The way I look at it is that if these young university graduates want to go to the US or Australia for a B.Ed., and pay their own way, then that is their business. If it doesn't pan out and lead them to a career, then eventually that market will dry up by itself.

What I really object to is our government putting these "funding units" through a post-secondary education system for 5-yrs (4 yr BA + 1 yr BEd) here in Ontario in a field where the annual demand (6500) is about half of the graduation rate (13000) and declining. Since they are putting in about $8500 per year per student (not including tuition) then this is costing us over $250million/year! (When tuition is added on the Ontario universities are raking in about 1/2 a billion annually in this deal.)

The universities are scamming these kids (and their parents) by leading them to believe that there is a career at the end of this path when for at least half of them there isn’t any hope, especially with declining enrollment due to the population demographics. The universities have a huge vested interest in perpetuating this system for obvious reasons.

I’m a recent graduate from teacher's college in Ontario and the career prospects for me and my cohort are beyond grim. The reality of the job market was never really discussed by the professors; while nice people, they really seem to be in their own little world at the university. (The same could be said for the guidance counselors at my secondary school.) I’m also discouraged by the fact that I cannot even apply to a publically funded separate board simply because I’m not the ‘right’ religion!

Like so many of us I’m going to try a short program preparing me to teach English as a second language at a college in Toronto, but even then I’m hearing that market is flooded too. I’m also struggling with student loans while I work part time waitressing so may parents have offered to pay for this program.

I didn’t think that I’d ever think this way, but I’d have to agree with William: the Ontario universities look at young people like me only as another “funding unit” and they could care less what happens to us after graduation. (Ironically they are already hitting on me to donate through the alumni association!)

My story is very similar to Mary's. I graduated with honours and a B.Ed. in 2007. Currently I work part-time in retail.

What frustrates me is that my brother, who took a three year technology program at college, was hired even before graduation, is employed full-time, and now earns over $60,000 annually. I'm planning to college myself now in a "post-graduate" program for Human Resource Management, but my whole life seems to be on hold for now.

They say that education is never a waste however it certainly seems that the Ontario universities have a powerful incentive to keep the status quo alive.

Since I have a background in operations management, I just can't resist. Who is to blame for this mismatch in supply and demand? In manufacturing one would be fired for producing twice as much as is needed by the customer, and Overproduction is classified as the number 1 waste, out of the 7 Deadly Wastes in Lean Manufacturing.

The university leadership can obviously only see dollar signs and will be more than happy to take the money if it is handed to them. The university faculty owe their livelihood to the perpetuation of this system so asking them for an honest opinion for the need for all of these teachers is akin to asking a CAW line worker at the GM plant for an honest opinion on the need for more cars.

The taxpayer and the parents are simply picking up the tab. The cannon fodder are the highschool graduates. (Some also subscribe to eight wastes with the 8th being the waste of human potential and that certainly is appropriate in this situation.)

The provincial government is asleep at the controls.

@William

You've added an important fact to this discussion - declining size of the elementary/secondary age group.

Many school boards are already dealing with this issue and closing schools. There is not only a need to address the current oversupply of B.Ed graduates, there is a need to prevent an even larger oversupply in the future.

@Mary

You make two good points, one of which I did not consider when writing this piece.

The fact that we have a religious school system, which is allowed to discriminate on the basis of religious, does result in unequal opportunities between Roman Catholics (and Eastern Catholics) and non-Roman Catholics. Sadly, there is very little movement towards one proper public school system in Ontario. A Roman Catholic can teach in the public system, and enjoys the opportunity to not be discriminated against in doing so.

In terms of your university looking for money, I've recieved a similar call. McMaster University called me to suggest I donate $20.09. I told them to deduct my donation from the hundreds of dollars they penalized me for having financial need. (McMaster charges a fee for students requiring OSAP to pay tuition and also charges interest during the wait for OSAP)

@Beverly

I know plenty of similar stories. Technical and trades programs in colleges are leading to well paying jobs. I often question my decision to not attend college after high school.

@Journeyman

Thank you as always for your thoughtful contribution.

@ Joey & William: So isn't it logical that if elementary age children are declining in number now, that in 10-15 years that this will also hit post-secondary education?

So why then are we expanding the capacity at our university campuses like mad right now all of the country if the lecture theatres will be 1/2 empty in the year 2020?

