Interest in the education system in British Columbia and Canada generally seems to be at an all time high. Likely, in part driven by high PISA (International testing) results, edu-tourism is flourishing and the world is very curious about what is going on in Canada. This week I am giving a talk to an audience of largely American Superintendents, which has forced me to try to crystallize exactly what it is in our part of the world that is so interesting.
When we look at structures, our Canadian system has a lot in common with our US counterparts. We have locally elected Boards of Education throughout most of the country, we have local accountability, a mix of involvement of different levels of government, generally high community engagement in education and strong teacher associations. We lack the Federal involvement in education present in the United States and seemingly most places in the world, and generally don’t have the ability to raise any funding locally for the school system. Throughout North America you can find quite a bit in common with how we organize education.
Our system seems to strive for this highly sought after combination of strong equity and high quality. We seem to have dismissed the idea that one needs to either have one or the other and instead we have committed ourselves to both. And we also seem to have this unwavering belief that no matter how “good” our system is, we need to continue to change, grow and get better. There is a sense that we can always improve. Trying to tightly describe the BC or Canadian uniqueness is a challenge, but I see these as some of the areas that stand out:
We Are Doing What We Always Say We Should Do
The entire BC curriculum has been redesigned. The prescriptive nature of the curriculum has been reduced with a greater focus on big ideas and the allowance of flexibility and choice in learning for teachers and students. Interdisciplinary learning has been embraced allowing the teacher a greater opportunity to be creative and innovative in the design of their learning experiences. Core competencies are the foundation of the curriculum with a focus on communication, thinking and personal and social competency. Now these areas that we have always said are important, but often in the background have been pushed to the foreground. And finally, the curriculum has been Indiginized and a focus on the First Peoples Principles of Learning has been emphasized throughout the province.
A former Superintendent colleague of mine, Mike McKay, would often say, “Will What We Know Change What We Do?” – with our system we are trying to make the answer now.
Curriculum
The shift in curriculum is as much about the how as the what. The move to big ideas, has seen a move to more inquiry based learning. The curriculum is seen as relevent and ever-changing. Rather than being static as it has been in the past, it is seen now as nimble, being able to shift as the world shifts.
Assessment
BC does not have high stakes assessment. Students in British Columbia write Foundation Skills Assessments in grades 4 and 7 in reading, writing and numeracy and then a literacy and numeracy assessment in grades 10-12. These results are shared with students and families and inform practice but they do not appear on report cards, nor are they part of any school marks. Teacher judgement is highly valued and they along with schools and districts design a range of assessments (more than just traditional tests) to support students. Increasingly passion projects, portfolios and capstone assignments are a large part of a student’s program
We Have Learned From Others
When I look at our system in BC now, I would describe it as a “mash-up” of what we are seeing around the world. One can see elements of Finland, Singapore and New Zealand in our system. International Baccalaureate and Advanced Placement have also clearly been influential. Teachers have looked locally – to schools in their district and our province, to Alberta and Ontario, to High Tech High in San Diego, and many other places and they have all influenced what we do. BC has always prided itself on being a highly networked province and this extends around the globe, and our system reflects this. We have taken good ideas and made them ours for our context
No Franchises
BC has this delicate balance of having a lot common with others but not sameness. Schools and districts share some tenants but are not trying “scale” work to all be the same. It is this idea of networks. We are trying to connect and build networks, focusing on diffusion, not replication.
It is hard to pull the BC or Canadian story together. I don’t think anyone can listen to someone speak about our system or visit our schools and say, we should be like them. Just as we haven’t done that as we looked to evolve our system. We are immensely proud of our school system, and it is wonderful to be somewhere that recognizes the world is rapidly changing, so as proud as we are of our past and present, our future needs to change to ensure we continue to have this pride.
Below are the slides I am using for this presentation this week. It is a work in progress, so any thoughts to help make these ideas more clear are always appreciated (if you are viewing this via email you may need to go to the website to see the slides).
cultureofyes.ca 
Chris,
Enjoy giving the talk. I know you will represent us (BC, and Canada) well.
Trying to discern what exactly makes our system so successful is tricky, indeed. Good luck! While attending the Learning Forward conference last year with Pasi as one of the keynotes, I wrote this blog about our great system, touching on the difficulty of defining our successes. https://donbalcombe.wordpress.com/2016/12/07/seeing-the-trees-within-the-forest/
Thanks Don for sharing this post. I too found that talk from Pasi very influential. I am actually borrowing a couple of his slides on equity and excellence for my presentation. It is the nature of education – trying to explain successes is not simple, and as much as people would like to point to a magic bullet – there isn’t one. Great blog post!
Chris:
Since the Canadian Study of the State of Professional Learning in Canada, and working with the BC Collaborative of Educators to create the BC Case Study, I have been fascinated by examining the issue you address. I suggest that a core aspect of our success in BC, and something that differs from our colleagues in the US, is the collaborative nature of quality professional learning that is enhanced by inquiry AND Innovation.
At the networking dinners that Learning Forward BC hosts, the innovative and collaborative cross role team work stand out as fundamental to creating a culture of learning for all.
