RCÉ Vol. 18, No. 1

Douglas Stewart Teaching or Facilitating: A False Dichotomy Harro Van Brummelen Effects of Government Funding on Private Schools: Appraising the Perceptions of Long-term Principles and Teachers in British Columbia’s Christian Schools Dennis Raphael Accountability and Educational Philosophy: Paradigms and Conflicts in Ontario Education Colette Deaudelin, Jean Loiselle et Marielle Pratte L’utilisation pédagogique d’outils informatiques de gestion de données à l’école primaire Salah Benyamna, Jacques Désautels et Marie Larochelle Du concept à la chose: la notion de particule dans les propos d’étudiants à l’égard de phénomènes physiques

Contents / Table des matières Articles Douglas Stewart Harro Van Brummelen

Dennis Raphael

Colette Deaudelin, Jean Loiselle et Marielle Pratte Salah Benyamna, Jacques Désautels et Marie Larochelle

1 Teaching or Facilitating: A False Dichotomy 14 Effects of Government Funding on Private Schools: Appraising the Perceptions of Long-term Principles and Teachers in British Columbia’s Christian Schools 29 Accountability and Educational Philosophy: Paradigms and Conflicts in Ontario Education 46 L’utilisation pédagogique d’outils informatiques de gestion de données à l’école primaire 62 Du concept à la chose: la notion de particule dans les propos d’étudiants à l’égard de phénomènes physiques

Review Essay / Essai critique James Ryan

79 Studying Effective Schools and Districts: The Problems with Universals and Uniformity

Book Reviews / Recensions Janine Hohl

86 Apprendre à vivre ensemble: Immigration, société et éducation par Jocelyn Berthelot

Eric Mclean

88 La direction des mémoires et des thèses par Aimée Leduc

Louise Moran

LeRoi B. Daniels

91 Open Learning and Open Management: Leadership and Integrity in Distance Education, by Ross H. Paul 93 Reform and Relevance in Schooling: Dropouts, De-Streaming and the Common Curriculum, edited by Derek J. Allison & Jerry Paquette

Teaching or Facilitating: A False Dichotomy* Douglas Stewart university of regina A recent trend suggests teachers should facilitate learning rather than instruct children. This alarming idea is couched in the slogan “we facilitate learning, we don’t teach.” I argue that to take the idea seriously is to eclipse the tradition of teaching and push it to one side, putting at risk the general education of youngsters. I clarify the terms “teaching” and “facilitating,” and give reasons why the former, not the latter, should be emphasized. Une tendance récente suggère que les enseignants devraient faciliter l’apprentissage plutôt que d’enseigner. L’auteur soutient qu’en retenant cette idée inquiétante, on balaie du revers de la main toute une tradition de l’enseignement et on met en péril l’éducation générale des jeunes. L’auteur clarifie les deux approches et explique pourquoi la première, à savoir l’enseignement, devrait être privilégiée. INTRODUCTION

One of the latest in a litany of educational slogans to play havoc with the formation of sound theory and practice advances the idea that teachers don’t teach, they “facilitate learning.” It is an idea that seems to have caught on with teacher organizations and is taking hold with students in faculties of education. In Saskatchewan, “facilitating” made its formal appearance in February 1984, with the publication of Directions, the final report of the Minister’s Advisory Committee on Curriculum and Instruction Review and a blueprint for provincial curriculum reform. According to Directions, a mainly child-centred work, the “role of the teacher is changing from disseminator of knowledge to facilitator of learning and this changing role should be acknowledged” (Saskatchewan Education, February 1984, p. 37, italics added). A similar theme is pressed in a companion report, Saskatchewan Education: Its Programs and Policies (June 1984), which claims that teachers “need to structure the environment and facilitate learning to provide opportunities for students to engage in problem-solving and decision-making about what and how they learn” (p. 54). Pressure has continued to mount for the replacement of teaching by facilitating. According to a recent study, Inherent in the supposition of teachers’ lack of knowledge about how students prefer to learn is a criticism of the teacher/lesson orientation still visible in the education system

*

I am grateful to J.S. Malikail and anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this paper.

1

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATION

18:1 (1993)

2

DOUGLAS STEWART

of Saskatchewan. The change of teacher role to that of a facilitator of learning has not been fully incorporated. The emphasis is often still on content and the presentation of content by the teacher rather than on the learning processes of the students. (Campbell, 1991, p. 107)

These are misleading and dangerous ideas for the education of children not only in Saskatchewan but generally. I argue that the slogan “we facilitate learning, we don’t teach” (or versions thereof) is based on a serious misconception of teaching and that were teachers to act consistently on the slogan, children would be educationally deprived or at least in grave risk of such a state. If my conceptual analysis of the case and overall arguments for a renewed emphasis on teaching are sound, then there are good reasons why we should think twice about handing children over to “facilitators” in our schools, and why faculties of education should think twice about presenting the teacher’s role as one of facilitating learning rather than of teaching curriculum subjects. Teaching: A Summary Analysis Teaching is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition of learning. It is not a necessary condition since there can be learning without teaching (a person can learn by reading, observing, or other means); and it is not sufficient since there can be teaching without learning (I might teach a class but the students not learn what I teach them). Teaching and learning are thus logically independent. It would be incorrect to think that if learning occurs there must have been teaching, or that if there was no teaching there could not have been learning. Of course, it is true that “we facilitate learning, we don’t teach” is consistent with the logical independence of these concepts, but that in itself is not sufficient to justify the slogan nor a good reason to take it seriously. Logical considerations alone do not give us a full account of what teaching is. To discard or even minimize teaching in favour of something called “facilitating” on grounds that teaching is not necessary to learning would be premature indeed. Although teaching does not entail learning, it does entail the intention to bring about learning (Scheffler, 1960; Hirst & Peters, 1970; Hellgren, 1985; Pearson, 1989). To teach something to others — for example, to teach a mathematical fact, a moral value, a motor skill, or a metaphor — is to intend that others learn these things. Learning is the central “good” at which teaching necessarily aims. Even when learning is not the result, teaching could still have occurred provided at least the purpose or aim to have others learn is present. Although learning as an outcome is not necessary for teaching proper, if the aim to achieve learning is removed there can be no teaching. There is, then, an important conceptual link between teaching and learning. Without a reference to “learning,” as embodied in the intention criterion, we could not have a concept of teaching — or certainly not a very coherent and recognizable one.

TEACHING OR FACILITATING

3

Given this conceptual link and the fact that learning may often follow teaching (that is, teaching may often be successful), it might be tempting to conclude that teaching and learning are related in some further way — causally, for example. Recent work on the teaching-learning relationship has explored the question of causal linkages (Ericson & Ellett, 1987; Macmillan & Garrison, 1983, 1986; Pearson, 1989). But we should tread cautiously here. Causal connections hold between events, not concepts, and occur in empirical, not conceptual, realms. If there are causal links, these would need to be brought out in concrete instances of the concepts in which episodes of teaching (cause) regularly lead to instances of learning (effect). Since experience cannot confirm what is not logically possible, and since teaching does not entail learning, instances of teaching cannot be said to guarantee instances of learning. Teaching (by itself) is not the cause of learning in the sense of being an empirically sufficient condition for it. That would be too stringent a test. It would also put in limbo the idea that students must take some responsibility for learning what they are taught. As others have pointed out, however, “sufficient causes are only one type of causal relation,” so that if teaching is not an empirically sufficient condition of learning, it would “not preclude that teaching and learning are causally related in another way” (Pearson, 1989, p. 83). Without going into details of a rather complex argument, it can been seen that teaching is factually or empirically related to learning at least as a “partial cause” (Pearson, 1989, p. 85) or “causal factor” (Hare, 1990, p. 201), even though teaching is not always sufficient and is not necessary to bring about learning. I have briefly advanced these conceptual and empirical claims to offset in part the criticism, often made by proponents of facilitating, that teaching is not a learner-centred activity. Just where critics think the “centre” of teaching actually lies is not clear, but, since (as I have outlined) the essential purpose of teaching is to bring about learning in others, and since it can be a causal factor in the achievement of learning, there can be little doubt as to the confusion from which such criticism must stem. Teaching is obviously more prominent in learning than enthusiasts of facilitating are generally willing to concede. Yet, an intention to achieve learning in others does not in itself do full justice to “teaching” as a learner-centred activity. The CBC’s Peter Mansbridge and Pamela Wallin (let us suppose) certainly intend their viewers to learn what they report in the nightly news, but we do not say they are teaching. Further differentia of “teaching” can certainly be appealed to, criteria that even strengthen its learner-centred emphasis — for example, that the intended content be first indicated to learners and that it fall within range of their capabilities (Hirst & Peters, 1970). But it is obvious that Mansbridge and Wallin can satisfy these additional criteria without much difficulty. The distinction we seek between teaching (at least in the context of schooling) and other activities like news broadcasting lies primarily in the types of learning

4

DOUGLAS STEWART

at which they respectively aim. We teach children so they will learn basic cognitive skills (how to read, write, calculate, estimate) and basic moral-social dispositions (to be kind, considerate, fair-minded, honest), and with the intent that they develop an understanding of the reasons why of things (why seasons change, why famines or revolutions occur, why nations go to war). The purpose of a news telecast, on the other hand, is to inform people of major events and happenings in the world, not to develop viewers’ cognitive skills, moral dispositions, or wider forms of understanding (except, perhaps, incidentally). The learning objectives associated with teaching are generally more complex and in some cases more fundamental than those typically associated with news reporting. Moreover, there can be little doubt that of the two processes, reading the news from a prepared text and teaching, the latter is easily the more difficult and complex. In fact, the idea that teaching incorporates a family of activities guided by an overall aim to achieve learning of certain kinds is critical to the case against featuring the teacher as “facilitator.” Activities of Teaching Analysts (Green, 1971; Hellgren, 1985; Komisar, 1969) have drawn attention to an important distinction between the intellectual (or logical) acts of teaching (e.g., explaining, defining, justifying, demonstrating, comparing, questioning, probing, inferring, concluding, interpreting, illustrating, and proving), and the strategic acts of teaching (e.g., motivating, planning, encouraging, guiding, counselling, and disciplining). At the core of teaching are the intellectual acts. Teaching a motor skill, for example, involves explaining and illustrating the critical aspects of the skill, and demonstrating it by performance. Teaching a metaphor involves acts of defining, illustrating, and interpreting. Questioning may be present in both cases; and so on. The intellectual acts of teaching thus criss-cross and overlap in a variety of combinations depending on the nature and complexity of what is taught. The strategic acts, on the other hand, are secondary to the teaching enterprise in the sense to which Hellgren (1985) has alluded. He argues that what is most distinctive about these acts is their concern to expedite or to improve the external practical conditions that make the occurrence of learning more likely, and he concludes (correctly) that strategic acts are therefore “subsidiary” to teaching proper (p. 54). In performing just the strategic acts a person would not actually be teaching, although any episode of teaching would normally incorporate such acts, along with intellectual acts — for instance, the use of humour or anecdote at critical points in one’s teaching to heighten student interest in a topic. Strategic and intellectual acts can be further differentiated by reference to the general kinds of knowledge each entails — a (psychological) knowledge of human behaviour, motivation, and learning styles for strategic acts; a (logical) knowledge concerned with the laws of human thought and ways of knowing for intellectual acts — and by the fact that the former but not the latter

TEACHING OR FACILITATING

5

are evaluated chiefly by their consequences or outcomes for learning (Green, 1971, p. 7). According to Green (1971), both types of acts are “indispensable to the conduct of teaching whenever and wherever it is found,” and the absence of either “would count heavily [strongly] against the view that teaching was going on” (p. 6). This seems to make the intellectual and strategic acts necessary not only for the conduct of teaching, but for the concept as well. On the first point, that intellectual acts are necessary for the concept and the practice of teaching, Green is surely right. But he is mistaken in thinking that strategic acts are necessary for the concept of teaching (though they may have a bearing on the conceptual issue). That would make learning outcomes part of what “teaching” means, which, according to the analysis of the concept, is not the case. Teaching (as a task) does not entail learning, and cannot, therefore, be evaluated strictly in terms of learning results. “Bad” teaching implies (at least) that the intellectual acts were incompetently performed, not that “learning did not occur” (learning may result even when teaching is “bad”). If strategic acts have value or a place in the wider enterprise of teaching, it is not because they are conceptually necessary to the latter. Their relation to the occurrence of learning is more indirect, mediated as it were through material and social conditions that enhance the achievement of learning or through modifying external environments that might otherwise make learning more difficult. One further type of teaching act has not, with few exceptions (see Fenstermacher, 1990; Sirotnik, 1990), received the attention it deserves. I refer to the “moral acts” of teaching, such as exemplifying honesty and fairness in attempting to bring about learning in others; being considerate of others’ views while at the same time being diligent about matters of truth, evidence, and argument; showing active concern for standards implicit in the disciplines of thought, and so on. The moral acts of teaching are important for two reasons. “Good” teaching is defined in part by reference to them, and, given the intention to have students emulate the virtues displayed in teaching, the moral acts of teaching are themselves among the acts of moral formation. FACILITATING: SKETCH OF A CONCEPT

According to the Concise Oxford Dictionary (8th ed.), “to facilitate” is to make something less difficult or easier to achieve. Wearing proper boots facilitates mountain-hiking by making the ascent not quite as arduous; using a sharp knife facilitates carving by making a cleaner cut. But what is it to facilitate learning? Is it simply to provide a well-lit and pleasant classroom, or one free of interruptions, or to ensure that children come to school properly fed and rested? We may distinguish here between facilitating conditions and empirically necessary conditions for the achievement of learning. A facilitating condition

6

DOUGLAS STEWART

enhances the occurrence of learning but is one whose absence would not make it impossible, only more difficult. By contrast, an empirically necessary condition for learning is one whose absence would actually prevent learning’s occurrence. A well-lit and pleasant classroom, or one free of interruption, is a facilitating condition, since it would favour the achievement of learning. If such conditions were absent, learning woud be more difficult, but certainly not impossible. On the other hand, children coming to school fed and rested is a necessary, not a facilitating, condition, since lack of food and sleep would seem to thwart the occurrence of learning altogether. In the standard sense of the term, then, to “facilitate learning” is to provide or to arrange a set of external material conditions or social circumstances that make learning easier but whose absence would not prevent it from being achieved. The following modest list of strategies is illustrative of facilitating conditions: displaying various curriculum or other related materials in the classroom; constructing activity centres; making oneself accessible to students, advising them about projects — how students might get started and might proceed; establishing co-operative learning groups or other social contexts that favour problem-solving approaches and (or) discovery learning; setting individual or group learning contracts; having students access information for themselves or use resources on their own; offering words of encouragement, inspiration, praise, or caution, and so on. Based on this first level of analysis we may conclude that “facilitating learning” is a strategic act of teaching. It is at home with such activities as motivating, guiding, and counselling rather than those of defining, justifying, inferring, and so on. Like other strategic acts, it must be subsidiary to teaching proper. One who is “facilitating” learning is understood as not engaged in actual teaching. For those who champion the slogan, however, there is more at stake than what is entailed by the descriptive use of “facilitate learning.” As Scheffler (1960, chaps. 1 and 2) has pointed out, when key expressions are programmatically defined — that is, express a choice of program or course of action — and are then embedded in a slogan they become rallying symbols for educational movements that are often controversial. “We facilitate learning, we don’t teach” is no exception. It rallies support for a favoured but problematic principle of child-centred education: that children ought to choose their own learning. It is based on the normative assumption that what children should learn be in accordance with their nature, and on the empirical claim that their choices faithfully embody that nature. The intent of the slogan is precisely to free children from adults’ instruction and intervention, from what is seen to be an unnecessary and unhelpful preoccupation with instruction, and to give children latitude to manage their own learning independently. It is thus a hand-maiden to child-centred principles. The slogan also urges teachers to accept the marginalization of teaching and its traditions, and to see this as a “natural” and desirable progression of their professional role to one more sensitive to learners’

