The balance between regulation and trust in the education system - part 2

The state of Ontario in Canada had a significant systemic problem in the education sector in the early 2000's. Several years of unrest between government and teachers' unions created increased mistrust and stalled fronts. One result of that was that the students learning outcome was below what was expected. Parents' expectations of better schools and better results were an important catalyst for change.

During 2004 the Ontario Ministry of Education invited parents, teachers, school leaders, researchers, politicians and bureaucrats to a courageous, open dialogue. They achieved a balance between regulation and trust, which made it possible to focus on long-term educational improvements.

The article does not consider whether the agreements that were signed at the time, were only good. But the grip by addressing brave calls to regain trust, is essential. Ontario's recognition of, and commitment to succeed in balancing regulation and trust, has cost some principles for all parties, and a whole lot of money. In return, they obtained an ecosystem where parents, teachers, school leaders, researchers, politicians and bureaucrats are dependent on each other's mutual understanding, respect and ability to follow up to ensure that students get the learning environment they deserve.

The article is not thoroughly on the various parts of the agreement, but mentions that teachers' unions are most pleased with the salary increase, with the contractual fixed maximum number of students in the class, with a fixed number of days for annual further training, with a long-term approach to investment and mentoring program for graduated teachers.

The authority level is most pleased with the fact that the initiative to succeed with a long-term committed relationship passed through in 2004. Then they could meet the parents' desire for evidence-based knowledge about learning outcomes. The authority level is also pleased with the common choice of the few national development topics that they intend to improve, and the agreement to use teachers as external advisors in the development of learning communities. Researchers are satisfied because they have been actively involved in the design of national educational development topics. Parents are happy because they feel they have got actual knowledge of the school.

Ontario's results from international surveys such as PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment), TIMSS (Trends in Mathematics and Science Study) and PIRLS (Progress in International Reading Literacy Study), all show a significant progress and are located high on international tables. According to the authorities the results demonstrate that the effort has been successful. For eight years the ecosystem has balanced on the agreed regulations and the increased mutual trust between the levels of the educational system.

This year the relationships and the accumulated trust are put to the test. Difficult economic times require significant cuts in the Ontario budget ahead. Thus the ecosystem can quickly get out of balance. Unpopular measures will be the subject of discussions, such as freezing salaries for all employees in the school for a period. Other possible measures are cutting annual training days, reduce teaching positions and increase numbers of students in the class.

Under the current agreement, publication of results, as well as systems for evaluating teachers were the hardest parts of the agreement to accept for teachers and school leaders in Ontario. Therefore, these issues will likely be discussed again.

The slowly achieved confidence between the government level and practice level in Ontario is put to the test by the fall negotiations. If the dialogue continues and leads to an agreement, it should be possible to maintain a balance between regulation and trust in the ecosystem. However, if it ends up with stalled fronts the outlook is bleaker. The previous story in Ontario shows that imbalance at best creates a few winners and many losers. In the worst case, only losers, in which students are the ones who lose the most. If it ends up with an ecosystem still in balance, in the worst case, it will create some winners and some losers. At best, only winners, and the students no matter are the ones who benefit most.