighbouring school hold several classes for students with autism and for other special education students. All these students get included in the Fraser Institute’s calculations in determining the scores for schools. If students do not write the EQAO tests, they are counted as a zero. Principals are now getting many of their English Language Learners to write the tests so that they will be included in the percentage of students that wrote the tests. These students may only get a level one; it’s better than a zero.
You are correct about parents shopping for schools. One school performed poorer than the neighbouring school. Some parents want to move their children to the better performing school not realizing that their own children were still officially or unofficially English Language Learners. The students at the neighbouring school were less likely to be ELLs. (I’m using the new terminology.)
Back to the school with the gifted classes. Yes, that school performed very well. That school gets a Fraser Institute score of 10/10 or 9.8/10 practically each year. The teachers are great; so are teachers at other schools that don’t rank so high on the Fraser Institute scale.
The EQAO tests do matter to schools. They do help improve teaching practices. However, a simple Fraser Institute ranking does not determine how well students are taught. Look at the the bullets listed in the Crux blog to help decide which schools are great.
May 18th, 2008 at 8:26 am
I think you’re falling for the urban myth that if parents have choice is will be something awful for schools. Hasn’t turned out that way in the provinces and states which offer choice. So for me that argument falls flat.
If you are a parent who needs proof that your student is learning each and every year then a school which pays attention to the basics and measurement of outcomes is for you and your child.
If you’re a parent who believes that schools aren’t a place of learning, and more of a social institution then you’ll not like the schools that focus on academics.
If you’re a parent who values both academics and social skills you’ll want a school that exhibits both.
At the very tip of this iceberg is the question that no one wants to answer. No, make that two questions that all of the stakeholders(including parents) in the education system raise but never have come to an agreement on:
1) what is the purpose of education and our schools?
2) what makes up the job description of an educator?
Until those two basic questions are answered, we’ll be spinning our wheels on this subject for years to come.
IF schools are places of learning then there must be proof that learning is taking place. If EQAO and/or rankings like the Fraser’s or C.D. Howe’s the system itself would eventually have to invent some for of measurement because seriously parents, future employers and post-secondaries wouldn’t keep quiet for long and would demand it.
May 18th, 2008 at 8:31 am
Sandy,
As you know, my kid’s school is one of the 18 that ranked a 10.
We are quite proud of this acheivement, obviously.
At our school council meeting we actually discussed how we will have to be much more stringent about our school’s boundaries as we fully expect more people to want to try to get their children into our school. Word spreads fast…but we don’t have space.
Although I do think that the score represents a “perfect storm” of teachable students, talented teachers, and involved parents and community, if a school is able to consistenly score high within the ranks of fraser, I think it does suggest the school is doing something right.
May 18th, 2008 at 9:02 am
An excellent discussion. I will leave comments open today for it to continue.
Ann — I am not falling for anything. I am simply asking questions that need to be asked. Surely a school is far more than a single criterion. However, it is a free country and parents can move around as they wish. But, I would recomment that they look at all the criteria, not just one single factor.
To teachers and trustees: One thing I did not bring up which I might at a later date, is something “Mé” touched upon — is the teachers themselves. If teachers are assigned to a school that is not doing very well in the rankings, what can THEY do to help the students improve? In other words, if their school is otherwise an excellent school, what can THEY do to improve their teaching practices — so their school’s overall ranking improves?
If educators take that approach, as opposed to being demoralized, they are taking back the control of the situation. And, as we have been reading over the past few weeks, a number of schools have done just that.
But, in terms of this Post article, I suspect that the highly ranked schools are probably excellent overall — and as Tori suggests they must be doing something right.
But, at the end of the day, I still say parents need to answer all the questions before they decide to switch schools — whether they are publicly funded or not. Sometimes it can be a case of the “grass being greener on the other side of the fence.”
May 18th, 2008 at 10:55 am
“Surely a school is far more than a single criterion” - for you it may be, but I could never assume that that is what other parents expect or wish for their choice of school/education for their child.
I would agree that the best remedy is for parents to think long and hard about the choices they have at their disposal and include all choices and varieties of schooling in that selection. There needs to be a non-partisan one-stop shopping vehicle available for all in each and every jurisdiction that helps parents make educated, not emotional or political education decisions. In Ontario this does not exist. We rely on organizations and too often word of mouth to educate parents on what’s out there and the effectiveness/success(or not).
Re: teachers working to improve - no doubt that teachers work hard to help kids and their schools improve, but let’s rewind back to the teaching faculties and ask ourselves how many of those actually teach the programs and methods proven to help kids improve such as phonics or Saxon math?