TEACHING OR FACILITATING

7

interests and learning styles. To remove the “tedium” of teacher-determined learning, facilitating strategies are designed primarily to make learning less demanding, more fun, and ostensibly more significant. It should not come as any surprise that teachers might find the idea of “facilitating” attractive. Yet the reasons for its appeal need to be scrutinized more closely. It can be argued, for example, that to facilitate learning is important because it represents a more humane approach to take with children than does teaching. As we have seen, “facilitating learning” refers to a non-interventionist strategy that is largely about teachers backing off, freeing children from the “imposition” of instruction and respecting their individual “autonomy.” Yet if the activities of teaching are basically rational and moral in kind, then teaching itself has a strong claim to being “humane.” Nor is teaching at odds with the idea of developing students’ individual autonomy. Particular instances of authoritarian or heavy-handed teaching should not be allowed to confuse the issue or jaundice the conception of what teaching is. Second, it might be argued that facilitating strategies more actively engage childrens’ minds than do acts of teaching, and consequently “facilitated” learning is superior to any learning that results from teaching. There may be elements of truth to the first part of this claim, although I would point out that the intellectual acts of teaching, and in particular those of questioning, probing, illustrating, comparing, and explaining, are intrinsically mind-engaging. Moreover, if “facilitating” is just a euphemism for “children learning on their own with minimal intervention by the teacher,” then at least for the earlier and more critical stages of schooling, and given the limited experience and maturity of children coupled with the low profile of teachers in their role as facilitator, only fairly minimal and simplistic kinds of learning can reasonably be expected. Claims for the qualitative superiority of learning that is “facilitated” should be treated with a healthy skepticism. There is, thirdly, the knowledgeexplosion argument. It is based on the idea that knowledge and information taught in school is quickly “dated” and that there is no point in continuing to teach it. The argument concludes that what best aid students to cope effectively with a rapidly changing world are strategies that facilitate problem-solving and learning by discovery. But aspects of this line of thought are troublesome too. It downplays the central value of substantive knowledge in favour of processes and procedures, and of the need for a judicious selection of knowledge in the general education of children. It fails as well to recognize that areas at the core of knowledge, with which schools ought to be primarily concerned (as I shall argue presently), are remarkably stable and not easily susceptible of becoming “dated.” A fourth but seldom-acknowledged reason for the attraction of “facilitating” is the relative ease with which it can be done. Psychologically, facilitating is (arguably) less stressful since one is not consistently in “front” of students as one is who teaches; and intellectually demanding since it requires neither the logical acts of teaching nor the same degree of knowledge and understanding of subject areas and their wider epistemological frameworks.

8

DOUGLAS STEWART

AGAINST FACILITATING

I shall establish two lines of critical argument here. According to the first and shorter, the facilitating movement (as embodied in the slogan) trades on a conception of teaching that is narrow and skewed. Teaching is characterized pejoratively as the act of direct “telling” or “imparting” facts to children (invariably described as passive and indifferent recipients), or as the act of “dispensing,” “transmitting” or “disseminating” knowledge (see Saskatchewan Education, February 1984), as if knowledge were all of a piece and to be handed out as a block. Small wonder that children might find such prospects tedious. This one-sided view, present in child-centred literature, sees teaching as a relic of the past. There is much to be criticized in such literature. It often appeals to undeniably grim instances of deadening or insensitive teaching from the history of schooling, then proceeds to offer these as standard or received accounts of teaching. This is surely a case of attacking “straw men.” No solid base is provided for the slogan to condemn teaching nor valid premises for it to uphold facilitating. What is carelessly overlooked by such literature, as well as by those who would dispose of teaching if they could, are precisely the essential features already discussed. Teaching is not restricted in its intent to achieve learning of only one kind. Learning beliefs, skills, rules, and (possibly) attitudes, as well as concepts, theories, and knowledge of different kinds can all equally be aims of teaching. There is too the critically related point illustrated at length earlier that teaching is “polymorphous” (Hirst, 1973; Senchuk, 1984); that is, it takes many different forms, and is thus improperly conceptualized as limited to essentially one type of activity such as “telling.” Telling is of course an important logical act of teaching. To tell children basic facts in mathematics, science, language, history, geography, or morals is virtually inescapable, and it is an efficient means of helping them learn at lower levels what is necessary for learning at more advanced levels of schooling. Yet “telling” is but one of many activities of teaching and cannot begin to capture the richness of the concept. Reduction of teaching to a single, linear act is evidence of conceptual muddle. The second argument concludes that the policy to “facilitate learning rather than teach” puts at risk the education of children. Behind this claim lies a view of what schools are for and how their goals are to be achieved. If we did not object to students learning very little of value in school, or if we thought the main reason for school was to entertain children or to keep them off the streets, then having adults as facilitators might be a splendid idea. But this is not what schools are for. The primary and certainly most demanding goal of schooling is education, which (roughly) is the development of mind or consciousness through the achievement of various kinds of knowledge and understanding (Peters, 1977). The more knowledge and understanding, the more mind one has to discern what

TEACHING OR FACILITATING

9

is presented to it, and consequently the more fully a person one is. Thus education, and schooling, to the extent that education is its primary goal, are fundamentally about empowering learners to better discern and comprehend what is in the world and to respond intelligently and sensitively to it. Schooling must therefore be centrally concerned with the growth of childrens’ intellectual capacities. Remove the development of cognition and there can be little advance in critical areas of social or emotional growth either (Peters, 1974). Schools have (of course) other important purposes, notably the achievement of moral dispositions and of an ability and willingness to relate well to others; basic preparation for citizenship in a democracy; and achievement of physical health and fitness and responsible attitudes towards care of the human body. Yet the achievement of greater awareness through knowledge and understanding remains the critical mission overall. Cognitive development underpins the moral, social, and health purposes of schooling and is at the core of the goal to educate. Such goals are not easily or quickly accomplished. A command of language is absolutely critical to conceptual and personal development, yet our record on language competence is not what it should be. Were teachers to adopt a facilitating mode in place of the activities of teaching the situation would be worse. Language arts is one area of curriculum where teachers can ill afford to shy away from acts of direct telling and explaining the basic language facts and skills, let alone from demonstrating such skills and setting examples of correct language use for children to emulate. In the second place, the basic “forms of understanding” or “ways of knowing” — identified in recent formulations as the scientific, mathematical, social-historical, aesthetic, moral, and religious (see Hirst, 1974; Reid, 1986) — are central to education and the development of consciousness of the world. At the same time they are enormously complex conceptual structures and not immediately or directly accessible to young learners. This raises serious questions about the means by which children are initiated into the basic ways of knowing. Given what schools are for and in particular their primary purpose, I contend that teaching, not facilitating, is what needs to be at the forefront. Why is this? Three distinct types of concept are relevant to achievement of a general education and to how the forms of understanding are developed in children (Dearden, 1968, chap. 6). Perceptual concepts, among the very first that they learn and that help bring order and sense into their everyday experience, are concepts of common physical objects and properties, such as dog, flower, tree, bird, stone, hot, rough, loud, sticky, and heavy. Practical concepts are also concepts of physical objects but with the difference that to understand them one must grasp what people do with objects or what they use them for (Dearden, p. 112). To have a concept of table, chair, pillow, car, clock, coat, telephone, or street is to recognize how these function in forms of social life. Even before they start school, most children have quite a number of perceptual and practical

10

DOUGLAS STEWART

concepts to discriminate among and relate many things they encounter daily, if in a limited or rather superficial way. Since perceptual and practical concepts are commonly learned through social contact and interaction outside formal instruction, it might be thought that facilitating strategies best suit such learning. This is not entirely persuasive, however, given that the formal acts of pointing, illustrating, or instantiating by someone already in possession of the concepts would seem to be necessary even in the informal social settings of concept learning. Yet it is also possible that a facilitating strategy such as the co-operative learning group can provide a useful context for children, clarifying and expanding the repertoire of their perceptual and practical concepts, provided this is not redundant of everyday learning experiences and therefore wasteful of school time. Perceptual and practical concepts play a less critical role in the development of human consciousness and understanding than do theoretical concepts. This third type is integral to the basic forms or traditions of thought. To understand a theoretical concept entails understanding some relevant body of theory. Theoretical concepts “organize in highly systematic ways our ordinary ‘common sense’ experience, and in so doing greatly increase our intellectual understanding of it” (Dearden, 1968, p. 116, italics added). To see that a fossil, for example, is more than just a pattern of markings on a stone, that a lunar eclipse is more than a blocking of the moon’s light, a graph more than a series of lines on paper, acts of chivalry or of oppression more than overt human movements, it is necessary to move beyond the limited perceptual level of understanding to grasp each of these notions in their relationship to wider, more elaborate and sophisticated theoretical frameworks (Dearden, pp. 116–117). For “fossil,” that framework consists of principles of biological evolution; for “lunar eclipse,” principles of the solar system; “graph,” mathematical functions; “chivalry,” Medieval life; and “oppression,” principles of morality and interpersonal knowing. Theoretical or conceptual frameworks do not lie about waiting to rush sensibly and coherently into untutored minds of children, nor are they readily mastered in some random and off-hand manner. These systems of thought are manifestly discontinuous with everyday experience. They are “strange” to children and represent major breaks with their familiar physical and social worlds, breaks nonetheless critical to the growth of cognition and understanding (Flodden, Buchmann, & Schwille, 1987). That young learners could initiate themselves independently into this necessarily complex and unfamiliar territory, or could single-handedly achieve even modest scientific, mathematical, historical, aesthetic, or moral perspectives of the world by means of activity centres, co-operative learning groups, or individual learning contracts where teachers take only a peripheral part — unless, of course, a good deal of relevant teaching and learning had already been accomplished — is a profound delusion and clearly a recipe for “educational” disaster.

TEACHING OR FACILITATING

11

Where theoretical concepts are concerned, and therefore greater awareness of the world, the intellectual acts of teaching need to be fully and systematically engaged at least at critical points. Mathematical conclusions have first to be “demonstrated” and “proved” according to principles of deduction by someone in-the-know to help others with less knowledge and experience get the “hang” of mathematically reasoning; natural phenomena must first be “identified,” “illustrated,” and “explained” in light of scientific laws and principles; moral judgments and actions “justified” in contexts of moral principles and relevant facts; works “interpreted” in light of aesthetic criteria; political or social movements “probed” and “explained” in terms of human aims, purposes, and emotions; and so on. How such objectives might be achieved systematically and meaningfully in the absence of informed and dedicated instruction by those already “inside” the forms of understanding, armed with the intellectual and moral acts of teaching, is unclear. CONCLUSION

If much of the school curriculum can simply be “facilitated” — that is, if what students are expected to learn at school is already more or less familiar to them from everyday experience, or is easy and straightforward enough to be grasped independently with only a facilitator standing by — then for “educational” purposes we have a bad curriculum, one that should be discarded. Parents should be outraged if the learning their children are required to do is not strange to them and does not challenge them, and if this learning does not require the activities of teaching. What reasons could possibly justify a school property tax out of which teachers are hired and pedagogical materials purchased; or a law, no less, that compels youngsters to attend school day in and day out, if their time is squandered on the familiar, the trivial, or the easy? Unless in the schooling process youngsters are taught the more complex factual and conceptual material necessary for their “education” and growth as persons, compulsory schooling is an economic and moral outrage. To the extent that “we facilitate learning, we don’t teach” opposes the intervention of teaching in any significant and sustained sense, facilitating per se is manifestly not what we need in our schools. It has a role, to be sure, but it is secondary to actual teaching and should be firmly kept in that perspective. Problems are created when, on the basis of either-or reasoning, facilitating is happily taken to extremes and teaching pushed to one side, if not over the edge, on trumped-up charges that it is outdated, useless, heavy-handed, authoritarian, or whatever. It is not nearly enough that we have teachers who care about children and are skilled at creating amicable learning environments. The time has come for a renewed understanding and dedication to teaching and its activities, and to a knowledge and understanding — both logical, in the sense of having at least a moderate comprehension of the basic disciplines of thought relevant to

12

DOUGLAS STEWART

schooling and its purposes, and psychological in the sense of knowing about children and their ways of learning — that teachers need in order to teach worthwhile learning competently. Canadian universities have recently been criticized (for different reasons) for not giving sufficient attention to teaching (Smith, 1991). It would be a tragic irony, and worse, were teachers in Canadian schools to give it too little, foolishly thinking there is a greater and more urgent value in “facilitating learning” than in actual teaching. REFERENCES Campbell, M. (1991). Teachers’ perceptions of learning styles and teaching strategies in relation to children of Indian ancestry. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Regina. Dearden, R.F. (1968). The philosophy of primary education: An introduction. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Ericson, D.P., & Ellett, F.S. (1987). Teacher accountability and the causal theory of teaching. Educational Theory, 37, 277–293. Fenstermacher, G.D. (1990). Some moral considerations on teaching as a profession. In J. Goodlad, R. Soder, & K. Sirotnik (Eds.), The moral dimensions of teaching (pp. 130–151). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Flodden, R., Buchmann, M., & Schwille, J. (1987). Breaking with everyday experience. Teacher’s College Record, 88, 485–506. Green, T. (1971). The activities of teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill. Hare, W. (1990). Teaching: Nature, norm and numbers. In E.O. Miranda & R.F. Magsino (Eds.), Teaching, schools and society (pp. 195–213). London: The Falmer Press. Hellgren, P. (1985). Teaching: A social concept (Research Report No. 36). Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Department of Teacher Education. Hirst, P. (1973). What is teaching? In R.S. Peters (Ed.), The philosophy of education (pp. 163–177). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hirst, P.H. (1974). Knowledge and the curriculum: A collection of philosophical papers. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Hirst P.H., & Peters, R.S. (1970). The logic of education. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Komisar, P. (1969). Teaching: Act and enterprise. In C.J.B. Macmillan & T. Nelson (Eds.), Concepts of teaching: Philosophical essays (pp. 63–88). Chicago: Rand McNally. Macmillan, C.J.B., & Garrison, J. (1983). An erotetic concept of teaching. Educational Theory, 33, 157–166. Macmillan, C.J.B., & Garrison, J. (1986). Erotetics revisited. Educational Theory, 36, 335–361. Pearson, A. (1989). The teacher: Theory and practice in teacher education. New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Peters, R.S. (1974). Psychology and ethical development. London: Allen and Unwin. Peters, R.S. (1977). Education and the education of teachers. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Reid, L.A. (1986). Ways of understanding and education. London: Heinemann Educational Books.

TEACHING OR FACILITATING

13

Saskatchewan Education. (1984, February). Directions: The final report of the Minister’s Advisory Committee on Curriculum and Instruction Review. Regina: Saskatchewan Education. Saskatchewan Education. (1984, June). Saskatchewan education: Its programs and policies. Regina: Saskatchewan Education. Scheffler, I. (1960). The language of education. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Senchuk, D. (1984). The polymorphous character of teaching. Educational Theory, 34, 183–192. Sirotnik, K. (1990). Society, schooling, teaching and preparing to teach. In J. Goodlad, R. Soder, & K. Sirotnik (Eds.), The moral dimensions of teaching (pp. 296–327). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Smith, S. (1991). Commission of inquiry into university education. Ottawa: Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. Douglas Stewart is in the Faculty of Education, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan, S4S 0A2.