The notion of "pre-screening" candidates to the teaching profession has merit, but, even with such measures in place, unsuitable students will occasionally be admitted. Expecting boards to administer such a system, however, is unrealistic since even in growth areas boards cannot anticipate their hiring needs with any certainty until the end of the summer at which school opens; what the one writer suggested was a board-administered pre-screening more than a year of when the candidate would be expected in the classroom. A more viable approach would be the government's doing a thorough, five-year demographic study and doing a needs assessment prior to setting benchmarks for each year in the one-year teacher education programs run by the dozen public Faculties of Education. I fault the Harris government for creating a massive oversupply based on the premise that young teachers would continue to drop out of the profession in great numbers over the first five years after graduation. The oversupply situation has been exacerbated by the by sanctioning the "border colleges" and the entrepreneurial Australian upstart, Charles Sturt U. The good news for the graduates of Ontario's public faculties of education (not "teachers' colleges, which ceased to exist in 1970) is that the success rate in the marketplace is much lower for those "children of privilege" who, with cumulative averages too low for acceptance on home turf, went to the States to acquire teacher certification. Has the current government been "asleep at the switch"? Parents, graduates, and faculties of education have been alerting the Ministry of Post-Secondary Education and the Ontario College of Teachers to the increasing oversupply for the past two years, but bureaucracies are slow to respond to social change and the government had to be sure there was indeed an oversupply prior to cutting the thousand additional spaces created before it came into office. What should happen is a system-wide reassessment as to how many "spaces" Ontario will need in the next five years, and then scale back the number of seats in teacher education programs accordingly--unless, of course, Ontario wants to subsidize the preparation of teachers who inevitably will work in other jurisdictions in Canada (notably, Alberta) and overseas.

@PEI

The short response is that decreasing youth demographics will effect tertiary education less than it will primary and secondary levels.

The reason for this is that primary/secondary is a universial requirement whereas tertiary is not.

(Arguably, it has become a universial requirement but this is a column in of itself and I don't want to lose the focus of this discussion.)

For this reason, tertiary has room to grow by increasing the percentage of the population which continues into the third level. The result is that tertiary will not have to cut back as much as the universial levels.

There's also immigration patterns which will create an increase in demographics in Toronto, which is expect to cause a space crunch in the GTA.

@ Philip Allington: Generally good comments. Obviously you are some sort of 'insider', however as soon as I read "I fault the Harris government ..." my antennae automatically go up. (And I'm no conservative supporter.)

The Liberals have been running Ontario for almost seven years. They are only just responding now? And instead of cutting the enrollments by 50% to match the demand, they cut them down by <10%?

I’ll give you a C-.

Since the taxpayers of Ontario are funding a large portion of local graduates education, perhaps we should protect our collective investment by requiring the school boards to give hiring preference to graduates from Ontario faculties of education.

Hiring graduates with international training would only be allowed if there was no local graduate that met the job criteria. Basically only under exceptional circumstances.

Oh yeah, blame everything from Mcguinty to harris, to the school boards and even the schools that are graduating you when you are the one who made that choice.

Oh but what about the teachers union militias? Just why do you think there's a shortage of teaching jobs? I'll tell you why.

If you have 12 dollars and you have to pay 6$ to 2 people. You can only have 2 people to work for you. If there are 15 people who want to work, you can hire 2 more by dropping the pay to 3$. Now the 2 who are there will scream and complain but knowing that there are 13 others out there, they'll keep their mouths shut.

But since you're being held hostage to terrorist unions, you can drop their wages and allow more teachers in the door. Unless you address that, this is a dead issue.

@f_f

You point to a regional disparity and a level disparity. If you are willing to teach elementary French, I know the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board is hiring. (Their last hire for this specialization was from PEI)

I'm concerned by your statement "no amount of holiday could possibly make teaching French in Ontario (outside of Ottawa) bearable."

But here's the twist: School boards are also dealing with a shortage of qualified teachers in specialized disciplines, such as French and high-school science. While they are able to better balance their budgets by hiring supply teachers - both retirees and recent graduates - because they do not have to pay benefits, they are also forced to spend more money recruiting teachers in specialized disciplines.

Please stop selling this nonsense about there not being enough French teachers. I know someone qualified to teach high school French who has struggled to get onto a list of potential hires only to stay there for months (I believe the situation remains unresolved) and thus is subbing instead. I know another person (who is qualified to teach high school biology) with a BEd who isn't even trying to get on the supply list because she says it's completely full (in Toronto, at least) and the competition is intense just to get on the short term supply list.

Please stop saying that we need French teachers. Even an acquaintance outside Toronto had difficulty finding work as a French teacher. As for the holidays, no amount of holiday could possibly make teaching French in Ontario (outside of Ottawa) bearable.

There are no teaching jobs out there right now. So stop pretending there are.

Why are you concerned with that statement? It's the truth.