I have also learned over 12 years that the best and more seasoned teachers often get first crack at the schools of their choice. Seniority matters, so sometimes that means the more inexperienced and ineffective teachers get the harder schools. I recall very clearly a phone call I received years ago about a father on a school council in a southwestern Ontario city, who lived in a low-socio-economic part of the city with a notoriously rough and under-achieving school. This dad was taking his kids out and driving them to another part of the city to attend school because, the principal of the school told him about how he couldn’t ever get the better teachers at his school due to the whole seniority thing.
The gov’t itself is lately making comparisons and ranking schools. The EQAO scores are used in the new accommodation review guidelines to determine “value to student”. If it’s important to parents and teachers, which learning is, then it’s worth measuring, and as I said before if the system thinks so too it has had plenty of time to come up with its own vehicle and ways to measure the effectiveness of learning and schools. I don’t believe it has anything in place, and as such time as it does we’re left with the EQAO and other comparisons to base our choices on.
What the Post tells me in spades is that given the opportunity parents will go to great lengths to get their kids into a school with a reputation that they like - no matter the focus.
To underscore things I find Tori’s comments very interesting. There school council discussing how to be more stringent about their boundaries as they expect that more folks will want their kids into their successful school.
How hard would it be for other unsuccessful schools and board to replicate what Tori’s school is doing?
Tori - is your school now closed to parents who wish to send their kids there? That worries me only because it gives the impression that your council might be trying to keep folks out. I’m sure that’s not the case, but I got a weird feeling when I read that a public statutory school council might want deter others from the success you’re experiencing. I’d welcome a clarification.
May 18th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
sorry for the glut of comments but it’s raining, I’m sick and, well…..not much going on in my household…so….
Sandy - your example questions are good ones but, as a seasoned parent and advocate for parents I’d like to use your questions and add to them in a way that might provide either more clarity or more questions. I personally think that the questions you’ve offered as examples could go further to help parents. Here’s what I would include or advise parents to ask using your questions as a base(my advise in brackets)
* is there a strong emphasis on academics? (..and how would parents know this?)
* is there a good sports program (…and why it’s important and how would we know? what defines a “good” program. Is it winning teams, house-leagues, opportunity for all, facilities?)
* are there extra-curriculars in the arts, choirs, band etc? (…and how much extra to participate, how balanced with curriculum)
* is there school spirit? (..how do we know and why is it important?)
* do children like attending (….how do we know this?)
* do teachers communicate with parents? (how? how often? are parents welcome to communicate with teachers? How? How often?)
* are the staff dedicated? (how do we measure this? Define dedicated)
* do staff undertake PD? (how often, and how would parents know?)
* is the principal approachable? (how, how often and are parents welcome to communicate with principals?)
* does principal treat parents with respect(…and vise versa. How do we know?)
* are their a lot of parent volunteers?(why is this important? How does it help the school environment? Is it ok that a teacher doesn’t use parent volunteers? Do volunteers need criminal background checks?)
* is the school council effective? (….define “effective”…and how does the community know that the council is effective?)
I would also add that parents should feel confident in their roles as advocates and their children’s first teachers to ask what programs the school uses, bullying policies, and how class time is structured.
Most parents don’t care about any of this at all. This kind of advocacy and discussion almost always rests with a handful at each and every school.
Is it improving in Ontario? That’s a big question answered best I think by saying that those boards, school administrators and educators who have always seen parents and choice as more of a resource and opportunity will thrive and be more welcome to new ideas and more choice. Those that have never been thus, will struggle, and end up in schools that struggle.
Another good question is whether parent partnership(which was promised by two governments) has been achieved or have parents just learned to play the game?
Ok…..sick and all I’m out of here while the sky’s blue.
May 18th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
As with everything else associated with statistics the results have to be looked at in context. I am from BC and we have had the Fraser Institute do an assessment for a long time. Every year many cry foul ans there is some justification. The statistics are only representative if you have a large enough sample size which is not a problem in large urban districts but create havoc in smaller rural ones.
A good example is the school my daughters attended. Over the years the school was all over the map as far as rankings. It was because it was a small school and when there were a few really bright students it skewed the stats up and when there were a few challenged students it skewed the stats down.
That is why you will see that rursl schools can change dramatically from year to year.
Having said that it is still a good idea to measure these things, just keep them in context. Cheers.
May 18th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Ann — As usual, sick or not, you are always up for a good debate. As far as all your sub-questions to my questions, that would take a Ph.D disseration to sort out, if even then.
Let’s just say, having been a teacher educator, you do the best you can when you are training future teachers. There is always new research to think about and curriculum and learning are very complex topics. I say that not to reduce or eliminate debate, but because, as SOR says, it really does depend on the context.