The Effects of Government Funding on Private Schools: Appraising the Perceptions of Long-term Principals and Teachers in British Columbia’s Christian Schools Harro Van Brummelen trinity western university An increasing proportion of Canadian parents enrol children in private schools. This study evaluates the changes long-term principals and teachers of the largest organization of Christian schools in British Columbia perceive to have occurred since partial public funding began in 1977. Funding has been a factor in salaries, resources, and program diversity. Some schools have implemented distinctive approaches based on a religious and educational vision; others have accepted government policies and public school programs with little critical analysis. The data suggest that a school may maintain its educational distinctiveness, but only as long as and to the extent that (1) its leaders continue to have a compelling educational mission shared by a cohesive supporting community, and (2) funding authorities continue to countenance the schools as true alternatives. De plus en plus de parents canadiens inscrivent leurs enfants dans des écoles privées. Cette étude évalue les changements que les directeurs d’école et les enseignants de longue date des principales écoles chrétiennes de la Colombie-Britannique ont remarqués depuis le début du financement partiel des écoles privés par le gouvernement en 1977. L’octroi de subventions a eu un effet sur les salaires, les ressources et la diversité des programmes. Certaines écoles ont mis en place des approches particulières fondées sur une vision religieuse et pédagogique; d’autres ont accepté les politiques gouvernementales et les programmes des écoles publiques en faisant peu d’analyse critique. Les données colligées donnent à penser qu’une école peut maintenir son caractère distinctif, mais seulement dans la mesure où (1) ses directeurs continuent à se donner une mission éducative claire, partagée par une communauté homogène et que (2) les instances assurant le financement continuent à accepter ces écoles comme des solutions de rechange valables.

During the past decade, a rising proportion of parents have enrolled their children in private or independent schools in all Canadian provinces except the Atlantic ones.1 As elsewhere in the industrialized world, this trend has revived the debate about the desirability of government funding of non-public educational alternatives.2 In British Columbia, which this study emphasized, the proportion of students attending independent schools increased from 4.3 to 7.2 percent between 1977 and 1990, partly because of government funding.3 A medley of provincial policies have resulted from the funding debates. Saskatchewan and Quebec have provided funding for many years, mainly at secondary level, whereas Alberta (1967), British Columbia (1977), and Manitoba 14

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATION

18:1 (1993)

GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND B.C.’S CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS

15

(1978) offer funding for both elementary and secondary schools. Ontario has not acted on the 1985 Shapiro Commission’s recommendation that private schools receive grants upon association with a public school board. Jewish and Calvinist Christian schools launched a court action in 1991 to challenge Ontario’s right to fund only one religiously-based school system, viz., the separate Catholic schools.4 Do government policies increasingly constrict independent schools? Do the schools toe the line to retain funding? Does closer contact with the public sector lead to conformity? Or does funding bolster the schools’ distinctiveness through more careful planning and supervision? Previous research has emphasized the effects of funding on private school policies. I, on the other hand, have been interested in the internal operations of the schools. This study analyzes the perceptions of long-term principals and teachers about changes between 1977 and 1991 in schools belonging to the Society of Christian Schools in B.C. (hereafter, SCS-BC). As a founding member of B.C.’s Federation of Independent School Associations, the SCS-BC lobbied vigorously to obtain government funding.5 It sees the government’s educational role as confined to equitable funding and to ensuring schools provide a responsible level of education in a safe and secure setting.6 This paper, then, investigates and evaluates how long-term staff members perceive the effects of government funding on the operations and programs of SCS-BC schools since 1977. GOVERNMENT FUNDING OF INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA

British Columbia’s 1977 Independent School Support Act recognized two groups of funded schools: (1) those with adequate facilities that do not promote racial or religious intolerance or social change through violent means (eligible for a subsidy equivalent to 9 percent of public school per-pupil operational costs); and (2) those that, in addition, hire certificated teachers, allow evaluation teams to assess their administration and programs, and participate in provincial student assessment programs (eligible for 30 percent funding). The funding levels were subsequently raised to 10 percent and a maximum of 50 percent, respectively, with the eligibility period for funding reduced from five years to one year of operation. The Ministry of Education has since made its bureaucratic presence felt in British Columbia’s independent schools. Schools funded at the higher level — including all SCS-BC ones — must show annually that they meet teaching time, course content, and teacher certification stipulations. Evaluation teams assess each school thoroughly, usually once every four years. Some Ministry officials assume, perhaps unthinkingly, that new general policies should apply to both public and independent schools. Thus a 1989 mission statement was to apply to

16

HARRO VAN BRUMMELEN

“everyone involved in education in our province” — despite objections from some independent schools.7 Moreover, as Barman has pointed out, private schools implicitly commit themselves to future government regulations, since ongoing dependence on funding, especially at the maximum 50-percent level, severely limits — if not blocks — continued operation without government grants.8 PREVIOUS RESEARCH

In the Netherlands, the government has fully funded non-public schools since the 1920s. Unlike in the United Kingdom and Australia, social class did not account for the establishment of Dutch private schools; religious values did. Schools offer required subjects a specified number of hours per year, hire qualified teachers (paid directly by the state), and administer uniform government exams.9 Although free to develop their own programs, most Dutch schools are uniform in structure, curriculum, and pedagogy. Exceptions are religious instruction, the interpretation of history and literature in church-related schools, and the methodology of Montessori and Waldorf schools. The schools’ homogeneity is mostly voluntary.10 Significantly, the publication of distinctive programs and textbooks for Dutch Christian schools reached a peak in the decade before full government funding.11 The French government implemented modest support for private schools in 1951, assuming most of their operating costs eight years later. Private schools had to conform almost completely with public education programs. Their admissions policies had to be open and the conduct of classes was to be secular. As a consequence, few parents enrol children in Catholic schools for religious reasons. Private schools today offer academic, moral, or social security, rather than religious or educational distinctiveness. Their lack of determination to preserve religious singularity led French private schools quickly to become quasi-state schools, often functioning to segregate the social classes.12 Australia has provided comprehensive aid to private schools since 1964. This subsidy averages more than 50 percent of operating costs.13 The schools’ graduates do well at compulsory government school leaving examinations, with a disproportionate number obtaining placement in post-secondary institutions.14 The Labour Party government’s attempt to cut funding to wealthy private schools in the mid-1980s foundered in the face of a strong coalition of leading citizens and Catholic bishops.15 Private schools are not closely regulated. Yet state examinations, whose results yield upper-middle–class support for private schools, establish government control over curriculum. In British Columbia, Donald Erickson headed a team between 1978 and 1984 investigating the consequences of funding independent schools.16 Erickson concluded that typical independent schools became more like their public counterparts in seeking provincial authorities’ approval. Hence, he claimed, schools became less responsive to parents and ceased to be close-knit com-

GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND B.C.’S CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS

17

munities where commitment to special goals and to each other made education effective.17 Erickson’s conclusions were based on a comparison of 1978 and 1980 survey results, unrepresentative in sampling and with a truncated time-span. Moreover, Erickson’s unpublished 1984 follow-up study showed his previous conclusions were untenable for Catholic and evangelical/Calvinist Christian schools. Government funding had resulted, for instance, in expanded programs and more parent involvement and enthusiasm. SCS-BC schools had undertaken substantial and unique curriculum initiatives, and Erickson expressed surprise that randomly-chosen parents could convincingly specify how the curriculum could and should embody a Christian life view — and all the while remain perceptive and critical of government influence.18 To draw general conclusions about the consequences of government funding for non-public schools is difficult. The political debate leading up to funding, the initial regulations accompanying funding, the proportion of the operating cost covered by funding, the determination of the supporting communities to maintain unique educational alternatives, the social milieu and educational context of the schools — all help to account for the consequences. In British Columbia, research has not yet convincingly unravelled these factors. In choosing to consider “Christian” schools, I have been guided both by comparative methodological considerations (the Dutch, Australian, and French examples), and by the current stage of development of research on private schooling in Canada. In this study, I had the possibility of “controlling” for two “variables”: politics and religion. Later research on secular private schools will perhaps deal with other variables. SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS BACKGROUND OF SCS–BC SCHOOL COMMUNITIES

The Society of Christian Schools in B.C. comprised locally-controlled schools that grew from 2,494 students in 22 schools in 1977/78 to 7,479 students in 45 schools in 1990/91. In 1991, it embodied 20 percent of B.C.’s funded private school enrolment.20 Although today its member schools include diverse Protestant church groups, SCS-BC was founded by Dutch Calvinist immigrants. Three-quarters of sixty-five long-term principals and teachers in this study had this background. The Dutch Calvinists who came to Canada after World War II quickly established their own schools and sought government funding for them. Their beliefs that life is affected by one’s faith, as well as their view that no one social institution should dominate any other, meant they distrusted government control of schooling. Many left Holland to escape what they considered the adverse effects of a life regulated by “socialist” decrees. In Canada, they were independent farmers and small-business persons. Many at first hoped to establish a Christian political party. By the 1980s their individualism led them to support the rightleaning Social Credit government that introduced independent school funding.

18

HARRO VAN BRUMMELEN

Today, observers note that SCS-BC parents are still involved in small local business enterprises (small construction firms, greenhouses, trucking), with family income levels apparently close to those of public school parents.21 Their conservative yet socially oriented sense of religious calling, and the individualism that, paradoxically, unites them, have meant that parents have stood solidly behind schools that would socialize their children into familiar traditions and patterns. Having experienced government funding for religiously-based schools in Holland, Dutch Calvinists soon sought funding in Canada. They were outspoken and politically active in opposing government intervention in their schools, believing that parents and local boards should set and maintain educational policies. During the first decade of funding in British Columbia, SCS-BC leaders, principals, teachers, and parents regularly debated and queried the implications of government funding. Can an independent school community such as this resist those contextual forces that cause private schools to resemble public ones? Does public funding inevitably accelerate the movement toward similarity? In the present case, will improving socioeconomic status of Dutch-Canadian Calvinists lead to demands for high but essentially public school standards? Will the influence of the media and of general social values on its second and third generations undermine group cohesiveness and thus their commitment to uphold private schooling as a distinct alternative? What is the effect of the increasing proportion of non-Calvinist Christian fundamentalists in the schools? Will epistemological paradigm shifts in theology, as well as in education, affect the thinking of leaders in the movement and, eventually, school programs? METHOD OF INVESTIGATION

In studying changes in SCS-BC schools since 1977, I chose to gather the opinions of all currently active principals and teachers who have worked in SCS-BC schools both before and after the appearance of government funding. Where possible, I have supplemented my survey of opinion with other facts — social, economic, and administrative. Still, my chief source is the views and opinions of participants. Later research could and should extend the empirical base of research. Of educators contacted, 77 percent had worked in SCS-BC schools continuously since 1977; 15 percent were employed after 1977 by schools completing the then-required five-year qualifying period for funding; and 8 percent worked for the schools in 1977 but today work in another educational setting. The principals and still-active ex-principals represent eighteen of the twenty-two SCS-BC schools in existence in 1977 and four of the newer ones. The teachers come from nineteen schools, four of which began operation after 1977. Seventeen of the nineteen current administrators, all fourteen previous

GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND B.C.’S CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS

19

principals, and twenty-five of the thirty-two teachers returned a completed questionnaire (a return rate of 86 percent). The questionnaire contained 87 specific questions in five categories (school administration, curriculum and instruction, student evaluation procedures, teachers and students, and parents and board). Almost all questions required two ratings on a scale from 1 to 5: degree of change (1, much less; 3, no change; 5, much more), and effect (1, very detrimental; 3, no effect; 5, very beneficial). The results were tabulated and arithmetical means calculated for all respondents as well as separately for the three subgroups (current administrators, previous administrators, and teachers). Whole-group means for individual questions varied from 2.6 to 4.4 for degree of change and from 2.3 to 4.5 for effect, suggesting the reliability of the questionnaire and/or the homogeneity of subjects. Each section of the questionnaire asked for further comment. The final page asked two open-ended questions: “What, in your view, is the one outstanding benefit and the one major difficulty with government funding of Christian schools?” and “What is your overall evaluation of the effect of government funding under the Independent School Support Act?” Most respondents gave substantial comments throughout the questionnaire. On the basis of the responses, a list of questions was prepared to obtain more reaction on issues where opinions differed markedly and on changes respondents did not ascribe solely to government funding. Using these questions, I conducted interviews with five administrators representative of diverse subcommunities in the SCS-BC (taking into account denominational background, size and location of school). Interview responses helped clarify and explain questionnaire input; quantitative results are based solely on questionnaire results. TEACHERS, PARENTS, AND BOARDS

SCS-BC schools have used government funds variously. Tuition fees are much lower than they would be without government funding. Teacher salaries are higher, their qualifications improved, classes are smaller, and teachers attend more professional development activities. All of this has produced, according to questionnaire responses, an improved esprit des corps. The boards of the schools, in most cases locally elected by parents’ associations, take more care in setting enrolment and educational policies, and make decisions more professionally since funding. Two respondents mentioned that by having to spend less time on pressing financial concerns, they have become more aware of educational issues in a Christian framework. Board-staff relations have improved and become more relaxed, but only slightly so (3.3/3.3; the first number indicates a slight positive change; the second, a slight salutary effect). Boards review government directives for schools more closely, generally considered a positive consequence (4.0/3.7).

20

HARRO VAN BRUMMELEN

The combination of reduced financial jeopardy, and the care boards now take in making decisions and presenting proposals, have contributed to poor attendance at school association meetings. Yet parental perceptiveness of program quality is deemed to have increased. Although parental involvement and influence is considered unchanged, it has shifted from fund raising to work with students. This follows, according to some respondents, from a general social phenomenon rather than any effect of funding: parents are more knowledgeable and want to be directly involved in their children’s education. THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPAL

Principals, the respondents agreed, spend more time on administrative routines and paperwork than prior to government funding. At the same time, they think quantity and quality of teacher supervision and curricular and instructional leadership to have improved during the past fourteen years. Principals, for instance, today often work closely with new teachers to help them plan and implement programs compatible with school aims. Respondents are divided about the overall effects of an “administrative” emphasis. Many principals feel “snowed under” with reading and paperwork pertaining to Ministry matters, with less time to attend to teacher and student needs. Just coping with the growth brought about by the legitimization of the schools, one principal claimed, leaves little time for educational leadership. One-sixth of teachers volunteered that their principals have become more isolated and bureaucratic, overemphasizing the implementation of government requirements. Almost as many respondents, however, disagreed, pointing out that the amount of paperwork, changed little since 1977, has been made easier by computerization. They observed that principals generally use their increased administrative time for educational purposes. Teachers supported this contention; they indicated, for instance, that the effect of administrative routines and paperwork has benefited the schools educationally (3.9). Similarly, topics discussed among principals have shifted from fund raising and discipline policies to educational initiatives promoting Christian “uniqueness.” Further, more teachers have been given educational leadership tasks through appointment as program coordinators, positions made possible by government funding. The enhanced role of principals, most respondents believed, also stems from “growing professionalism” and the influence of SCS-BC education coordinators. Principals today, as opposed to 1977, are knowledgeable of government education policies, and spend more time thinking about the goals and direction of their schools. Whether this affects classroom teaching and learning, however, varies considerably with principal leadership styles and priorities.

GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND B.C.’S CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS

21

TEACHING AND LEARNING

Respondents believed three facets of teaching and learning to have changed considerably: attention given to new public school curriculum proposals (4.4), availability of resources and equipment (4.2), and overall quality of classroom instruction (3.9). These changes were deemed beneficial (3.7, 4.2 and 4.0 respectively). However, teachers appreciated the emphasis on public school program initiatives more than did principals (4.1 vs. 3.2). Teachers were neutral about adoption of public school time allotments (3.2) whereas principals believed this detrimental (2.5). The quality of educational programs, respondents generally agreed, had improved (3.8), with teachers giving more and (they believed) beneficial attention to cooperative and long-term planning (change/effect, 3.6/3.7). Areas where respondents thought schools had experienced limited beneficial change included use of external curriculum guides and resources (3.4/3.4, both for public and for Christian ones), inclusion of the Christian perspective in everyday instruction (3.2/3.3), and time spent on curriculum evaluation (3.5/3.6). The use of textbooks written specifically for Christian schools remained almost the same after funding (3.1/3.3), although use of supplemental resources for Christian schools increased somewhat (3.5/3.6). Both the spread of numerical responses and the interviewee’s comments indicated schools varied widely in these matters. Respondents agreed that the quantity and quality of such special programs as learning assistance and the fine arts had increased. However, they were divided about the effect of funding on uniqueness of school programs. Six claimed government funding had caused greater emphasis on teaching “from a Christian perspective.” Justifying programs for the government, added several, “has led to a clarification and renewed application of Christian goals and objectives.” Yet nine others believed schools “are regularly nudged to move into the Ministry of Education fold.” Still others claimed funding has had little impact on the Christian distinctiveness of schools’ programs compared with the impact of work by provincial SCS-BC coordinators. Again, perceptions as well as realities differed a great deal from school to school. THE INFLUENCE OF GOVERNMENT DIRECTIVES AND EVALUATION TEAMS

Nine respondents commented that government-imposed school evaluation had encouraged their staffs to examine long-range plans, develop written goalstatements accentuating their Christian beliefs, and revamp their programs. Another eight said it had led to clarification of the school’s vision and contributed to the incorporation of a “Christian perspective in education.” Yet fourteen respondents indicated their local boards reacted quickly and unthinkingly to evaluation teams’ criticisms, leading one principal to point out

22

HARRO VAN BRUMMELEN

a need to “energetically get the board and education committee to look less at Ministry requirements and more at what the Biblical focus of our school curriculum and program should be.” Further, said another, although most government directives are not necessarily intended for independent schools, boards often receive them as directives “from above.” Although most evaluation-team members are independent school teachers, retired public school inspectors have chaired most evaluation teams. As a result, some SCS-BC principals stated, the measure of independent school quality at times becomes the public school status quo, implicitly expecting their schools to conform. The Ministry’s Independent School Branch has sometimes applied such pressure explicitly: it tried to persuade some schools to implement aspects of the Year 2000 program when they preferred more “traditional” approaches. The SCS-BC showed its concern in 1987 by publishing a policy paper that took issue with the recommendation of some evaluation team chairmen that the goals of a school should be stated as measurable behavioural objectives; this brings with it a philosophical framework whose acceptance or rejection is the prerogative of the school.22

The principals are gate-keepers for external recommendations, whether these come directly from the Ministry or from an evaluation report. One respondent stated that “some principals are aware and astute, and show some evidence of critical analysis. Many, however, buy into the philosophy of a document such as Year 2000 without standing back. They give little attention to basic issues.” Some respondents believe principals as well as SCS-BC leaders have adopted the government’s educational agenda. One of these pointed to an “excessive emphasis” on the process of learning rather than on “culturally-meaningful generative knowledge”; another added that principals without strong theological and philosophical beliefs succumb to the implicit pressure to conform to the public sector. On the other hand, all interviewees said principals with a strong curricular or pedagogical direction and whose competence is trusted by the Ministry are able to maintain their educational autonomy. STUDENT EVALUATION

Until 1990, funding had little effect on student assessment in most schools. Some revised programs on the basis of results of the mandatory Provincial Learning Assessment Program (for example, placing more emphasis on grades 4–7 geometry). The government’s recent new Year 2000 program has made an impact, however, with some schools revising their assessment procedures and report cards. One school produced a 20-page primary report card consisting of criterionreferenced learning descriptors (one-third from Year 2000, one-third revisions of ones in Year 2000, and one-third consistent with the school’s unique character).

GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND B.C.’S CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS

23

It is unlikely these changes would have been made without the schools’ close contact with the Ministry due to funding. Principals and teachers felt unanimously negative about the re-introduction of grade 12 school leaving examinations in 1984. Although they agreed that students’ achievement in grade 12 courses has improved (3.8/3.9), the Christian emphasis in these courses has suffered (effect, 2.4). There is now more emphasis on formal teacher presentation (effect, 2.6) and factual memorization (effect, 2.3), and less on critical thinking (effect, 2.5). Although SCS-BC schools waged a vigorous (though unsuccessful) political campaign to set their own exams, even without funding the schools probably would have decided to participate in those examinations because they were required for students seeking university entrance. THE RESPONDENTS’ OVERALL IMPRESSIONS

Asked to name one outstanding benefit that had resulted from government funding, 51 percent of respondents mentioned improved educational programs; 29 percent, financial stability and affordability; and 20 percent, staff satisfaction stemming from salary increases. Only one person said funding caused schools to emphasize their programs’ uniqueness. Fewer than three quarters of respondents identified an outstanding drawback, and specific responses were more varied. One-third, the largest group, commented that schools had become less independent and distinctive, with their agenda now set by the public sector. Nine percent thought schools faced a major loss of personal commitment of both parents and staff, and another 9 percent decried “administrative hassles” as their major concern. When asked to give their overall evaluation of the effects of government funding, almost half said funding had been very beneficial. Twelve percent of respondents said they feared that Christian school independence would gradually erode, but an almost equal percentage claimed funding had forced their schools to clarify their vision. The majority agreed that 50-percent funding is a desirable plateau, with parents maintaining interest in and support for the schools, since they still pay substantial tuition fees, and the government not yet claiming total ownership. A number of respondents remarked that lack of funding does not produce an absence of government control: non-funded private schools in Iowa and accredited private secondary schools in Ontario, they said, must meet more stringent stipulations and evaluations than funded schools in British Columbia. Nonetheless, in British Columbia, as elsewhere in the world, the government has insisted that certain regulations accompany funding of independent schools, if only to convince itself and the public that such funds are spent responsibly. Regulations may exist without funding, but funding will not occur without regulations. Funded schools that value independence will always experience some tension as they resist bureaucratization and deprivatization.

24

HARRO VAN BRUMMELEN

CAUSES OF CHANGE IN SCS-BC SCHOOLS

Government funding has improved certain aspects of SCS-BC schools. Teacher salaries have increased. Schools meet the needs of more students through special programs. Teachers are more involved in professional development and curriculum planning. Resources, equipment, and facilities are more readily available. Changes that more directly affect the heart of the schools’ mission present a decidedly mixed picture, however. Some schools clarify their vision and plan Christian learning approaches more zealously than before funding; others accept government directives with little consideration of their implications. Some boards spend more time considering educational issues that affect the school’s direction; others jump hastily to implement government evaluation-team recommendations. Some principals have intensified their direction-giving leadership; others have become more bureaucratic as they comply with government policies. Some schools increasingly use teacher resource units developed specifically for Christian schools; others accept and use government textbooks and guides without critical analysis. Such data emphasize that the search for causal connections is complex and that change is not due solely to government funding but is also affected by social, political, and intellectual factors. To garner continued support, Christian schools are compelled to be sensitive to parental attitudes. As Christian school supporters are assimilated into Canadian society, their attitudes toward schooling became less isolationist.23 One questionnaire respondent said that his defensive, separatist stance of the 1970s reflected his immigrant mentality, and noted that today the real objectives of parents in Christian schools . . . coincide rather closely with those of parents generally, i.e., a reasonable continuity with the home, academic/ intellectual challenge, a controlled environment, pleasant teachers, and better marks than the kid in the next desk.

Parents today may place more emphasis on a caring atmosphere or academic excellence and less on a unique educational program. Several responders added that the long-established non-funded Calvinist schools in Michigan are more like public schools than SCS-BC schools, leading them to conclude that cultural context affects schools more than does government. Similarly, the trend toward professionalism some respondents identified cannot be attributed solely to funding. Not only have Canadian parents and teachers generally become better educated, but children of immigrants usually outdo their parents’ educational attainments. The improved educational and professional background of supporters — as well as institutions’ tendency toward increasing professionalization and accountability — contribute to boards becoming more astute in dealing with administrative and educational issues. Boards became more

GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND B.C.’S CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS

25

demanding of principals and appointed provincial consultants. Government funding has, at most, accelerated this trend. In British Columbia, funding for independent schools was introduced in a consultative and flexible manner. Through the Federation of Independent Schools, SCS-BC leaders had regular input into the interpretation of funding regulations. The Inspectors of Independent Schools allowed substantial curricular freedom; one respondent noted that his “fears of intrusive demands on the curriculum and the operation of the schools” were not realized. A confrontation with the Minister of Education, in 1984, about the imposition of grade 12 government examinations proved, nonetheless, the reality of the government’s ultimate control of funded schools. By then, economic dependence on funding and parents’ desire to enable students to go directly to university meant that, despite strong protests, all students wrote the exams.24 Finally, the rapid growth sparked partly by funding has led to at least two changes in the schools’ intellectual and religious identity. First, the teaching force has become more heterogeneous, in both religious and educational background. The number of new teachers educated at Calvinist colleges dropped from almost 40 percent to less than 10 percent between 1977 and 1991. This may mean, for instance, that new teachers are more open to recent intellectual forces affecting education (for example, that humans construct knowledge). Second, an influx of fundamentalist parents has led to more conflicts about book choice and lifestyle standards. The effects of this changing composition require further investigation. CONCLUSION

SCS-BC schools have changed as a result of shifts in their own communities and social context, as well as due to government funding. The schools differ substantially from each other, however, in how much they diverge from the taken-forgranted norms of the public sector.25 Seventeen respondents claimed that funding resulted in more attention being paid to mission-driven planning and the implementation of a distinct Christian approach. Almost as many (fourteen), however, believed that government regulations and evaluation-team recommendations had eroded their school’s distinctiveness. The continued uniqueness of funded independent schools depends on three necessary (but not sufficient) conditions. First, it requires effective, proactive, principled, and convincing leadership at both the local and provincial levels, leadership based on clear goals. Second, the school community must form a cohesive Gemeinschaft, with a strong sense of shared commitment, that insists on its school reflecting its identity. Third, the government must be willing to view independent schools as responsible educational alternatives. Under these conditions, for instance, in one homogeneous, conservative community a highly respected principal changed the school’s program considerably during the years

26

HARRO VAN BRUMMELEN

of government funding, making it much more distinctly Calvinist in its orientation. What characterized interviewees whose schools had maintained distinctive features was their readiness, determination, and willpower to maintain constant vigilance with respect to government regulations. Although some respondents believed the control exercised by a well-focused value community can outweigh the political and bureaucratic control accompanying funding, most feared that future government policies and decreasing sensitivity to their potential risks might ultimately destroy the schools as singular institutions. When questioned, they perceived, for instance, that an open enrolment policy or the inability to hire teachers who “fit” the schools’ religious purpose would undermine the school as a Gemeinschaft and hence, in the long run, as a viable and effective alternative. Can funded independent schools resist the powerful social, political, and intellectual forces that press them to abandon their distinctiveness? My evidence suggests many SCS-BC schools have thus far not lost their distinctiveness, and in some instances have augmented it since funding came into effect, albeit only within an overall framework for schooling expected by society-at-large. Unless independent schools have passion for their mission and wariness about government control, however, funding may well accelerate erosion of the schools’ distinctiveness. NOTES 1

In British Columbia, the term “independent” describes all non-public schools, including, for example, Catholic and Protestant Christian, Montessori, Waldorf, and “elite” British-type schools. This paper uses the terms “private” and “independent” interchangeably. Ontario’s private school enrolment declined between 1985 and 1991, but only because private Catholic senior secondary schools became public separate ones.

2

See, for instance, William Lowe Boyd and James G. Cibulka, eds., Private Schools and Public Policy (New York: Falmer, 1989); William Lowe Boyd and Herbert J. Walberg, eds., Choice in Education: Potential and Problems (Berkeley, CA: McCutchan, 1990); John Chubb and Terry Moe, Politics, Markets, and America’s Schools (Washington: The Brookings Institute, 1990); Geoffrey Walford, Private Schools in Ten Countries: Policy and Practice (London and New York: Routledge, 1989); and the December 1990/January 1991, vol. 48, no. 4 issue of Educational Leadership.

3

Information supplied by Statistics Canada and the Federation of Independent School Associations in B.C. See also John Bergen, “The Emergence and Expansion of Private Schools in Canada,” in Y. L. Jack Lam, ed., The Canadian Public Education System: Issues and Prospects (Calgary: Detselig, 1990), p. 13.

4

For funding arrangements in various provinces, see, Stephen T. Eaton, Education in Canada (Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, 1988), pp. 81ff. The court action is described in the Ontario Alliance of Christian Schools High School Digest (April 1991): 1. An August 1992 Ontario Court of Justice decision that the Ontario government’s funding policy, although contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is within its “reasonable limits” escape clause is being appealed (Christian Week, vol. 6, no. 9 [25 August 1992]: 1).

GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND B.C.’S CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS

27

5

See L.W. Downey, “The Aid-to-Independent Schools Movement in British Columbia,” in Nancy Sheehan, J. Donald Wilson and David Jones, eds., Schools in the West: Essays in Canadian Educational History (Calgary: Detselig, 1986), pp. 305–23; and Jean Barman, “Deprivatizing Private Education: The British Columbia Experience,” Canadian Journal of Education 16:1 (Winter 1991), pp. 12–31.

6

See, for instance, H. Van Andel et al., “Report on Government-School Relationships” (Society of Christian Schools in B.C., 1976), and Board of Trustees of the SCS-BC, “Ministry of Education Regulations Affecting SCS-BC Schools” (Langley, BC: The Society of Christian Schools in B.C., 1987), p. 4.

7

British Columbia Ministry of Education, The Primary Program (Victoria: Queen’s Printer, 1989).

8

Barman, p. 24.

9

Karen Seashore Louis and Boudewijn A. M. van Velzen, “A Look at Choice in the Netherlands,” Educational Leadership, vol. 48, no. 4 (December 1990/January 1991): 67; and Estelle James, “The Netherlands: Benefits and Costs of Privatized Public Services — Lessons From the Dutch Educational System,” in Walford, pp. 179–99.

10

Louis and van Velzen, p. 68. See also Charles L. Glenn, “Parent Choice in Four Nations,” in Boyd and Walberg, pp. 69–76.

11

A never-repeated example is the extensive curriculum developed by W. G. van de Hulst et al. in Verdieping and Belijning [Deepening and Structuring] (Groningen: Noordhof, 1921), 2 vols.

12

Richard Teese, “France: Catholic Schools, Class Security, and the Public Sector,” in Geoffrey Walford, Private Schools in Ten Countries: Policy and Practice (London and New York: Routledge, 1989), pp. 133–50; and Frances C. Fowler, “The French Experience with Public Aid to Private Schools,” in Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 68, no. 5 (January 1987): 356–59.

13

Don Smart and Janice Dudley, “Australia: Private Schools and Public Policy,” in Walford, p. 222.

14

Denis P. Doyle, “Family Choice in Education: The Case of Denmark, Holland, and Australia,” (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1984), p. 17; Smart and Dudley, p. 122.

15

See Doyle and chapters 7 and 8 in William Lowe Boyd and James G. Cibulka, eds., Private Schools and Public Policy: International Perspectives (Philadelphia: Falmer, 1989).