Unless you are a dyed in the wool teacher (I know a few) no amount of vacation is worth trying to teach core french to most of Ontario. Do you remember Core French? I have heard stories about being treated like crap as a Core French student teacher in
Southern Ontario because the kids don't see the point (French? What for they wonder). I remember my own Core French classes. Core French in Ontario requires a massive overhaul in order for it actually teach French rather than bore students to tears by repeatedly trying to drill passé composé in their heads for five years straight before 90 percent of the students quit French and never say more than bonjour and au revoir again.

As a student heading to Nipissing for primary/junior education in the fall, I've heard many of the downsides and the extreme difficulty of finding a job, or even getting hired on with a board as a supply.

The reason new graduates (myself included) are hoping for the kindergarten teaching positions is because of the expansion of full-day learning in Ontario. I have volunteered in a kindergarten class for the past year and a half in my hometown, and with 3 kindergarten classes in every other day, meaning 6 classes in total, the teachers and rooms will need to be doubled to accommodate the full day, everyday learning. (And this is just one school example).

As for the suggestion of school boards 'endorsing' students, or giving promises of employment upon graduation, I see some problems. While in my case, I did return home to Waterloo Region to volunteer (because of the familiarity), it is already encouraged to choose your home region for where you will be completing your practicum teaching. This is all great and fosters a good relationship for education students with the board they are from.

However, I don't think it's fair to expect students to settle in the same area they are from and basically get tied down to your home region. One of the appealing aspects of becoming a teacher is that teachers are needed everywhere.

Nothing is set it stone for me personally to return and settle in Waterloo Region, and while it's always a possibility, I could end up in an other area of the province and don't think it would be fair if I was penalized for trying to work in a new area.

I definitely agree with you though regarding the out of country schools and Austrailian teachers schools. I agree that teachers that are educated in Ontario should have first priority (clearly I have a bias...). To go out-of-province is much easier to gain acceptance, as long as you can cover the high cost, which I agree is limiting for many.

Sarah Milne, while I wish you luck in reaching your dream of teaching kindergarten kids, I’m certain that a large part of the Ontario government's rationale in expanding to 'all-day' kindergarten was in fact motivated as a "make-work" project for unemployed teachers (of course cheered on by their too powerful union).

And I have great difficulty in understanding why 5-years of university is required to teach (many would argue baby-sit) 4 & 5 year olds. The idea of solely using ECE's who are specifically educated in shorter less expensive programs for this task would have been plenty sufficient (Oh, but there is that too powerful union again!)

So the taxpayer pays over $40k in university subsidies to train one teacher, and then pays forever the higher rates of pay and benefits demanded by these over-qualified educators.

These teachers are killing the goose that is laying their golden eggs. People are getting fed-up and I fear that there will be a huge backlash again soon as per the "Common 'Cents' Revolution". Mark these words.

I'm a professor, and I fully support cutting back. Universities don't profit from local undergrads.

The difficulty is that most professions now have similar stories, not just teachers. Do we want a society where only medical doctors and accountants get training at University?

Anybody going into any program in University needs to do some serious legwork into understanding the costs, the risks, and the rewards. If you can't do that, you're not ready for university.

You say that only the "privileged" will be able to afford to go to out of province teacher education programs. In actuality, most people can qualify for a bank loan to attend these institutions.

If the system worked the way that you propose, only the truly privileged (i.e. those who have 40 hours a week to volunteer in a school to get their "recommendation" and still have their bills paid) would be able to attend teacher's college. Also, this would exponentially increase the amount of nepitism that plagues the process of teacher hiring in the first place.

Both the Harris and McGuinty governments deserve blame for feeding the oversupply: Harris-era legislation permitted foreign programs in Ontario [notably Charles Sturt (Australian, very aggressively expanding in teacher education and other fields) and SUNY Potsdam], and during the Liberal era 4 more publicly funded universities were approved to offer teacher education (Trent, Wilfred Laurier, UOIT, and Laurentian English). As well, there are colleges in upstate New York that offer programs aimed at Ontario. The tuition fees for the New York schools, Charles Sturt and SUNY program are around $18 000 per year. Lots of people want to get a teaching qualification regardless of the state of the job market.

Hi Philip, nice to see you contributing (yes, he's an insider...which could be easily determined, so am I).