For example, if you have a school where most children are above average, the curriclum will reflect that just as it will if students have ESL or are academically challenged. As such, no two schools will ever be the same.
SOR — Exactly. I agree that, while the rankings are very important, they shouldn’t be the ONLY criterion used when deciding on schools, as it seems to be with the parents discussed in the Post article.
Yet, I can’t help wonder if the families who are moving to new school districts realize that too many new students could change a school’s rankings — even going down. What then?
Similarly, since rankings change depending on the students in the school, what would be ironic is if a school (where the students used to attend) subsequently increases their rankings with fewer or different students.
But, as both Ann and SOR have explained, the sky did not fall in B.C. or Alberta when parents were given public money to decide where their child could attend school.
But, that is a different kettle of fish. There parents really do have choice and the donut effect does not seem to happen. But, in Ontario, where public money is not provided for parents to have choice, you get what Tori is talking about. Where school councils have to decide to shut out certain families.
I really do think choice would mean that all schools would have to shape up and be competitive. Right now, in Ontario’s largest city, that is not happening and parents are being forced to “fight” for that right, even to the point of the expense of moving.
This sure is not the end of this story. Kathleen Wynn and Dalton McGuinty, the “Education Premier,” can pretend all is well, but it surely isn’t.
May 18th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Ann’s question, “What is the purpose of education, and our schools?” is very important, and from my experience, one’s answer to that question defines one’s vision for the future of education. I would also ask the question, “What is the purpose of public funding for education” as I think people may consider what they want for themselves or their sector in the former question, while the latter requires consideration of what they want for every child in their province.
The Canadian Education Association’s 2007 survey found that when it comes to factors most likely to shape Canadians’ views about how schools should be run, respondent’s named their own experiences as a parent (70%) or student (51%) as very important, and the influence of the media (TV, radio and newspapers, magazines or books) was most commonly
identified as somewhat important. That finding seems right to me- based on my many discussions with parents. Those who had a good school experience- be it private or public- think the type of school they, or their children, attended is a good model, and those who didn’t have a positive experience, think another model is better. That survey also found that respondents valued research driven educational changes, and they valued standardized provincial tests both for individual student’s assessments and for school, board, and provincial educational assessments. That gives me hope that people are willing to re-evaluate their attitudes when presented with evidence. And there clearly is a country wide interest in evaluating educational systems via testing.
Which brings me back to taking a stab at Ann’s question; I think-
“The purpose of education and schools is to support and promote psychological, physical, and social wellness while imparting the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required to function as effectively and independently as possible.”
May 18th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Thanks Paula — You were very brave to try to come up with that definition. I say brave because one of the questions I asked in my Ph.D dissertation research was just that question. And, what I found was that the answer depended pretty much on what you said — what each educator “believes” about teaching and learning.
However, that was where it ended. Out of dozens of responses, there were some core beliefs by everyone, pretty much as you state, but over and above that, a VERY wide range of priorities. That is why it is so hard to get consensus — because apart from the main issues — that is where it ends.
You actually have people in today’s world saying education is about socializing our kids, that academics are not nearly as important as they once were.
Given this Post article, obviously the majority of parents are not tuned into that view at all — thankfully.
May 18th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
Great discussion!
If: a) there is no one definition that can be agreed upon re: what the purpose of education is, and b) we’re told all children learn differently, and all teachers teach differently and have different beliefs, and c) parents are just as prone to demanding a variety of choices, why are we soooo convinced that public education is the only way to define learning and meet expectations?
I don’t think it is.
I believe one of the very last lines in the Post article said something to the effect that if the public schools were more like private schools it would be better(or something like that).
What IS is about the private school that makes someone say that? It’s not the first time I’ve heard the “if only my child’s school was like a private” argument. Are the kids actually learning that much better or, is there more invested between school and home because it’s being paid for?
I don’t believe it’s possible to come to a consensus about what education is. It’s totally subjective and the education system as it stands today is tiered by way too many “partners” for a common consensus to be possible.
That’s why I see more choices, not fewer being the answer. However, all education systems and schools in the public system will be competing for fewer and fewer students. I see all kinds of reasons for schools being very interested in what parents are looking for in the very near future as more choices open up within and outside the system.
By the way, on Tuesday morning I believe Canada AM is doing a series on the draw of Alternative Schools in Canada and what makes them a choice for parents.
May 18th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Ann- I’ll try to remember to watch Canada AM Tues morning. Given the diversity of opinion here, we have our work cut out for ourselves. Yet, the McGuinty folks really do think there is a consensus of opinion.
Re private schools, since my husband retired from the public system, he has been teaching half time at a private facility. You’re right. When parents are paying, they have certain expectations or they walk. As a result, the school’s board of directors, teachers and administration are very keen and motivated and go to great lengths to be the best — in everything.