16

Donald Erickson et al., “Characteristics and Relationships in Public and Independent Schools” (San Francisco: Center for Research on Private Education, 1979), and “Victoria’s Secret: The Effects of British Columbia’s Aid to Independent Schools,” Parts 1, 2 and 3 (Los Angeles: Institute for the Study of Private Schools, 1984, unpublished monographs).

17

Donald A. Erickson, “Disturbing Evidence about the ’One Best System,’” in Robert B. Everhart, The Public School Monopoly: A Critical Analysis of Education and the State in American Society (Cambridge: Ballinger, 1982), pp. 415–17.

18

Erickson, “Victoria’s Secret,” p. 15:55. See also pp. 12:19ff, 13:25, 13:26, 13:28, and 14:35ff.

19

Barman, “Deprivatizing Private Education: The British Columbia Experience.”

20

Based on information supplied by the Society of Christian Schools in B.C. and the B.C. Ministry of Education.

21

Harro Van Brummelen, Curriculum: Implementation in Three Christian Schools (Grand Rapids: Calvin College, 1989), p. 28; Frances Bula, “Where Christ Is at the Top of the Class,” Vancouver Sun, April 2, 1991; and Stephen Easton quoting Erickson in Education in Canada (Vancouver: Fraser Institute, 1988), p. 88.

28

HARRO VAN BRUMMELEN

22

Board of Trustees of the SCS-BC, “Ministry of Education Regulations Affecting SCS-BC Schools” (Langley, BC: The Society of Christian Schools, 1987), p. 2.

23

See, for instance, H. Ganzevoort and M. Boekelman, Dutch Immigration to North America (Toronto: Multicultural History Society, 1983), and Harro Van Brummelen, Telling the Next Generation: Educational Development in North American Calvinist Christian Schools (Lanham: University Press of America, 1986).

24

Van Brummelen, Telling the Next Generation, p. 286.

25

For a detailed description of three different SCS-BC schools, see Harro Van Brummelen, Curriculum: Implementation in Three Christian Schools (Grand Rapids: Calvin College, 1989).

Harro Van Brummelen is in the Faculty of Social Sciences and Education, Trinity Western University, 7600 Glover Road, Langley, British Columbia, V3A 6H4.

Accountability and Educational Philosophy: Paradigms and Conflict in Ontario Education Dennis Raphael university of toronto Ontario is one of only two Canadian provinces not carrying out every-student achievement assessment. Until recently, Ontario did not have a province-wide assessment program. The Ministry of Education now conducts provincial assessments, and recently released benchmarks of expected student achievement. The Ministry also participates in interprovincial and international studies. Involvement in these programs, however, is at odds with the province’s child-centred educational philosophy. I examine some examples of consequences of the conflict between the child-centred educational approach and the development of objectives-based programs, then scrutinize the educational implications of these two conflicting models (child-centred or organismic, and objectives-based or mechanistic), highlighting weaknesses of the child-centred approach. À part une autre province, l’Ontario est la seule à ne pas effectuer des évaluations du rendement scolaire de l’ensemble des élèves. Jusqu’à tout récemment, l’Ontario ne disposait pas d’un programme d’évaluation pour toute la province. Le ministère de l’Éducation fait maintenant des évaluations à la grandeur de la province et a publié dernièrement des repères pour le rendement escompté des élèves. Le ministère participe en outre à des recherches interprovinciales et internationales. Ces programmes ne concordent pas toutfois avec la philosophie de l’éducation de la province, laquelle est axée sur l’enfant. L’auteur se penche sur certaines des conséquences du conflit entre l’approche qui privilégie l’enfant et l’élaboration de programmes qui se fondent sur des objectifs. Il examine ensuite les répercussions sur l’éducation de deux modèles opposés (organiciste ou axé sur l’enfant et mécaniste ou fondé sur des objectifs), en mettant en lumière les lacunes de l’approche organiciste.

Every Canadian province examines student achievement through either student or group assessments. Many do both (Raphael, 1990). Student assessments provide a test score for each student. These scores contribute to grades and give students and teachers feedback about a student’s achievement. Student assessments can also provide school-, district-, and province-wide data through aggregation of scores. Group assessments produce scores reportable at the school, district, or provincial level. British Columbia conducts both student and group assessments: group assessments at various grades, and student assessments (through course examinations) for numerous senior-level subjects. Quebec and Alberta also conduct group and student assessments. New Brunswick and Newfoundland have well-developed student assessment programs and Manitoba conducts group assessments in a variety of areas (Raphael, 1990). 29

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATION

18:1 (1993)

30

DENNIS RAPHAEL

Prior to 1968, the Ontario Ministry of Education administered province-wide examinations as a basis for awarding the grade 13 diploma.1 These examinations were replaced in 1968 by administration, for post-secondary admission purposes, of the Ontario Tests for Admission to College and University; in turn, these tests were discontinued in 1974. Since then there has been no provincially-mandated student assessment (McLean, Raphael, & Wahlstrom, 1984). In 1987 Ontario instituted a provincial group assessment program modelled after that of British Columbia, and this now provides estimates of school, school district, and provincial levels of student achievement in the various subject areas. Reviews of Canadian geography, senior division chemistry and physics, elementary-level reading and mathematics, and grades 8, 10, and 12 mathematics have been completed. In contrast to its limited focus on within-province assessment, Ontario has participated in virtually all recent comparative studies of achievement: the Second International Mathematics Study (SIMS) (McLean, Raphael, & Wahlstrom, 1984), the Second International Science Study (SISS) (Connelly, Crocker, & Kass, 1989), and the 1988 and 1991 International Assessments of Educational Achievement (Lapointe, Askew, & Mead, 1992; Lapointe, Mead, & Askew, 1992; Lapointe, Mead, & Phillips, 1989). Ontario is committed to involvement in the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada School Achievement Project, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Indicators Project, and the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. The premise of this paper is that Ontario’s lack of emphasis upon provincial assessment and its reluctance to institute provincial monitoring of student achievement stems from the ongoing conflict between the predominant childcentred educational philosophy in place since the early 1970s and increasing concerns with educational accountability.2 PARADIGMS AND WORLD VIEWS

Paradigms impose a view of events in the world, suggest a framework for organizing these observations, and direct attention to events worth noting (Kuhn, 1962). Communication between adherents of various world views is difficult. To the extent, as significant as it is incomplete, that two scientific schools disagree about what is a problem and what a solution, they will inevitably talk through each other when debating the relative merits of their respective paradigms. In the partially circular arguments that regularly result, each paradigm will be shown to satisfy more or less the criteria that it dictates for itself and to fall short of a few of those dictated by its opponent. . . . Both are looking at the world, and what they look at has not changed. But in some areas they see different things and they see them in different relations one to another. (Kuhn, 1962, p. 149)

PARADIGMS AND CONFLICT IN ONTARIO EDUCATION

31

For Reese and Overton (1970), the field of child development is dominated by two well-defined and irreconcilable world views: the organismic and mechanistic models. “Organismic” and “mechanistic” refer to two psychological approaches to understanding child development; in educational theory and practice they are represented by the terms “child-centred” and “objectives-based,” respectively. The organismic model of child development is best represented in contemporary education circles by the acceptance of most of Jean Piaget’s (Flavell, 1963) notions of development.3 THE CHILD-CENTRED MODEL OF DEVELOPMENT

The assumptions of the child-centred model determine how we view children and the type of education they should receive (Looft, 1973; Overton & Reese, 1973; Reese & Overton, 1970). This model is translated by the fields of epistemology and psychology into the active model of development. The tenets of the active model are: (a) the organism is inherently and spontaneously active and is the source of acts, rather than the collection of acts resulting from external forces; (b) the organism is an organized entity, one that gains meaning from the totality of organization rather than from the parts of which it is constituted; and (c) change is assumed as a given and predictability is limited. The epistemological position derived from this model is constructivism: reality results from an interaction of the individual with its environment. The individual who accepts this model will tend to emphasize the significance of process over products, and qualitative change over quantitative change. Products (behaviours) or achievements will be employed to infer the necessary conditions for their occurrence, that is, to infer psychological structures. Changes in psychological structures will be the basic referents of developmental interest, and these changes will reflect basic qualitative changes conceptualized as changes in levels of organization or stages. In addition, he will tend to emphasize the significance of the role of experience in facilitating or inhibiting the course of development, rather than the effect of training as the source of development. In general he will emphasize a structural or structure-function analysis of behaviour, rather than a functional analysis. (Reese & Overton, 1970, pp. 134–135)

Reese and Overton (1970) outline corollary issues associated with the models. Holism versus elementarism. The dictum the “whole is more than the sum of the parts” illustrates this view. Piagetian theory is the best example of the holistic viewpoint and is illustrated in the concept of organization, one of the two basic functional invariants (the other being adaptation). The concept of conservation illustrates the relationship between the organized cognitive structures of the individual and its reflection in behavioural referents. Elementarism is the view that development is the addition of many smaller parts comprising the whole. Gagné’s (1968) analysis of skills involved in conservation and his explication of the role of learning hierarchies in attaining

32

DENNIS RAPHAEL

educational skills illustrates this position in developmental and educational psychology. Structure-function versus antecedent-consequence. The child-centred model directs attention to the relationship of structure to the developmental functions. A marked teleological bent is seen as development of internal structures has definite end-purposes. Study emphasizes the development of structures and their relationship to behaviour. There is a distinction between process and achievement. Structural versus behavioural change. What changes as children develop? The adherent to the child-centred viewpoint looks for changing internal structures. The child thinks differently, according to her/his need to adapt to the environment. These changes may not be apparent and reliance upon external signs of these changes could be misleading. Changes are self-directed toward identified end-points. Discontinuity versus continuity. Structural change is discontinuous. Ways of looking at the world shift as higher forms of structures are organized. Change is not the continuous addition of information and knowledge. The issue of stages. The child moves through stages as new, qualitatively differing structures appear. Unidirectional versus multidirectional courses of development. The childcentred viewpoint outlines a single course of development through which children move at differing rates; multiple developmental courses are not seriously considered. In Piaget’s theory the end point is formal operational thought. Sources of development. Although the environment can support or inhibit movement upon the prescribed course, the impetus for development resides within. Table 1 outlines educational practices used by education consultants and teachers who adhere to the child-centred model. More sophisticated analyses of how the child-centred emphasis can be correlated with an activist assessment approach can be developed, but my point is not to design an ideal educational strategy but to demonstrate how the average policy maker and practitioner use these paradigms to define and to justify their educational and assessment activities. THE ONTARIO EDUCATION SCENE

Ontario educational philosophy since the late 1960s has been child-centred. Obvious manifestations are the provincial documents and guidelines such as Living and Learning (Ontario Department of Education, 1968), the Formative Years, Education in the Primary and Junior Divisions (Ministry of Education, 1975a, 1975b), and most recently Science is Happening Here (Ministry of Education, 1989a). This worldview has influenced many aspects of Ontario’s

PARADIGMS AND CONFLICT IN ONTARIO EDUCATION

33

TABLE 1 Corollary Issues Associated with the Child-Centred Model of Development

Issue

Child-centred approach

Active vs. Passive

Active

Child sets the pace; education must be child-centred; unfair to assess children according to objective, external criteria; teachers provide learning opportunities but instructional options are limited if child is not learning.

Holism vs. Elementarism

Holism

Focus upon the whole child; do not teach or assess skills in isolation; since cognitive and affective skills grow in tandem, avoid aversive learning experiences.

Structure-Function vs. AntecedentConsequence

StructureFunction

Provide positive learning opportunities so the child will naturally develop advanced structures; since these structures are unique to each individual and cannot be mapped onto outward manifestations of achievement, assess activities rather than objective outcomes.

Structural vs. Behavioral Change

Structural

Important change occurs within the child and cannot be assessed using measures of outward behaviours; objective measures may not show what the child really knows; assess attitudes, not achievements.

Qualitative vs. Quantitative Change

Qualitative

Change cannot be understood as the accumulation of parts; it makes no sense to identify components of learning to teach or to assess.

Stages

Stages Exist

Identify stages or levels of development; promote movement through general environmental support; use homogeneous grouping of children for effective instruction.

Unidirectional vs. Multidirectional Course

Unidirectional

Assume one way of developing; children make their own strategies; group and stream students to teach those at various developmental points; use methods that promote this natural progression.

Internal vs. External Source of Energy

Internal

Change and motivation emanates from the child; the environment can only provide support.

Suggested educational practice

education system, among them the Ministry’s role in curriculum development, ongoing teacher training practices, and student assessment practices.

34

DENNIS RAPHAEL

Curriculum Guidelines Ontario curriculum guidelines lack specific content and goals, especially at the elementary level. The reasons for this include adherence by the guidelines’ authors (all of whom have worked in the prevailing ethos) to the child-centred viewpoint and associated education and assessment assumptions outlined in Table 1. The second is Ontario’s commitment to a decentralized system where the Ministry outlines broad goals and local school authorities adapt these goals to local circumstances. Living and Learning (Ontario Department of Education, 1968) was the report of the Provincial Committee on Aims and Objectives of Education in the Schools of Ontario. The following, taken from the section “The Learning Experience,” illustrates the child-centred approach to education policy: Learning by its very nature is a personal matter. There is virtually a metabolism of learning which is as unique to the individual as the metabolism of digestion. Parents and teachers may create conditions for learning, and may provide stimulating experiences with learning in mind, but the actual learning experience is intimate and subjective, for each human being reaches out to the world in his own idiosyncratic way. . . . Learning is not always visible to the observer. Solid programming for every moment of time may not of necessity create a positive learning experience. For the mind, unlike a machine, may make its leaps in moments of serenity and solitude. . . . The road to learning takes personal effort, and no human being can jump the hurdles for another. (p. 49)

Education in the Primary and Junior Divisions (Ministry of Education, 1975b) was released as “an extensive philosophical basis and rationale for the program of these [primary and junior] divisions” (p. 3). After presenting the behaviourist approach to learning, the document states: The cognitive-field development approach is based on the assumption that learning is an orderly development in successive patterns of increasingly intricate mental structures. These mental structures develop as the child grows through experience with people, things, and symbols. According to this theory, learning is purposeful and the child is an agent in organizing his or her own knowledge. Of the two approaches, a cognitive explanation is more appropriate in dealing with complex behaviours such as communication, concept-formation, and problem solving. (p. 10)

Circular P1J1: The Formative Years (Ministry of Education, 1975a) outlined provincial curriculum objectives for the primary and junior divisions (in Ontario, grades K–6). First issued in 1975, it remains, as does Education in the Primary and Junior Divisions, Ministry policy for these school years. Although some specific objectives of learning are delineated, the thrust of Circular P1J1 is similar to that of Living and Learning.