Although I teach in a different jurisdiction now, I used to be a faculty member in an Ontario faculty or education. The issues facing Ontario are mirrored across Canada...at least the Ontario government has finally started to do something about it.

a) Although there might be a shortage in *some* sciences, there has never to my knowledge been a shortage of biology teachers. Yet, overwhelmingly the vast majority of science education applicants to faculties of education in Ontario and elsewhere are in biology or general science. If you're going to talk about a shortage of science teachers you should more specifically refer to the shortage of physics teachers and the semi-shortage of chemistry teachers. As far as I know this is true in most jurisdictions across Canada to varying degrees.

b) My first class involves telling my students that there are no jobs in biology teaching and that they should save their money. I mention other professions....medical technology, electrician, plumbing, x-ray technician, etc etc where they'd stand a far better chance of getting a job for the same investment. None quit. Ever. Not one. I've brought in science department heads to tell them this, I've brought in people who hire for school boards to tell them, none leave. Ever. Not one. For those here who think profs lie and deceive their students about potential jobs, that's not the truth to my knowledge. Any of my colleagues in science education are just as truthful to their students as far as I know.

c) @William. Across Canada the drop-out rate from teaching as a profession in the first five years is between 35% and 50%. Ontario graduating 13,000 teachers a year when the supply of jobs is only 6,500 is not unreasonable given those numbers.

d) People going to out-of-jurisdiction schools (or places like Charles Sturt) when they don't get accepted into Ontario institutions causes significant problems. At the same time, our governments are making credential transfer across political boundaries easier. What is the solution in this environment? I don't see the pre-screening idea as being feasible in any number of ways (but points for thinking outside of the box). One solution might be to charge higher tuition but to grant large provincial tax deductions for those who get jobs for a couple of years that essentially rebates the higher tuition....and make sure OSAP covers the higher loans. That might result in fewer applicants in areas where the jobs are less likely to be obtained.

e) @Journeyman: There's lots of research that suggests that the return on full day kindergarten is higher than the actual cost of offering it....from both academic (such as reading) and behavioural perspectives. If you actually care about public monetary efficiency, that's one program you should be fully behind.

Michael Bowen: Thanks for your insight.

On the issue of full-day kindergarten, you didn't touch upon the qualifications required to deal with this age group. Why are ECE's not sufficiently qualified? Why are full-blown B.Ed.'s (or higher) required? Is there a pedagogical reason or is this really not just a union job protection issue?

Anyway, there is also lots of research that concludes that home-schooled kids fair better than 'schooled' kids; on this basis perhaps we should be encouraging home-schooling and supporting these families. Good idea???

The qualifications and training are *lots* different for ECE (a 1 to 2 year college diploma) versus someone who has to have two degrees to be able to work with very young kids and give you that financial return. Well-prepared kindergarten teachers (should) understand the research and how to implement it in ways that an average college graduate will not. I can certainly see the "surface" reason for arguing for ECE instead of certified kindergarten teachers, but it's not supported by the research as far as I'm aware. What I do know is that the return on investment for very young kids by providing them with well-qualified people and small classrooms is more than paid back by the solving of later issues (where numeracy, literacy, truancy and behavioural issues are all reduced and therefore fewer supports and remedial programs are needed....and those remedial programs are darned expensive). Front loading good daycare, good literacy programs at libraries, good post-natal care programs for mothers, and good kindergarten programs has *considerable* long-term financial benefits.

As for home-schooling....I'm a big supporter of home-schooling and have been for over a decade (before the Fraser Institute started commissioning reports on it in other words...altho' as I recall their conclusions are that students generally fare as well academically but not necessarily better, but that there are other non-academic and less tangible advantages). In an ideal world I would argue that home-schooling parents should be able to use professionally staffed drop-in centres where they and their kids work with someone with a professional background in the subject area who teaches the parents how to work effectively with their kid(s) in that subject and where both the parent(s) and the kids learn the subject matter....this suggestion comes from my understanding that particularly in math and science home-schooling parents wish they had more support. In fact, I've proposed that very sort of drop-in centre (where my teachers-in-training would work as part of their course credit (outside of class time) under my voluntary supervision with parents & their kids) and have not, to this point, been supported administratively. So, yes, my professional judgement is that culturally we should be supporting home-schooled families far better than we do. ...so I happen to think it's a great idea. And I've been arguing it in various professional settings for a decade.

I'll make a final point. Many of the issues and ideas raised by "outsiders" here are actually understood and agreed with by all sorts of "insiders"....it's not like I come across many ideas in forums such as this that aren't argued for and about by my peers and colleagues. That's partly because we see the same issues, and partly because many of us read forums such as this (and talk to neighbours, parents, etc). That those ideas are not adopted or spread in practice is not necessarily because they don't have advocates "inside" (which is often the assumption in discussion forums such as these). My recognition of the frustrations of many of the general public on these issues is why I decided to start participating in discussions in these forums. I don't have a particular agenda or position to forward or push, other than the perspective that just like in engineering or medical science the practices in education should reflect the best we know in research at the time. The public should demand that too (in my view).