So, one assumes that if parents had access to their own tax money, you would find the same expectations. Parents pick my husband’s school because they have a reputation (you guessed it) for academic excellence and a strong ESL and sports program.
Dare I say it, there are also no signs of confrontation or grievances as there isn’t a teachers’ union.
May 18th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
No problem, Sandy. I’ve written many Vision/ Mission statements,and I always find it a valuable exercise to try to frame a concept in one or two sentences. I also find that many people can’t stand leaving ’space for interpretation’ so they write long winded drivel that loses all it’s meaning. Simple is best- in decorating- and writing
Sandy said;
“You actually have people in today’s world saying education is about socializing our kids, that academics are not nearly as important as they once were.”
We need a publicly funded system that values both. Students need to be in safe and nurturing environments that ’support and promote psychological, physical, and social wellness’, to be able to learn, and to use their learning.
The other factor that no one has commented on is the Principal. This person can make or break a school. Boards need to ensure that successful principals do their fair share of time at challenging schools, and that they are given the resources they need to help those schools.
May 18th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Ok…last post from me…in between sneezes and coughs.
I think teachers deserve choice also. We never talk about that and I do believe that’s a whole other kettle of fish altogether, but I have many teachers in my family. Some always wanted to teach. Some ended up teaching when they couldn’t get work in their chosen fields. One teaches in a private school. One university prof., and one principal.
Even in one family the teacher expectations are different.
This type of discussion is important for parents to be participants in.
Thanks to all.
May 18th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Ann, I agree that private schools, home schools, faith based schools are all perfectly valid education models, but I don’t agree that they should be publicly funded. They are options that people choose for personal reasons, they are not options that the public sector has a responsibility to support. If a children’s educational needs are not being met in the public system, and the parents and the board agree that they will not be met by the public system, then there is valid reason for public funding to support that child’s private or home schooling. Usually, though, that’s not the issue. I do support more alternative programming in public schools, and I do support a more flexible attitude in public education- like something that would enable a child to attend public school for half- days for core subjects, and they they could access their private school or program of choice at their own cost for the other half day, and that alternative would be credited as required to progress to the next grade. There’s much room for improvement and flexibility.
May 18th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Paula — You mentioned the need for good principals in one of your comments and I just wanted to let you know that I am about to post an article that was in the Goderich Signal Star this past week and written by a regular guest writer here by the name of Cathy Cove. Hope you enjoy it.
May 18th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
Tori - is your school now closed to parents who wish to send their kids there? That worries me only because it gives the impression that your council might be trying to keep folks out. I’m sure that’s not the case, but I got a weird feeling when I read that a public statutory school council might want deter others from the success you’re experiencing. I’d welcome a clarification.
As long as the child lives in either the school’s immediate boundaries or the holding boundaries, the child is able to attend.
May 19th, 2008 at 8:26 am
Tori - thanks for the clarification
Paula - we’ll have to disagree on the power that choice gives parents. I don’t believe that the state governance of our schools is the best choice for all students, and too many public dollars are eaten up by the same large bureaucracy which it employs. I also don’t believe that the public system is prepared to answer to the consumers of the service it provides.
Given the declining enrollment situation in Ontario, and most other Canadian jurisdictions, it shouldn’t be costing us more to educate fewer students and we’re no closer today, as an educational community of insuring we have value for our dollars spent. In fact, I’d wager that accountability for spending on education in Ontario isn’t better than it was 10 years ago.
It’s time Ontario played catch-up with the rest of the world in the matter of respecting all schools of choice.
May 19th, 2008 at 11:52 am
I know we disagree, but between my goal of one publicly funded school system and your’s of funding allocated to parents to utilize according to their choice ( I think?), there is much area for agreement. In the one school system network we have many different opinions on how to work towards ending the preferential funding for Catholic people. Some think it must be done in one step with the constitution and education act amended and both systems merged. I think only the Greens have the backbone to do that, and recognizing that they won’t form the provincial government any time soon, we should also advocate for less radical change. Shared facilities, open enrolment for all resident children in all publicly funded schools, all religious programming and classes to be elective for all students, in any community where there is only population to support one school, that school must be public. These changes promote human rights and they need not be disruptive. The group I coordinate, a chapter of Educational Equality in Ontario, is actually neutral on the question of funding for alternative schools, as long as the funding is modest enough to prevent a mass exodus from public schools, and it applies to all alternatives, including the currently 100% publicly funded Catholic schools.
I also think you and I agree that more alternatives in publicly funded schools- that are research supported and are designed to improve student outcomes- should be encouraged- one size doesn’t fit all.