PS News presents reports on recent College activities and a selection of announcements, events and initiatives in the wider education community that may be of interest to our members.
Government review finds dysfunction in BC College of Teachers
BC Education Minister Margaret MacDiarmid is talking with education stakeholders in the wake of a report on the functionality of the BC College of Teachers. The report calls into question the college’s ability to serve the public interest.
The government-commissioned review of the college by former deputy minister Donald Avison asserts that:
- the BC college is “dysfunctional”
- its council is “more preoccupied with procedural complexity” than with the overriding responsibility of protecting the public interest
- “The BC Teachers’ Federation has acted overtly to limit the scope of authority exercised by the college and has done so in a manner that has impaired the capacity of the College to be seen as an entity exercising authority independent from the federation”
- when compared with other self-regulatory bodies, the BC College of Teachers “fares poorly.”
The review was precipitated in part by a governance committee report tabled with the BC college’s council in December 2009 that recommended a series of policy changes to strengthen the college’s ability to act independently.
Avison says that the report generated “a considerable amount of acrimony” within the council and between its proponents and the teachers’ federation, but that it was a catalyst to unearthing long-standing issues. The proposed package of reforms never came to a vote. Consequently, a majority of the BC college’s council opted to communicate its concerns directly to the minister of education and to call for an independent review of college governance.
Report commissioned
Trustees, principals, vice-principals, supervisory officers and parents supported the call for a review.
Avison was commissioned to see whether the college was fulfilling its mandate, to look at its role and performance in pre- and in-service training, and to compare its role and function to those of other self-regulating professions and teacher-certification bodies. He interviewed former members of the council, received a written submission from the BC Teachers’ Federation (BCTF) and spoke with various education stakeholders to prepare his report.
Avison says the existence of the BC college and its mandate has been controversial since the college’s creation in 1987.
The BCTF, Avison reports, believes that the creation of the college divided the loyalties of teachers and was thus a “direct attack” by the government on their organization. In response to early frictions, the government dissolved the college’s council and replaced it with 20 members drawn from the teaching profession, school administration, school parent groups, postsecondary educators and other groups. The number of elected teachers was reduced to 12 from 15. In response, the BCTF ran an “overt” campaign to occupy the elected council positions. The intent, says Avison, was to restrict the mandate of the college by controlling or limiting budget, fees and policies. The BCTF sought to not routinely publish the names of members involved in discipline cases and to not implement an online registry for members.
Federation critical
The BCTF said there had been no problems at the college until recently and that current issues are the result of a manufactured crisis by the college’s chair and registrar. It said the college is meeting its legislated mandate by establishing standards and putting in place protocols to deal with concerns.
“The public interest and the interest of the profession are closely aligned with teachers committed to high standards of practice and with educational attainment levels within the profession that go well beyond what is likely to be found in other jurisdictions,” the federation said.
Further, it said that there was “no evidence” that the BCTF has ever interfered in the discipline process of the college.
The report, A College Divided, is highly biased and politicized, said BCTF president Susan Lambert.
“It’s laced with unsubstantiated allegations and continues a sorry history of friction within the college of teachers,” she said.
In examining whether the BC college meets its mandate, Avison found that “the current standards when compared to what had been in place, or when compared to the much more robust standards adopted by other self-regulating professions, are imprecise and, in some areas, rather vague.”
“The 2008 Standards are distinguished by what they no longer contain,” Avison wrote. “The obligation to ‘work collaboratively with educators, support staff, professional support staff, parents and others to improve student achievement’ is gone from the text.”
The duty to establish and maintain the boundaries of a professional relationship with students is also gone, he said.
Avison called the results of setting expectations for pre- and in-service teacher education “at best – rather mixed.”
Registrar supports
Doctors, lawyers and accountants in BC all have “comparatively stronger mechanisms for the certification of members, comprehensive requirements for ongoing professional development of members and discipline processes that, by comparison, are more responsive to the public interest and certainly more transparent than what can be found at the BC College of Teachers,” Avison said.
Kit Krieger, a former president of the BCTF and the current registrar of the college, agreed with Avison’s assessment. Krieger expressed confidence that self-regulation can be preserved but said the decision resides ultimately with the government and the profession.
“While government is the authority that determines whether teaching will be a self-regulating profession, I believe that government’s decision will be shaped by whether or not it is confident that teachers understand and aspire to professional status. If teachers want to be and be seen to be professionals, they must embrace the full responsibilities that accompany self-regulation. Primary among these responsibilities is to place public interest ahead of the interests of the profession, an undertaking that requires an absolute separation between the regulatory function of the college and the advocacy function of the BCTF.”
“On balance, the council is not, and has not, been effective for quite some period of time and there is reason for serious concern about potential damage to the public interest if some form of action isn’t taken to address the ongoing problems,” Avison said.
“There is also little reason for optimism that the difficulties at the college will likely find some form of resolution without some form of government intervention.”