OK, so I notice that the universities are now offering 4-yr undergraduate degrees in ECE. These people aren't qualified either?

There is no influence from the teacher's unions?

(I'm not buying that, but thanks again for your thoughts.)

That's a good question Journeyman... excellent idea for a pilot research project. It would be interesting to see what the full curriculum of those programs are, especially their practicum experiences....and what the experience of other jurisdictions (such as European) have with that approach. However, I can predict what the "outcome" of a positive finding would be....those programs will get absorbed into faculties of education and the requirement to become a kindergarten teacher will be a 4-year ECE program with a BEd certification at the end.

In part that would resolve the slippery slope problem that arises from your suggestion. If an ECE certification is okay for Kindergarten, then why not Grade 1? Grade 2? Where would you then draw the line? Rather than that argument (on which fortunes would be spent to figure it out), it's administratively far easier just to stick with the same certification across the system. If your argument prevailed I can predict another outcome....ECE run daycare costs would start sky-rocketing. One of the only thing keeping them so low now is the distinction between the teacher and ECE programs.

Don't forget, I'm a brutally beat upon taxpayer too (and, Joey, I'm not going to finish paying off my student loans until my early 50's). And I'm not in any teacher's union. I'd be just as happy finding financial short-cuts in this system as you....but often short-term short-cuts have long-term bigger costs.

I have, BTW, taught as a classroom teacher in schooling systems without a union...having done so I can tell you that you'd rather have the union, because the abuses in THAT sort of system leads to considerably poorer teaching (and the associated bigger, long-term costs) and other structural issues that detract from the learning environment.

In an international comparison Canadian teachers are not paid abnormally well, not even in relation to many jurisdictions in the United States...particularly in relation to the cost of living. They certainly were in the 70's and 80's, but not so much now. The last numbers I saw a few years ago, on a per-student expense basis Canada's educational spending ranks quite poorly (15th) compared to many other jurisdictions, our GNP/per capita costs appear high because of the number of students we have IN education systems relative to our country's size.

I would argue, as would many others, that these numbers are raised in part because there are far too many people going to university who should be in other sorts of employment preparation programs. That's not a "union" issue, it's because employers will hire someone with a BA over someone with a high school diploma even though the BA has nothing to do with the job. And that just doesn't effect the post-secondary system...the number of students taking the same high school courses over and over before graduating to raise their marks so they get into the university program they want raises the costs of high-schooling as well.

Remember, the cost-benefit projections, even WITH certified teachers running Kindergarten, are positive....full day Kindergarten saves money in the long-term because of the later programs/remediations that are no longer necessary. If you REALLY want to save money as a taxpayer, figure out a way to get parents to read to/with/around their kids more often and to have them use TV/Computers less...lots of research suggests this dramatically improves school performance in the short and long term (a constant message to my friends with kids). :)

Teacher education is already competitive to get into. Many people apply and don't get in. You don't only need the grades, but you need a strong experience profile, references etc. It is a professional program like law or medicine.

My sister went to teachers college because it was a career of choice for her. Her university average was in the 90s and she could have done anything really, but her dream was to teach. Happily, she was one of the fortunate ones who landed a job upon graduation. There are jobs out there, if you're willing to re-locate and be flexible.

f_f wrote: "Unless you are a dyed in the wool teacher (I know a few) no amount of vacation is worth trying to teach core french to most of Ontario. Do you remember Core French? I have heard stories about being treated like crap as a Core French student teacher in
Southern Ontario because the kids don't see the point (French? What for they wonder)."

----------------------
What's a "dye in the wool teacher"? If you mean someone who actually wants to teach and has the talent, then come on, everyone should have that. Why teach if you don't want to? There are plenty of people out there who do want to and have to talent. Teaching isn't easy, but it's rewarding and a very important profession. And French is a lot of fun too. I remember enjoying French at school and a lot of the kids did. Sure, I grew up in an affluent area, but French was very popular.

Beverly wrote: "My story is very similar to Mary's. I graduated with honours and a B.Ed. in 2007. Currently I work part-time in retail.

What frustrates me is that my brother, who took a three year technology program at college, was hired even before graduation, is employed full-time, and now earns over $60,000 annually. I'm planning to college myself now in a "post-graduate" program for Human Resource Management, but my whole life seems to be on hold for now.

They say that education is never a waste however it certainly seems that the Ontario universities have a powerful incentive to keep the status quo alive.