PARADIGMS AND CONFLICT IN ONTARIO EDUCATION

35

It follows that the curriculum will provide opportunities for each child (to the limit of his or her potential): to acquire the basic skills fundamental to his or her continuing education; to develop and maintain confidence and a sense of self-worth; to gain the knowledge and acquire the attitudes that he or she needs for active participation in Canadian society; to develop the moral and aesthetic sensitivity necessary for a complete and responsible life. (p. 4; italics added) Programs developed at the local level should provide each child with opportunities to achieve the levels of competence and the forms of growth and development implied in the aims that follow. Such programs would allow individual children to move beyond the expectations of the program without subjecting those who cannot reach them to loss of self esteem or confidence. (p. 5; italics added)

Science is Happening Here (Ministry of Education, 1989a) outlines the science curriculum for grades 1–6 and is remarkable for its lack of specificity about what children are expected to learn at each (or any) grade in science. The teacher is again expected to “provide opportunities” for learning rather than to meet certain instructional goals.4 Guidelines therefore emphasize how children supposedly learn (and teachers should teach), rather than expected learning outcomes. Although recent Ministry statements (see the commentary for Ontario in A World of Differences [Lapointe, Mead, & Phillips, 1989]) suggest guidelines are being made more specific, such recent releases as Science is Happening Here contradict this suggestion. The shift to the whole-language approach to reading is another manifestation of the paradigm. This model has been adopted by most Ontario boards (Ministry of Education, 1990) despite research (see, for example, the United States Department of Education booklet What Works, 1987) documenting the efficacy of the phonics method (Chall, 1989).5 Assessment and the Birth and Death of the OAIP Acceptance of the child-centred model of development makes formulation of assessment or testing models problematic because assessment of student outcomes run contrary to the model’s tenets. Teachers must assess and grade, however, and administrators are sometimes asked for evidence of system-wide functioning. During the late 1970s the Ministry of Education was concerned about board assessment practices and commissioned a number of studies of assessment practices and assessment needs at the board level (Bramwell & Vigna, 1979; Wahlstrom & Danley, 1976, 1979, 1980; Wahlstrom, Danley, & Raphael, 1977; Wahlstrom, Raphael, Jones, & Weinstein, 1977). These studies found that without guidance from the Ministry, schools and school boards applied a bewildering array of assessment practices but frequently used achievement and aptitude tests developed in the United States to report system-level data.

36

DENNIS RAPHAEL

Educators depended on materials developed by particularly innovative school boards (e.g., Making the Grade by the Etobicoke School Board, 1985), the Ontario Ministry of Education’s Evaluation of Student Achievement: A Resource Guide (1976), and local teacher-developed materials. I participated in two of these studies and in our final reports we recommended the Ministry assist boards by preparing item test banks that could be used at a variety of levels to assess student attainment of educational objectives. The Ministry moved quickly on the recommendation. The Ministry Task Force on Evaluation called for the creation of like instruments, and the Ontario Assessment Instrument Pool (OAIP) was born (Ontario Ministry of Education, 1981). OAIP development began in the late 1970s. Contract teams drew on the latest developments in instructional assessment to develop curriculum-based item banks for use in Ontario schools. Ministry statements released during this time anticipated that these item banks, keyed to the Ontario Ministry of Education Guidelines, would be used at three levels: (a) by teachers at the classroom level to assess and improve both class and individual student achievement; (b) by school board personnel to assess system-level functioning and student achievement; and (c) by the Ministry of Education to assess province-wide achievement through periodic sampling of student performance (Ontario Ministry of Education, 1981). If educators knew what they were doing well, it was assumed, they could explain their approaches to others; if they knew what they were doing poorly, they could modify and improve their instruction. The Ministry also carried out a series of extensive field trials collecting data on provincial-level achievement in chemistry, physics, mathematics, and English. Development of instruments for such important purposes was expensive. Ontario teachers, consultants, and Ministry advisory committees worked diligently over two decades to create thousands of assessment items running the entire spectrum, from multiple choice, fill-in-the-blanks, essays, and skills demonstration to lab exercises. The items’ quality was examined psychometrically using the latest computer technology. The instruments themselves were extensively field-tested, and data on provincial-level achievement in selected areas were collected in a series of field trials (McLean, 1987a, 1987b; Talesniak & McLean, 1987; Wolfe, McLean, & Gaudino, 1987). The British Columbia, Alberta, and Manitoba ministries of education routinely use OAIP questions in their provincial assessments. Since 1987 the Ontario Ministry of Education has used OAIP instruments in provincial reviews. Some were also used by the recent International Assessment of Educational Progress (IAEP). At a 1988 planning meeting for IAEP in Toronto, representatives from the 20 participating countries were so impressed with the OAIP pools that bundles of these measures were carried or sent to countries around the world for use by classroom teachers in such countries as China, the former Soviet Union, Ireland, Jordan, Israel, Spain, England, Hungary, Switzerland, and Scotland.

PARADIGMS AND CONFLICT IN ONTARIO EDUCATION

37

The Ministry of Education’s own provincial reviews provided some striking findings. The Provincial Assessment in Canadian Studies Geography (Ontario Ministry of Education, 1988a, 1988b) found that almost two-thirds of Ontario teachers reported using OAIP rarely or not at all. The Ministry’s Senior Division Advanced Level Chemistry and Physics Provincial reviews (Ontario Ministry of Education, 1989b, 1989c, 1989d, 1989e) found 23% of physics teachers never used OAIP instruments and an additional 49% used them occasionally. The figures for chemistry teachers were 23% and 47%, respectively. The most recent review found that 67% of grade 6 teachers use the available mathematics instruments not at all. Although these instruments were distributed to boards, the Ministry’s own information (personal correspondence, Ontario Ministry of Education, December, 1990) indicates that no money was allocated for implementation or monitoring of the instruments’ use. The absence of systematic research into the rise and decline of the OAIP makes it impossible to advance definitive reasons for its failure. Some hypotheses can, however, be advanced. At the very minimum, the rationales for its development conflict. The Ministry assured teachers’ federations that the OAIP would be an open system used primarily by classroom teachers. Trustees were told the banks would be useful for monitoring achievement levels of the system, school boards, and schools. I believe the OAIP failed mainly for two reasons. First, the Ministry outlined a child-centred, non-assessment–oriented educational philosophy, yet produced a multitude of test items supporting a very different (objectives-based) approach to instructional practice. Second, the Ministry was unwilling or unable to mandate educational practice among Ontario school boards consistent with the decentralized education system. It is clear from Table 1 that use of a set of instruments assessing components of student learning, presumably affected by instruction and conducive to public discussion of results, is incompatible with a model that sees the child as the master of his or her learning rate, whose learning cannot be assessed on external, objective measures, and whose learning itself is frequently seen as unaffected by instruction. Province-Wide Testing and Assessment As noted earlier, Ontario has consistently been involved in international studies of student achievement. Yet while supporting such involvement, the Ontario Ministry of Education resolutely resists imposition of province-wide student testing at any level (Silipo, 1992). As a Ministry employee set the task of communicating the value of provincial assessment, I personally encountered strong resistance to the Ministry group assessment program by elementary-level educators both at the Ministry and in the field. Research by Holmes (1991) supports these impressions, indicating significant differences between views of testing held by Ontario directors of education and

38

DENNIS RAPHAEL

by similarly educated members of the general public. The directors oppose testing in the elementary years, the public supports it. These differences extend to educational philosophy, with directors of education being more likely to accept the progressive or child-centred approach to education than is the public. It is therefore unsurprising that the education establishment, adhering strongly to the child-centred model, most oppose standardized assessments. Yet in Ontario these criticisms are being muted by various factors, among them strong demands for public accountability (including a recent government-commissioned report critical of the child-centred approach) and some disturbing results of recent comparative studies on mathematics and science achievement. Hardly a week goes by without another Ontario constituency group criticizing the education system (Raphael, 1990). During the late 1980s, Ontario’s government established educational accountability as an important goal, and commissioned a report on the relevance of education and the issue of drop-outs (Radwanski, 1987). The report was a scathing indictment of the prevailing child-centred educational philosophy and approach. According to Radwanski (1987), teachers are expected to provide opportunities for student learning but the responsibility for learning (or not learning) falls upon the shoulders of children. It is difficult, then, to specify common deficiencies in instruction, since common objectives for all children are usually not outlined. Radwanski also pointed out another major concern: the Ontario drop-out rate for students in the academic stream is 12% but 62% for students in the general (non-academic) stream and a whopping 79% for students in the basic (remedial) stream. Radwanski used his own constructed indices to arrive at these figures, since he found that the Ministry kept no completely accurate drop-out records. The Premier’s Council (Ontario Premier’s Council, 1988) also released a critical study of the functioning of the education system. Both reports called for the institution of student testing. The 1988 International Assessment of Educational Progress (IAEP) involved four Canadian provinces. Ontario students knew less mathematics than those in Quebec, British Columbia, and New Brunswick, and less science than British Columbia students (Lapointe, Mead, & Phillips, 1989). The 1991 IAEP found Ontario 13-year-olds knew less mathematics than students in virtually every other province, and less science than their peers in Alberta, British Columbia, Quebec, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, and Manitoba. Of 9-year-olds in the four participating provinces of British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec, and New Brunswick, those in Ontario knew the least mathematics and science (Lapointe, Askew, & Mead, 1992; Lapoint, Mead, & Askew, 1992). The Minister of Education described these results as “disturbing” (Silipo, 1992), and the Ministry announced another plan of action.6 Concurrent with the announcement of the poor 1988 IAEP results, the Ministry of Education announced a program to develop expected standards of achievement, that is, benchmarks, and diagnostic tests to allow teachers to

PARADIGMS AND CONFLICT IN ONTARIO EDUCATION

39

ascertain whether students are meeting these standards. Benchmarks in mathematics and science were to be developed by December 1989. A renewed commitment to produce benchmarks in mathematics, by June 1992, was made upon release of the IAEP II results (Silipo, 1992). No work was done on diagnostic tests, and fulfilling the previous government’s commitment is not a priority of the present government (personal communication from M. Boyd, Minister of Education, June 1991). The Ministry has announced Ontario’s participation in the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada School Achievement Indicators Project (CMEC, 1991) and the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Involvement in these studies will strengthen the movement toward assessment of outcomes (Raphael, 1990). Aspects of these initiatives, however, are at odds with the child-centred educational philosophy still on the Ministry books. THE ALTERNATIVE PARADIGM: THE OBJECTIVES-BASED APPROACH

Recent reviews of provincial educational practices suggest the child-centred ethos is on the wane in most provinces and nations (OECD, 1989; Raphael, 1990). Suggestions of a shift are apparent in Ontario, where the Minister of Education recently stated that the answer to Ontario’s problems lies with common and clear standards of attainment, improved curricula, and better teaching methods (Silipo, 1992). The alternative paradigm is the objectives-based (mechanistic) world view. In some this evokes images of automatons mindlessly digesting facts and numbers. This view is unfair. It is no coincidence that the philosophy most associated with mechanism is that of John Locke and empiricism. Empiricism was and continues to be a cornerstone of democratic thought, arguing as it does that experience comes mainly through the senses, and that all are equally capable of benefiting from such experience (Lerner, 1986). Mechanism takes the metaphor of the machine (Reese & Overton, 1970) and represents the universe as discrete pieces operating in a spatio-temporal field. In combination these form the reality to which all complex organizations are reducible. Forces are applied to these components and prediction is possible. Purpose is derived through examination of events, and purpose in itself does not serve as cause. In education the mechanistic view is best illustrated by the objectives-based strategies of Gagné (1968, 1975, 1977) and Bloom (Block, 1971; Ryan & Schmidt, 1979). Table 2 presents the educational practices that stem from acceptance of the objectives-based approach. Radwanski (1987) provides a political statement and Gronlund (1990) an educational statement of the value of the objectives approach. No one model satisfies all needs. Admittedly, the objectives-based model neglects somewhat the role of structure and its influence upon perception and learning. In the field of child development, Scarr (1982) elaborates on the mechanistic psychological

40

DENNIS RAPHAEL

TABLE 2 Corollary Issues Associated with the Objectives-Based Model of Development

Issue

Objectivesbased approach

Suggested educational practice

Active vs. Passive

Passive

Teacher sets the pace; education must be teachercentred in that teachers determine the means and methods of instruction; important to assess according to objective external criteria; teacher can readjust instruction if child is not learning.

Holism vs. Elementarism

Elementarism

Focus upon the components of instruction; teach and assess component skills to derive higher-order skills; since cognitive and affective skills grow in tandem, provide successes in learning; since generalization must be taught, provide transfer of training; assess same.

Structure-Function vs. AntecedenceConsequence

AntecedenceConsequence

Provide instruction so that successful learning will occur; since learning should follow successful instruction, assess the success of instruction through objective means.

Structural vs. Behavioural Change

Behavioural

Since changes within the child cannot be assessed use objective measures of performance, see what the child can do at a variety of tasks.

Qualitative vs. Quantitative Change

Quantitative

Change occurs as the result of accumulation of parts; identify components of change; teach, and assess same.

Stages

No Stages

Identify components of development; promote movement through teaching of component skills.

Unidirectional vs. Multidirectional Course

Multidirectional

Assume many ways of learning; teachers provide a variety of learning strategies to students such as cognitive strategies; accept a variety of ways to learn and teach.

Internal vs. External Sources of Energy

External

The environment can direct and effect change; use assessment to define effectiveness of instructional approaches.

model and its role; his probabilistic epigenetic approach deals with some of the model’s weaknesses. Lerner’s (1986) dynamic interactionism moves beyond strict mechanistic tenets. The strengths and optimism of the objectives-based model,

PARADIGMS AND CONFLICT IN ONTARIO EDUCATION

41

and its suggestions about the role of instruction and assessment in improving learning, provide a powerful argument for a shift away from the child-centred model. Interestingly, researchers in child psychology and development have become increasingly critical of Piagetian stage-type constructivist approaches. (See Kuhn, 1986 for a recent review.) Kuhn identifies two main weaknesses: First, the actions generated by the individual’s cognitive system that give rise to change are described by the model in such general abstract terms that it is not easy to draw on the model in conceptualizing the varieties of more specific, cognitively salient acts the individual engages in, and their likely influence on cognitive development. . . . The second limitation, closely related to the first, is that in emphasizing the role of the individual’s own self generated actions, the constructivist model neglects the social context in which these actions, and therefore cognitive development occur. The constructivist process, whatever its precise nature, does not take place in a vacuum. (Kuhn, 1986, p. 229)

The dissatisfaction with Piagetian-type constructivist approaches noted by Kuhn is responsible for the increasing enthusiasm for Vygotskian (Vygotsky, 1962) approaches. As reviewed by Belmont (1989), one aspect of this enthusiasm is the strong instructional orientation of the Vygotskian approach and its emphasis on the social nature of learning. Although not explicitly noted by the objectives-based approach, the social context is necessarily included in the design and delivery of instruction, a key component of the model. SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS

Since Living and Learning (Ontario Ministry of Education, 1968), the childcentred credo has dominated Ontario education. Radwanski (1987) and other critics question the very foundation of the approach; poor achievement results support these criticisms. This approach limits enthusiasm for assessment and reduces public accountability, as evidenced by the failure of OAIP. I have outlined the limitations of the child-centred approach and presented the alternative, objectives-based approach. For those who believe that instruction can make a difference, that most children can learn most material, especially the basics, and that assessment provides a powerful tool for ascertaining whether we are reaching our goals, the child-centred view has outlived its usefulness; assessment programs that can verify achievement of educational objectives are necessary (Raphael, 1990). Acceptance of the objectives-based approach is well under way in most Canadian provinces,7 the United States, and nations around the world (CMEC, 1988; OECD, 1989; Raphael, 1990). The participation of the nine largest provinces in the 1991 International Assessment of Educational Progress, and the

42

DENNIS RAPHAEL

commitment of all provinces except Saskatchewan (which now has observer status) to the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, School Achievement Indicators Project show the increasing acceptance of this approach. The Ontario education bureaucracy, however,8 still marches to the tune of the child-centred drummer, even though this tune is no longer popular with the public and is abandoned almost everywhere else in the world. It remains to be seen how long the music will continue to play without dancing by or approval from the public. NOTES 1

University-bound students have traditionally been required to complete a core of additional courses, hence the grade 13. More recently these courses are now called Ontario Academic Credits (OAC) rather than grade 13.

2

A version of this paper was first presented at a meeting of the Effects of Changes in Assessment Policy Group, at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Toronto, Ontario, in November 1988. The paper was updated for distribution at the December 1989 meeting of the Association of Educational Research Officers of Ontario (AERO) in Toronto. The present version was written November 1992, 24 months after election of the NDP provincial government.