Thanks Sue. Yes, this is an important addition. I am always impressed that roles seem to matter less in Canada than other places – we just focus on the work. Of course, I also really appreciate everything you did in West Vancouver to help establish this culture.
Hi Chris,
Very interesting blog. As well as all that you mentioned I was always impressed by the results produced by the introduction of self regulation in our classrooms. I am not sure if it has been adapted through out Canada but it certainly seemed to be a very beneficial addition in our district. Good luck with your speech.
Yes, Cindy that is a good addition. I think our work in this area is unique to Canada and particularly BC. People seem so surprised how committed we are to social emotional learning in general.
I really appreciate the additions that Linda Kaser offered me in an email after reading my post that I think really assist with the conversation:
Assessment and curriculum change and the “meso” level –
The reasons we do so well in BC according to informed people (visitors and OECD gurus and pre-doctoral grads)
1. we pay no attention to gurus
2. the primary teachers association is superb and has been for at least four decades
3. we have the richest smartest “meso” level of any system in the world (which is why we are future ready)
4. the FREE learning progressions have been used by thousands to shape their curriculum choices for twenty years (be sure to build this one into your assessment slide – it is UNIQUE
5. the focus on character aka social responsibility has helped to make safe and caring schools
6. we have brilliant educators who have engaged with schools – three especially – Kim, Deb B and Nancy Perry so we know what SEL and deep self reg looks like
7. we have outstanding FIRST NAME consultants who have state of the art strategies
8. we have outstanding Indigenous scholars/leaders who have shaped the province over the last ten years especially – Dr. Lorna Williams especially
9. we work behind the scenes across roles
10 we even have a district network that self funds to learn more about powerful district inquiry work – unique in the world
Hi George, tough I agree with many points, I have a few to add. In Canada we place greater value in our teachers, treat them as professionals (OCT/OEEO) and pay them accordingly (unlike in much of the US). Also, we value both our official languages. French language schools are thriving across the country, not just in Quebec. And most importantly, we believe in strong publicly funded education for everyone! Yes, there are private schools but every child can receive an excellent education in our publicly funded elementary and secondary schools.
Agreed – strong public schools that are attended by most of the students in our country is a key value to our system and does make us unique in the world!
Hi Chris
This is a terrific piece.
“It is this idea of networks. We are trying to connect and build networks, focusing on diffusion, not replication.” Yes, yes, yes.
To add to the brilliant Linda Kaser, regarding meso levels, is the seemingly natural interweaving of micro and macro levels of inquiry we seek and participate in and as a result, drawing learners of all kinds together to pursue their own learning.
Thanks Jennifer. And yes, the inquiry work across levels is definitely something that is a key part of our system.
Very late to the party on this one, but an interesting topic and great discussion. One thing that strikes me as a big asset is the funding model of Canada’s confederation wrt education.
We don’t have major federal funding earmarked for schools, but we do have equalization payments that (I believe) are more robust than the US federalist model. Rather than a politics that seeks to exert control over the system from the federal level (too many cooks, too great a focus on data-driven accountability models = too many mandated assessments), the provinces get to spend the transfer payments where they believe it will make sense.
But it’s a Goldilocks situation – we get the feds out of the picture, but don’t apply a locally-driven funding model too narrowly. Sure, we collect lots of funding from West Van homeowners, and could have a set of uber luxury public schools with sweeping views and grand pianos in the foyer, but instead that money pays for everyone’s good schools across BC. The $26,000/yr that it costs per student in Bella Bella doesn’t have to come out of their local tax base. A greater number of smaller states in the US means much wider variation in funding levels. The fact that small, East Coast provinces do poorest in PISA is another hint in this direction (correlation does not equal causation, of course…).
In the US, as I understand it, there are school jurisdictions that are very poor and can’t fund schools the same way as others. They simply lack the tax base – you can’t get much tax from people with no money. This leads the folks with money to buy in ‘good districts’. Unlike in BC, those homeowners can then choose through their collective electoral decisions not to fund people outside their community. We see the same dynamic as local West Vancouver politicians and residents decry the new school surtax as “grossly unfair”.
Another aspect vs. the US system is health care. Health care spending in the states has eaten school resources – it is an uncontrolled cost mandated by contracts. We’ve had similar shocks – pensions in 2008 had to be re-actuarialized, and now we are worried about the new payroll tax replacing the MSP, but that’s a tiny thing compared to the shakedown educational institutions get from the health insurance companies every year. There’s an economic theory called Baumol’s cost disease that explains why this is happening.
I agree that all of the points raised above are contributing factors, but a lot of the variation relates, in my view, to how a country structures its levels of government, how it shares wealth across jurisdictions and the nature of what the polis is demanding from elected officials. Even as district admin try to make improvements to their outcomes, it’s important to acknowledge up the constraints they work with when designing solutions. So many of the problems I have worked on in the public sector start with the phrase ‘assuming no new resources…’
But resources definitely count.
Thanks Stephen. This is a very useful addition. What struck me in visiting Finland and talking with educators and other leaders was that those who were looking to replicate the Finnish Story were doomed – it was so tied to who they are as a population and decisions they have made around their values.
I appreciate the thoughtful additions to the conversation.