--------------------
Yeah, but I'm guessing you're 23 or 24 and can get past this down period.

No one said you'd get a job with a BEd...but let's face it, the teaching profession in public schools is closed to you without it. If you wanted a quick study program that yields a job at the end then, yes, college might have served you better.
University education normally trains us for careers that are years in the making. Think of medicine. It's a long haul. Academia? Same story. Law? Similar. Teaching? You may have to supply or take mat leaves for awhile before you are hired permanently. Plus you have to be willing to re-locate.

William wrote: "The way I look at it is that if these young university graduates want to go to the US or Australia for a B.Ed., and pay their own way, then that is their business. If it doesn't pan out and lead them to a career, then eventually that market will dry up by itself."
----------------------
They go abroad because they can't get accepted in Ontario. It's competitive here. Unfortunately, a lot of them won't find work...because people know they went abroad because they couldn't get accepted back home. Ontario school boards tend to hire Ontario BEd graduates.

Mary wrote: "
Why cutting 1,000 places from Ontario’s teachers colleges will not work

Joey Coleman, April 27, 2010 at 3:30 PM

Ontario's Minister of Training, Colleges, and Universities, John Milloy, announced this week that Ontario will cut 1,000 spaces from its teacher training programs in an attempt to correct an oversupply of unemployed B.Ed graduates.

Cutting enrolment at public universities is one of the few methods available to the government to be seen as addressing this problem. The cutting back of spaces in the province may have no impact on the oversupply of qualified teachers - but it will ensure that more teachers come from privileged backgrounds, with parents who could afford paying for a teacher's degree from elsewhere.

There already exists a market for foreign institutions - especially those in U.S. border states such as New York - offering teaching degrees to young Ontarians who are rejected within the province but whose parents can afford to pay for them to attend out-of-country. The Ontario government has no control over these universities and degrees from "Western Nations" are fully recognized when graduates return to the province in search of a full-time teaching position.

I'm already hearing from contacts that teachers' colleges along the border have engaged in a media buy and are likely to expand their enrolments this September to profit from the increased demand for out-of-province spaces.

There are many interests vested in keeping the status quo.

Students

Despite a glut of qualified teachers applying for a limited supply of teaching jobs (with the exception of certain high-school specializations), the rewards of securing a full-time teaching job more than outweigh the risks of unemployment - especially for those holding undergraduate degrees who find themselves already facing poor employment prospects.

With above-average pay, lots of time off - including two months in the summer - and union protections that prevent all but the absolute worst teachers from being fired, it should not be a surprise that many young people are pursuing a teaching career. It's one of the few career paths that offer job security in today's economy.

Students have little desire - but plenty of interest - to decrease spaces. After all, most people believe they're the exception to the rule and will find their dream job (teaching Kindergarten for many) immediately upon graduation.

Universities

Universities have little interest in regulating the flow of graduates from their programs - once they have the student's tuition and government funding units, their interests are fulfilled.

School boards

School boards benefit from an oversupply of teachers who fill the ranks of their supply teaching availability list.

But here's the twist: School boards are also dealing with a shortage of qualified teachers in specialized disciplines, such as French and high-school science. While they are able to better balance their budgets by hiring supply teachers - both retirees and recent graduates - because they do not have to pay benefits, they are also forced to spend more money recruiting teachers in specialized disciplines.

Sometimes they are forced to settle for less than ideally qualified candidates to fill positions; for example, having a non-French major who can speak French instructing the subject at the elementary level.

All parties could benefit from a serious plan to address the current imbalance in teaching graduates - both in numbers and qualifications.

A suggestion

The problem of an imbalance between teaching graduates and jobs can be solved by pre-screening candidates entering teachers colleges for jobs at local school boards when they graduate. To gain entrance to teachers' college, a candidate should be required to prove they have a position lined up with a public or private school waiting for them when they graduate.

This would enable school boards to directly recruit undergraduate students in specialized disciplines and for the creation of incentives for these in-demand graduates to pursue a teaching degree. As undergraduate students would require the endorsement of a school board to enter teachers' college, there would be significant incentives for those wishing to teach to be volunteering at primary and secondary schools. This pool of potential volunteers could be the basis of a comprehensive effort to increase educational outcomes at schools in the poorest socio-economic areas of Canada's cities.

Engaging children in Canada's poorest neighbourhoods - with role models attending university - would achieve more to increase the representation of our nation's lowest social classes in higher education than any present government program. This could help address the increasing gap between the well-off and the poor.

Schools would have an interest in "sponsoring" teaching candidates with roots in their local communities. This could also result in more students from rural, poor and inner-city areas, as well as from native reserves, attending teachers' colleges, which could do more than present "access" programs to encourage socio-economic diversity in the teaching profession.