3

I have chosen to concentrate on two psychological models and the associated educational approaches. There are, however, at least four major schools of thought specifically concerned with children and learning: cognitive developmental, behaviourist, information processing, and humanistic (Good & Brophy, 1986).

4

An interesting episode illustrates the translation of this approach into educational practice. I made a presentation on the relatively low level of science achievement in Ontario to a group of teachers in Ottawa. One teacher said that “If students enjoyed working with science-type materials such as magnets or mirrors, I really don’t care if they learned anything.” A principal standing nearby stated, “As an educator I fully agree with that view, but as a parent it scares me to death.”

5

The issue is an active one in Ontario, as shown by contributions such as that by Doreen Kronick in the Toronto Star (1989, October 2): “Most boards have embraced the whole language approach to reading and spelling which means that spelling, grammar, decoding, and learning to write have been replaced by reading for meaning and spontaneous writing. They underestimate the difficulty inherent in learning to spell, decode and write with skill.”

6

It is impossible to draw upon published documents to identify the strategic processes of how these decisions are made. Press releases provide politically astute presentations of actions but true motivations for government action frequently remain obscure.

7

Not surprisingly, the British Columbia Ministry of Education’s attempt to implement aspects of a child-centred approach through the “Year 2000” initiative is sparking controversy.

8

The Ministry of Education working paper The Common Curriculum (1993) takes the child-centred approach to even further extremes. The document outlines a non-subject–discipline approach from grades K to 9: “Subject matter and outcomes are organized into broad program areas rather than traditional subject disciplines” (p. 1).

REFERENCES Belmont, J.M. (1989). Cognitive strategies and strategic learning: The socio-instructional approach. American Psychologist, 44, 142–148. Block, J. (1971). Mastery learning: Theory and practice. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

PARADIGMS AND CONFLICT IN ONTARIO EDUCATION

43

Bramwell, J.R., & Vigna, R. (1979). Evaluation instruments locally developed in Ontario. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education. Chall, J. (1989). Learning to read: The great debate 20 years after. A response to “Debunking the great phonics myth.” Phi Delta Kappan, 70, 521–538. Connelly, M., Crocker, R., & Kass, H. (Eds.) (1989). Science education in Canada: Vol. 2. Achievement and its correlates. Toronto: OISE Press. Council of Ministers of Education, Canada [CMEC]. (1988). Recent trends in curriculum reform at the elementary and secondary levels in Canada. Toronto: Author. Council of Ministers of Education, Canada [CMEC]. (1991). CMEC School Achievement Indicators Program (Background Paper No. 1). Toronto: Author. Etobicoke Board of Education. (1985). Making the grade: Evaluating and reporting student progress. Toronto: Author. Flavell, J. (1963). The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. Gagné, R.M. (1968). Contributions of learning to human development. Psychological Review, 75, 177–191. Gagné, R.M. (1975). Essentials of learning for instruction. Hinsdale, IL: The Dryden Press. Gagné, R.M. (1977). The conditions of learning (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Good, T.L., & Brophy, J.E. (1986). Educational psychology (3rd ed.). New York: Longman. Gronlund, J. (1990). Measurement and evaluation in teaching. New York: MacMillan. Holmes, M. (1991). The values and beliefs of Ontario’s chief education officers. In K. Leithwood & D. Musella (Eds.) Understanding school system administration: Studies of the contemporary chief education officer (pp. 154–174). New York: Falmer. Kuhn, D. (1988). Cognitive development. In M. Bornstein & M. Lamb (Eds.), Developmental psychology: An advanced textbook (pp. 205–260). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lapoint, A., Askew, J., & Mead, N. (1992). Learning science. Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service. Lapoint, A., Mead, J., & Askew, J. (1992). Learning mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Lapoint, A., Mead, N., & Phillips, G. (1989). A world of differences: Report of the International Assessment of Educational Progress. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Lerner, R.M. (1986). Concepts and theories of human development. New York: Random House. Looft, W.R. (1973). Socialization and personality throughout the life-span: An examination of contemporary psychological approaches. In P.B. Baltes & K.W. Schaie (Eds.), Life-span developmental psychology: Personality and socialization (pp. 26–52). New York: Academic Press. McLean, L.D. (1987a). Teaching and learning chemistry in Ontario in the Senior Division. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education. McLean, L.D. (1987b). Teaching and learning physics in Ontario in the Senior Division. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education. McLean, L.D., Raphael, D., & Wahlstrom, M.W. (1984). Intentions and attainments in the teaching and learning of mathematics: Report on the second international mathematics study in Ontario. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education.

44

DENNIS RAPHAEL

Ontario Department of Education. (1968) Living and learning: The report of the Provincial Committee on the Aims and Objectives of Education in the Schools of Ontario. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1975a). Circular P1J1: The formative years. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1975b). Education in the primary and junior divisions. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1976). Evaluation of student achievement: A resource guide. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1981). Ontario Assessment Newsletter, 1. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1988a). Canadian Studies Geography: A public report card. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1988b). Canadian Studies Geography: A report for educators. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1989a). Science is happening here. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1989b). Senior Division Advanced Level Chemistry: A public report card. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1989c). Senior Division Advanced Level Chemistry: A report for educators. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1989d). Senior Division Advanced Level Physics: A public report card. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1989e). Senior Division Advanced Level Physics: A report for educators. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1990). Junior Division Reading: A report for educators. Toronto: Author. Ontario Ministry of Education. (1993, February). The common curriculum (Working Paper). Toronto: Author. Ontario Premier’s Council. (1988). People and skills in the new global economy. Toronto: Author. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (1989). School and quality: An international report. Paris, France: Author. Overton W.F., & Reese, H.W. (1973). Models of development: Methodological implications. In J.R. Nesselroade & H.W. Reese (Eds.), Life-span developmental psychology: Methodological issues (pp. 65–86). New York: Academic Press. Radwanski, G. (1987). Ontario study of the relevance of education and the issue of dropouts. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education. Raphael, D. (1990). Educational evaluation and reform strategies. Toronto: Council of Ministers of Education of Canada. Reese, H.W., & Overton, W.F. (1970). Models of development and theories of development. In L. Goulet & P.B. Baltes (eds.), Life-span developmental psychology: research and theory (pp. 116– 145). New York: Academic Press. Ryan, D., & Schmidt, M. (1979). Mastery learning: Theory, research and practice. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education. Scarr, S. (1982). Development is internally guided, not determined. Contemporary Psychology, 27, 852–853. Silipo, T. (1992, February 5). Provincial and international tests show need for change in math and science education (Press Release). Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education.

PARADIGMS AND CONFLICT IN ONTARIO EDUCATION

45

Talesniak, I., & McLean, L.D. (1987). Report of the 1983 field trials in Chemistry, Senior Division. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education. United States Department of Education. (1987). What works. Boulder CO: Author. Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language (E. Hanfmann & G. Vakar, Trans.). Cambridge: MIT Press. (Original work published 1934) Wahlstrom, M.W., & Danley, R.R. (1976). Assessment of student achievement: A survey of the assessment of student achievement in Ontario. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education. Wahlstrom, M.W., & Danley, R. R. (1979). Measuring achievement at the intermediate level: An analytical review of test instruments used in evaluating student achievement in english, science, history and geography. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education. Wahlstrom, M.W., & Danley, R.R. (1980). Measuring achievement at the senior level: An analytical review of test instruments used in evaluating student achievement in the senior division. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education. Wahlstrom, M.W., Danley, R., & Raphael, D. (1977). Measuring achievement at the primary and junior levels. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education. Wahlstrom, M.W., Raphael, D., Jones, L., & Weinstein, E. (1977). Assessment of student achievement: Evaluation of student achievement at the intermediate level. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Department of Curriculum. Wolfe, T.J.E., McLean, L.D., & Gaudino, V. (1987). Report of the 1983 field trials in Physics, Senior Division. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education. Dennis Raphael is in the Department of Behavioural Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, McMurrich Building, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 1A8.

L’utilisation pédagogique d’outils informatiques de gestion de données à l’école primaire Colette Deaudelin Jean Loiselle Marielle Pratte université du québec à trois rivières Une analyse des recherches portant sur l’utilisation des systèmes de gestion de base de données et des banques de données dans l’enseignement au primaire et une enquête faite dans le milieu scolaire québécois mettent en évidence les contributions possibles de ces outils dans un contexte d’apprentissage. L’article fait également état des limites actuelles des outils informatiques de gestion de données et propose des éléments de prospective. Research on database management systems and on databases for primary education available in Quebec show how these tools may be helpful to learners — and in what ways the tools are limited in educational application. INTRODUCTION

Au cours des dernières décennies, la quantité d’information que l’individu, qu’il soit adulte ou enfant, doit traiter s’est accrue de façon considérable. Des outils informatisés de gestion de l’information maintenant disponibles viennent combler des lacunes à ce niveau. Outre le fait qu’ils soient bien adaptés à ce type de tâche, ils possèdent en plus un grand potentiel éducatif, notamment en ce qui a trait au développement d’habiletés à traiter l’information et à résoudre des problèmes (Bibeau, 1986; Hunter, 1985; Malo et Cloutier, 1990; Repartir, 1990). L’introduction de tels outils en milieu scolaire est toutefois récente comme le montre le nombre de projets INNOVATION1 subventionnés en milieu scolaire (Meynard, 1987): un seul projet portant sur l’utilisation de systèmes de gestion de base de données en milieu scolaire a été enregistré de 1984 à 1987. Du côté de la recherche, ce n’est aussi que récemment que l’on s’est penché sur les outils informatisés de gestion de l’information en fonction de leur utilisation par des élèves du primaire. Quel est l’état de la recherche en ce qui a trait à l’utilisation d’outils informatisés de gestion de l’information par des élèves du primaire, quelle utilisation fait-on de tels outils à l’école primaire au Québec et quelles sont les tendances de développement de ces outils, telles sont les questions que nous abordons dans le présent article. Après une revue de quelques concepts liés aux outils de gestion de données, nous nous penchons sur les principaux résultats de recherche portant sur ce type d’outils et les élèves du primaire. Le texte trace ensuite un portrait 46

REVUE CANADIENNE DE L’ÉDUCATION

18:1 (1993)

OUTILS INFORMATIQUES À L’ÉCOLE PRIMAIRE

47

québécois des utilisations pédagogiques des outils informatisés de gestion de l’information à l’école primaire. Enfin, un regard est jeté sur les développements technologiques susceptibles de repousser les limites des systèmes de gestion de bases de données actuellement sur le marché. BASES, BANQUES ET SYSTÈMES DE GESTION DE BASE DE DONNÉES: QUELQUES DÉFINITIONS

Généralement, on réfère aux outils informatiques de gestion des données par l’expression “base de données.” Une revue de la littérature nous confronte toutefois à des acceptions différentes de cette expression. Une étude des définitions de Legendre (1988), Plante, Simard, Proulx et Lavoie (1987), Boivin et Duquet-Picard (1988), Don (1988), de Villers (1989), Ginguay et Lauret (1987), Matte et Villardier (1987) et Morvan (1988) a permis une définition exhaustive des concepts de “base de données,” “banque de données” et de “système de gestion de base de données” (Deaudelin et Pratte, 1990; Pratte, 1990). Cette étude nous amène à retenir les termes de “base” et de “banque de données” pour référer à des ensembles structurés de données pouvant être consultés et gérés à l’aide d’un outil informatique. Dans le cas de la base de données, l’usager peut créer, consulter et traiter l’ensemble des données tandis que dans celui de la banque, les données ne peuvent être que consultées par l’usager puisque l’ensemble des données est généralement de grande dimension et géré par un organisme extérieur. Quant au concept de système de gestion de base de données (SGBD), il permet de référer à l’outil informatique qui rend précisément possible la constitution et le traitement de ces contenus. LES RECHERCHES CONCERNANT L’UTILISATION D’OUTILS DE GESTION DE DONNÉES AU PRIMAIRE

Une recension des recherches faite à partir des principales banques de données relatives à l’éducation en Amérique du Nord et en Europe2 met en évidence le potentiel éducatif de tels outils. La méthode utilisée pour cette recension de même que les résultats de l’analyse des recherches répertoriées sont présentés dans les sections qui suivent. La méthodologie Le corpus des recherches a été constitué à partir de l’interrogation des principales banques de données, soit ERIC, FRANCIS, EDUQ, Canadiana, Dissertation Abstracts International, ONED, Cahier de projets de recherche-développement 1986–1989 (APO Québec, 1989) et enfin l’Inventaire de la recherche universitaire au Québec. Les descripteurs retenus sont les suivants: (1) base de

48

DEAUDELIN, LOISELLE ET PRATTE

données — banque de données — logiciel-outil — progiciel — application; (2) éducation — enseignement — apprentissage — école; (3) primaire — élémentaire; (4) de 1985 à 1990; (5) tous les types de documents; sauf administration et bureautique. La consultation de ces différents répertoires a permis d’identifier 16 recherches. Nous avons recueilli des informations sur les objectifs visés, sur les méthodes utilisées ainsi que sur les principaux résultats obtenus par ces recherches. L’examen des objectifs et des résultats des recherches révèle deux ensembles de préoccupations: celles portant sur la stratégie pédagogique et celles concernant l’identification ou l’évaluation des caractéristiques des logiciels. Quant à l’analyse des méthodes de recherche, nous avons retenu une typologie élaborée en fonction des buts et des méthodes de recherche. Ces buts, tels que présentés par de Landsheere (1982), sont ici énumérés ainsi que les méthodes les plus susceptibles d’en permettre l’atteinte selon les auteurs consultés: — mettre en évidence des relations causales ou des relations fonctionnelles entre variables: la méthode expérimentale (Borg et Gall, 1983; Ouellet, 1982; Robert, 1982), la méthode comparative (Borg et Gall, 1983; Ouellet, 1982) et la méthode d’identification de relations causales (Selltiz, Wrightsman et Cook, 1977); — décrire un processus: méthode historique (Borg et Gall, 1983; Robert, 1982) et méthode descriptive (Ouellet, 1982; Robert, 1982; Selltiz, Wrightsman et Cook, 1977); — résoudre un problème: recherche-développement (Borg et Gall, 1983; Ouellet, 1982); — évaluer un processus, un produit: méthode évaluative (Borg et Gall, 1983). Analyse des recherches répertoriées Les trois aspects pris en compte dans les recherches analysées sont ici présentés. Les objectifs visés par les recherches analysées Les objectifs des recherches répertoriées concernent généralement les stratégies d’intégration pédagogique ou les logiciels utilisés. Il est à noter que toutes les recherches concernent le deuxième cycle du primaire alors que 30% de ces recherches s’intéressent aussi au premier cycle du primaire. Une majorité des recherches (55% dans le cas des SGBD et 50% dans le cas des banques de données) vise le développement de stratégies pédagogiques permettant l’intégration des systèmes de gestion de bases de données et des banques de données au primaire (Bordier, Labelle et Paquette, 1987; Dallaire Klinck et Beauchamp Payer, 1989; Dauphinais, 1986, 1988; Gagné cité dans APO Québec, 1989; Labelle, Robitaille et Lagacé cité dans APO Québec, 1989; Perron cité dans APO