The oversupply problem was not created overnight and it will not be solved with a knee-jerk reaction. The greatest cause of the current crisis was the knee-jerk responses of previous governments to the supply and demand crises they faced.

It is time for a serious review and restructuring of the teaching profession, and the best place to start is revamping the present assembly-line teaching colleges, which are producing too many graduates who are generalists and not enough who are specialists.

The only party with the power and motivation to act is the government.

What do you say, "education premier" Dalton?

Tagged with ontario, cut, training, teacher, spots |
Comments

The way I look at it is that if these young university graduates want to go to the US or Australia for a B.Ed., and pay their own way, then that is their business. If it doesn't pan out and lead them to a career, then eventually that market will dry up by itself.

What I really object to is our government putting these "funding units" through a post-secondary education system for 5-yrs (4 yr BA + 1 yr BEd) here in Ontario in a field where the annual demand (6500) is about half of the graduation rate (13000) and declining. Since they are putting in about $8500 per year per student (not including tuition) then this is costing us over $250million/year! (When tuition is added on the Ontario universities are raking in about 1/2 a billion annually in this deal.)

The universities are scamming these kids (and their parents) by leading them to believe that there is a career at the end of this path when for at least half of them there isn’t any hope, especially with declining enrollment due to the population demographics. The universities have a huge vested interest in perpetuating this system for obvious reasons.
Comment by William - April 27, 2010 at 4:13 PM

I’m a recent graduate from teacher's college in Ontario and the career prospects for me and my cohort are beyond grim. The reality of the job market was never really discussed by the professors; while nice people, they really seem to be in their own little world at the university. (The same could be said for the guidance counselors at my secondary school.) I’m also discouraged by the fact that I cannot even apply to a publically funded separate board simply because I’m not the ‘right’ religion!"

-------------------
You can't teach in a Catholic school unless you are knowledgeable about Catholicism. That's just how it works...get over it.

Surveys of recent teacher education graduates by the Ontario College of Teachers (certification body) show that graduates of non-Ontario programs like Charles Sturt and the 'border colleges' get teaching jobs at about half the rate of graduates from Ontario publicly funded programs. This result has persisted over several iterations of the annual survey. I think it's because their programs are crap and the students aren't sufficiently well qualified to get into Ontario programs. If school boards are biased against them, perhaps it's for good reason.

Michael Bowen wrote: "@William. Across Canada the drop-out rate from teaching as a profession in the first five years is between 35% and 50%. Ontario graduating 13,000 teachers a year when the supply of jobs is only 6,500 is not unreasonable given those numbers."

To me that says more about the poor quality of the education and preparation of these new teachers than anything else. Could you imagine that sort of attrition rate with other professions (e.g., doctors, firefighters, police, etc.). You folks at the teacher's colleges must be doing a very poor job of explaining and demonstrating the role of a 'teacher' to your students.

That should be reason enough to close half of these programs down!

(And besides, if your numbers are correct, then there shouldn't be an oversupply of teaching grads. There obviously is, so what gives?)

@ Zoe: "You can't teach in a Catholic school unless you are knowledgeable about Catholicism. That's just how it works...get over it."

No, I will not get over it. How is "catholic" English, math, science, gym, music, geography, history different from any-body else’s. Aren't all of the publicly funded schools supposed to follow the provincial curriculum?

Why should I need a "Letter from a Priest" to have equal treatment at a publicly funded school? (How many child molesters have written those letters over the years attesting to people being 'good' Catholics?)

Re Catholic, there really only should be a single public system in Ontario. Both Quebec and Newfoundland managed to dispense with their historical denominationally based school systems without a lot of fuss. It might be harder in Ontario but it's very difficult to justify the current system. In many locations Catholic and 'public' school boards shares services such as bussing and purchase of supplies, so the logical conclusion is not far away...

Apart from that, teaching in the Catholic system requires only a nominal commitment to Catholicism. Proponents of Catholic education have pressed for greater Catholic content in teacher education programs but thus far have not got anywhere.

To Sean o Sea. I've done some work in my graduate program looking at the employment status of those 1 year out of their B.Ed programs.

Those graduating out of an Ontario school might have a higher employment rate than those from the border colleges/Australia. However the Ontario students are significantly more likely to doing supply not LTO, or full-time teaching.

I'd wager that this is due to their existing willingness to be more mobile in their job search that are those in Ontario Faculty of Ed's.

Finally school boards/union rules that dont provide full recognition of years of service in other boards is problematic. A new teacher has no incentive to go to an underserviced area in Northern Ontario when they cant get years credit for that back in the GTA boards afterwards.

@Sean O'Sea:"...graduates of non-Ontario programs like Charles Sturt and the 'border colleges' get teaching jobs at about half the rate of graduates from Ontario publicly funded programs....I think it's because their programs are crap and the students aren't sufficiently well qualified to get into Ontario programs."

So what would you suggest? That Ontario graduates demonstrate their academic worth compared to the other graduates by having their undergraduate transcripts publicly available? That would certainly allow parents to ensure that teachers had sufficient academic backgrounds in subjects before those teachers started teaching their children. That type of accountability would be tough to achieve tho'.

>Michael Bowen wrote: "@William. Across
>Canada the drop-out rate from teaching
>as a profession in the first five
>years is between 35% and 50%. Ontario
>graduating 13,000 teachers a year when
>the supply of jobs is only 6,500 is
>not unreasonable given those numbers."

>To me that says more about the poor
>quality of the education and
>preparation of these new teachers than
>anything else. Could you imagine that
>sort of attrition rate with other
>professions (e.g., doctors,
>firefighters, police, etc.). You folks
>at the teacher's colleges must be
>doing a very poor job of explaining
>and demonstrating the role of a
>'teacher' to your students.

>That should be reason enough to close
>half of these programs down!

Well, I respectfully disagree. It might have more to do with the determination of people in those programs to become teachers no matter what experiences they encounter on practicum, no matter what they are told about the rigours of the job. Many of my students (who are already university graduates) fully believe they will only have to teach students who are like they were, academically and behaviourally, in school. The "shock" of getting a string of classes to teach with students very much not like them, and sometimes in a subject area they know anything about, is quite the reality check for some of them. Others are rather astounded at the volume of work teachers have to do...far different than what they expected. They certainly do not expect to have to spend weekend after weekend grading assignments at some times of the year. Little can be done to address this sort of thing in a one or two year BEd degree, it takes a sharp dose of "real life" over a full year or two of full-time teaching for the reality to really set in that maybe they just don't want to be a teacher.

> And besides, if your numbers are
> correct, then there shouldn't be an
> oversupply of teaching grads. There
> obviously is, so what gives?)

You're of course "missing" that the 13,000 "grads" from Ontario Fac of Eds entering the system doesn't count those who receive certification elsewhere and transfer in their licensure. In some provinces a number equal to that of provincial graduates applies for certification from those "border" United States institutions that essentially only exist to teach Canadian students who couldn't get into the provincial programs. In those provinces you could have zero faculty of education graduates in a year and oversupply would still occur.

Besides, if you doubt the 35-50% figure, go and look up what the attrition rate is yourself and present counter-evidence....I'm always happy for someone to find data that I'm unaware of...but to my knowledge, the range I cited is current as of this year for jurisdictions across Canada.

I'm sorry Zoe but 'I enjoyed French' is not really the point now is it?

And I'm sure that with this recession there are a hell of a lot more non-affluent kids around than affluent ones.

As for the dyed in the wool comment, realistically you must know that it's more than enjoying teaching. Liking the idea of teaching and actually being able to teach are two different things. Have you seen entre les murs? Even a good teacher can't get at all of them. French teaching in Ontario is depressing because no matter what you do in most cases and how interested the kids are, very few of them will actually ever be able to use the language. The cultural element of French (apart from a trip to a Quebecois-French restaurant in tenth grade) is non-existant. Most kids (esp. the non affluent ones) don't care, can't be bothered, etc. Our Core French system is messed up. And even immersion isn't all it's cracked up to be. The French teach English and German with greater success than we do French and theoretically we are the ones who like to brag about living in a 'bilingual' country. Lots of good things happen when you learn French (mostly you get to understand how the other solitude thinks and understand Jacques Brel) but the French program in Ontario starts too late, ends too early and teaches nothing to show how French might be useful or fun. Voila les raisons pour lesquelles je trouve vachement plate l'idée d'enseigner la langue de Moliere.

The troubles for teachers begin and end with reformer provincial governments. They push through election promises even when it's clear that teachers and parents think the policy is a dog. McGuinty's split-class policy is a good example. It taxed teachers by giving them double the work (taking from individual attention they used to give kids) and it made education harder for the kids in the younger end of the class and less challenging for those at the oldest end. A resounding failure, split-classes are now entrenched as a progressive education policy when in fact they should only be used as an answer to overcrowding in schools.

It think the best thing a writer like Joey Coleman can do is focus himself on researching and reporting the failures and successes. He's too inexperienced to make 'suggestions' -- that much is clear!