OUTILS INFORMATIQUES À L’ÉCOLE PRIMAIRE

49

Québec, 1989; Pratte cité dans APO Québec, 1989; Pratte, 1990; Ruelland, 1988; Skillen, 1986). Certaines décrivent des pratiques permettant la consultation de la banque de données américaine Compuserve (Teague, Teague et Marchionini, 1987) ou évaluent certains aspects de ces pratiques (par exemple, la capacité qu’ont des élèves à utiliser des banques de données sur disques compact “CD ROM”; Teague et al., 1987). D’autres recherches visent également la mise au point de logiciels mieux adaptés aux besoins des élèves du primaire (Paquette, 1989a, 1989b; Pratte cité dans APO Québec, 1989; Skillen, 1986) alors qu’une autre vise exclusivement l’élaboration de produits informatisés (Dauphinais, 1986). Enfin, des recherches portent sur les caractéristiques mêmes que devraient présenter les logiciels s’adressant à des élèves du primaire (Dauphinais, 1989; Scardamalia, Bereiter, McLean, Smallow et Woodruff, 1989). Les méthodes utilisées En regard de la typologie retenue, trois méthodes sont privilégiées. Comme nous pouvions l’anticiper à la lecture des objectifs, dans 59% des cas, une méthode de recherche-développement est utilisée. D’autres recherches (24%) s’appuient plutôt sur des méthodes descriptives ou comportent, dans 24% des cas, une dimension évaluative.3 Les résultats obtenus dans les recherches analysées Les résultats des recherches répertoriées concernent principalement les stratégies d’intégration pédagogique et les caractéristiques des logiciels. L’analyse des écrits met en évidence certaines caractéristiques sous-jacentes aux stratégies pédagogiques développées. Parmi les plus souvent mentionnées, on retrouve: l’intégration des matières (ou à tout le moins le recours à plusieurs matières); la démarche expérimentale et la démarche de résolution de problèmes; la créativité; l’aspect signifiant de telles activités; la nécessité que de telles stratégies mettent l’accent sur le traitement de l’information et les représentations variées qui favorisent ce processus de traitement. Quant aux étapes nécessaires à la réalisation de telles stratégies pédagogiques, une majorité des recherches ayant abordé cette question réfère en fait aux principales étapes de toute activité éducative, à savoir une mise en situation, une situation d’apprentissage incluant des activités d’exploration et des activités d’apprentissage, une situation d’évaluation et une situation de réinvestissement.4 Au plan des caractéristiques générales que devraient présenter les logiciels conçus pour des élèves du primaire, la recherche de Skillen (1986) souligne que ces logiciels doivent soutenir la démarche de construction de savoirs de l’élève par des interventions qui visent essentiellement à rendre manifestes les activités de construction du savoir, à encourager l’élève à diversifier ses stratégies

50

DEAUDELIN, LOISELLE ET PRATTE

d’apprentissage, à lui fournir un feedback sur le processus d’apprentissage qu’il utilise et enfin, à lui permettre de coopérer à l’apprentissage des autres. Malgré le nombre relativement faible de recherches répertoriées, nous pouvons néanmoins dégager certaines tendances dans l’utilisation des SGBD et des banques de données que préconisent ces recherches. On y souligne bien l’importance d’insister sur la démarche de résolution de problèmes en mettant l’accent sur le développement d’habiletés métacognitives. Quant à la facture des logiciels, le nombre de recherches est relativement faible et les conclusions qu’on y retrouve risquent de devenir rapidement désuètes étant donné la rapidité de développement des nouvelles technologies. Enfin, en ce qui a trait aux limites de la présente recherche, les méthodologies utilisées dans la majorité des recherches recensées limitent grandement la généralisation des résultats rapportés ici. Dans le cas de recherches descriptives ou évaluatives, les limites sont liées tant aux caractéristiques très particulières et au nombre souvent peu élevé de sujets interrogés ou observés qu’aux environnements informatiques spécifiques dans lesquels se sont déroulées les recherches. Dans le cas des recherches dont la préoccupation principale est le développement de produit, les limites sont liées à deux aspects. D’une part, nous avons dû recourir à des sources de seconde main. D’autre part, lorsqu’un rapport est disponible, celui-ci fournit généralement peu d’information sur l’impact de tels outils sur l’apprentissage des élèves de niveau primaire, dans la mesure où de telles recherches procèdent à la validation du produit développé auprès d’un nombre restreint d’élèves. Les écrits recensés mettent en évidence l’apport possible des SGBD dans un contexte d’apprentissage, mais renseignent peu sur l’utilisation de tels outils en milieu scolaire. La section qui suit fait état de cette utilisation à l’école primaire au Québec. ÉTAT DE LA SITUATION DANS LES ÉCOLES PRIMAIRES QUÉBÉCOISES

Nous présentons la méthodologie utilisée pour tracer un portrait québécois des utilisations pédagogiques des systèmes de gestion de base de données (SGBD) et des banques de données à l’école primaire, pour ensuite faire état des principaux résultats obtenus. Méthodologie La collecte des données Une enquête faite auprès de quelques 335 responsables du dossier des applications pédagogiques de l’ordinateur dans tous les établissements privés et les commissions scolaires francophones, anglophones et allophones du Québec a permis d’identifier 109 expériences d’utilisation d’un SGBD en classe, appelées

OUTILS INFORMATIQUES À L’ÉCOLE PRIMAIRE

51

activités. Un premier questionnaire, composé essentiellement de questions fermées, a été utilisé afin d’identifier l’activité au moyen d’une courte description tout en précisant le niveau d’enseignement, le type d’environnement (Macintosh, IBM ou autre, le nom de l’organisme subventionnaire supportant l’activité (si tel était le cas), et enfin le nom de la personne responsable de l’activité. Un deuxième questionnaire envoyé à cette personne a permis de valider les informations recueillies lors de cette première collecte et d’obtenir, au moyen de 11 questions ouvertes, des informations sur: — la problématique qui a amené l’élaboration du projet; — les objectifs poursuivis; — la démarche pédagogique (contextes informatique et pédagogique); — les principaux apprentissages faits; — les difficultés rencontrées et des solutions possibles. L’analyse des données Différents cadres d’analyse ont été utilisés selon qu’il s’agissait de traiter les données concernant les objectifs poursuivis et leur degré d’atteinte, ou celles concernant les démarches pédagogiques utilisées. Quant aux difficultés rencontrées, nous avons analysé les données à partir d’un cadre émergent. Afin d’analyser les objectifs poursuivis, nous inspirant d’une distinction faite par le Ministère de l’Éducation du Québec (1985), nous avons considéré les trois rôles suivants joués par l’application: (1) objet d’apprentissage: l’objectif d’apprentissage est d’abord de connaître l’outil; (2) outil de travail: l’outil informatique est ici utilisé afin de faciliter certaines étapes d’un travail nécessitant le traitement d’une quantité importante de données; l’attention n’est alors pas portée sur les apprentissages au niveau du traitement de l’information, mais plutôt sur la tâche que l’outil permet de réaliser plus facilement; (3) outil d’apprentissage: dans ce dernier cas, l’utilisation du logiciel vise d’abord et avant tout le développement d’habiletés liées au traitement de l’information. Étant donné les potentialités des SGBD en regard du développement de certaines habiletés intellectuelles, il semble important de distinguer, d’après la typologie de Gagné et Briggs (1979), trois catégories d’objectifs: (1) les informations verbales et les habiletés intellectuelles de premier niveau: l’apprentissage d’informations verbales correspond à l’apprentissage de faits (savoir, par exemple, que la vache est un mammifère) tandis le développement d’habiletés intellectuelles de premier niveau réfère en fait au développement de la capacité à discriminer et à acquérir des concepts

52

DEAUDELIN, LOISELLE ET PRATTE

concrets. À titre d’exemple, discriminer la ligne droite de la ligne courbe et maîtriser le concept de nombre pour ensuite identifier correctement un triangle quelconque constituent des habiletés de premier niveau; (2) les habiletés intellectuelles de niveau supérieur et les stratégies cognitives: nous regroupons dans cette catégorie la capacité à appliquer des règles complexes et, au plan des stratégies cognitives, l’habileté à induire de telles règles; (3) les objectifs d’ordre affectif: cette catégorie d’objectifs regroupe ceux qui concernent la modification d’attitudes (par exemple, développer le goût de la lecture). Quant à la démarche pédagogique privilégiée, le modèle de stratégie pédagogique proposé par Pratte (1990) a guidé l’analyse des informations recueillies. Deux phases sont prises en compte: la préparation (contexte informatique et contexte pédagogique) de l’activité et son déroulement (mise en situation, situation d’apprentissage et situations d’évaluation et de réinvestissement). Les résultats Un portrait quantitatif L’enquête a permis de répertorier, dans les écoles primaires du Québec, 109 activités exploitant les SGBD tandis qu’aucune ne mettait à profit les banques de données. Ce nombre représente un taux qui peut être qualifié de moyen si l’on considère le nombre de questionnaires envoyé, soit 350, mais il est tout de même faible si l’on considère le nombre d’établissements visés par notre enquête, soit 1954. Dans 35% des cas, ces projets abordent différents thèmes en sciences de la nature alors que, dans 30% et 28% des cas, ce sont respectivement les sciences humaines et la langue maternelle qui sont privilégiées. Ces activités sont plus souvent réalisées au deuxième cycle du primaire (72% des cas). Les objectifs poursuivis Lorsque la visée de l’enseignant est liée à une meilleure utilisation des moyens d’enseignement (voir la section centrale du tableau 15), dans 70% des cas, l’attention est portée sur l’utilisation de ces applications comme “outil d’apprentissage.” Dans 44% des cas, les projets privilégient l’apprentissage d’informations verbales ou le développement d’habiletés intellectuelles de premier niveau (habiletés à discriminer, à identifier certains objets en fonction de certaines caractéristiques). À titre d’exemples, les SGBD sont utilisés pour compiler des informations sur les animaux, les régions touristiques ou encore les

OUTILS INFORMATIQUES À L’ÉCOLE PRIMAIRE

53

plantes du Québec. Bien que ce soit dans une proportion moindre, certains projets (23%) visent le développement d’habiletés intellectuelles de niveau supérieur. Parmi celles qui sont le plus souvent mentionnées, on retrouve les habiletés liées à la résolution de problèmes, les habiletés à établir des liens, à émettre des hypothèses, etc. Des objectifs d’ordre affectif sont visés dans 4% des projets; ils concernent le plus souvent l’autonomie de l’élève, le travail d’équipe et les relations interpersonnelles.

TABLEAU 1 Degré d’atteinte des objectifs et autres apprentissages faits en fonction des catégories d’apprentissage considérées Degré d’atteinte des objectifs Sans info. sur le degré d’atteinte

Non atteints

10%

1%

9%

10%

2%

8%

cognitif (1er niv.)

43%

35%

8%

ouia

cognitif (niv. sup.)

23%

18%

5%

ouib

4%

4%

5%

2%

5%

5%

Objectifs atteints

Objectifs Démarche

Apprentissages non prévus

Moyens Objet d’apprentissage

Outil d’app.

affectif Outil de travail Autres

100% a b

c

ouic 3%

100%

Une faible proportion des informations fournies témoigne d’apprentissages non prévus De l’ensemble des informations fournies au sujet de cette catégorie d’apprentissage, 45% d’entre elles témoignent d’apprentissages non prévus Une forte majorité des informations fournies en regard de cette catégorie d’objectifs, soit 92%, indique des apprentissages non prévus.

54

DEAUDELIN, LOISELLE ET PRATTE

Le degré d’atteinte des objectifs Comme en témoigne le tableau 1, lorsque des informations sont disponibles,6 elles indiquent un haut degré d’atteinte des objectifs. Autre fait intéressant mis en évidence dans le tableau 1 (dernière colonne) est que des apprentissages non prévus par les enseignants ayant réalisé ces activités ont aussi été observés. C’est le cas des apprentissages cognitifs de niveau supérieur et des apprentissages d’ordre affectif. Au plan affectif, la proportion d’apprentissages non prévus est importante. Les observations faites témoignent d’une plus grande motivation, d’un plus grand intérêt, d’une ardeur au travail extraordinaire et d’un grand enthousiasme des élèves. Il va de soi que de tels résultats peuvent être attribués au fait que les élèves savent qu’ils participent à une expérience (effet Hawthorne) ou encore à la nouveauté de l’outil informatique mis à leur disposition. Nous pensons toutefois que l’utilisation d’outils performants de traitement de l’information est aussi susceptible de provoquer de tels effets au plan affectif. Les démarches pédagogiques privilégiées Les résultats de l’enquête mettent en évidence la diversité des mises en situation utilisées (lecture d’un texte, “tempête d’idées,” invitation d’une personneressource, sortie). La situation d’apprentissage comprend, d’une part, des activités d’exploration des concepts et du logiciel et d’autre part, des activités visant la recherche d’information, l’organisation, le traitement et l’analyse des données et enfin la présentation et la diffusion des résultats. On y précise autant les actions qui sont posées par les élèves lors de leur travail avec le logiciel que les interventions de la personne responsable de l’activité dans le but de préparer ou de conclure le travail de l’élève. Les activités d’objectivation et d’évaluation sont, quant à elles, peu souvent mentionnées. En dernier lieu, quelques activités de réinvestissement sont décrites. Les difficultés rencontrées Parmi les difficultés rencontrées, certaines sont liées à la dimension matérielle: nombre restreint d’appareils, complexité des logiciels, utilisation de logiciels en voie de validation, accessibilité réduite à une documentation imprimée, à jour, dans laquelle les élèves peuvent effectuer leur recherche d’information. D’autres sont en relation avec les apprentissages mêmes que les élèves doivent réaliser au primaire. En résumé, cette enquête montre que des activités utilisant les SGBD sont actuellement réalisées à l’école primaire. Malgré les difficultés rencontrées, elles permettent pour le moins aux élèves d’établir un premier contact avec les nouvelles technologies de l’information. Les objectifs poursuivis dans de telles

OUTILS INFORMATIQUES À L’ÉCOLE PRIMAIRE

55

activités témoignent toutefois d’un “premier pas” que constituent ces activités, car on se limite assez souvent aux objectifs cognitifs de premier niveau alors que de l’avis de plusieurs auteurs, comme nous l’avons vu précédemment, le travail devrait plutôt s’effectuer par rapport à des objectifs cognitifs de niveau supérieur. On constate par ailleurs, l’absence d’activités exploitant des banques de données. Enfin, la majorité des activités répertoriées place l’élève en situation de conception de la base de données. Étant donné l’ampleur du travail qu’occasionne la constitution d’une base, les élèves effectuent souvent leurs recherches à l’aide de bases de données contenant une quantité très limitée d’informations. En terminant, il importe de souligner les limites d’une telle enquête. Nous avons choisi de procéder à une collecte de données par le biais de questions ouvertes afin de ne pas filtrer des informations non anticipées. Si cet instrument a rempli adéquatement son rôle, il a cependant amené certaines difficultés dans l’analyse des données à cause du caractère parfois sommaire des réponses fournies. Par ailleurs, la planification de telles activités de même que la description qui en est faite sont grandement liées à la capacité des répondants, essentiellement des enseignants, à formuler des objectifs d’apprentissage et à en faire l’évaluation. Compte tenu, par exemple, des difficultés inhérentes à l’évaluation d’objectifs cognitifs de niveau supérieur, il faut considérer les résultats de la présente recherche comme des indices de la situation vécue présentement dans le milieu scolaire québécois. Malgré l’évolution probable de la situation décrite, les résultats de l’enquête peuvent être utiles tant aux chercheurs qu’aux praticiens. LES OUTILS DE GESTION DE DONNÉES: LIMITES ET PROSPECTIVE

Limites actuelles des outils de gestion des données Les limites que présentent actuellement les outils de gestion des données sont reliées principalement au type d’informations contenues dans les bases de données et aux moyens qui permettent à l’usager d’accéder à cette information. On remarque tout d’abord que les bases de données construites ou utilisées en milieu scolaire contiennent surtout des informations factuelles. Or, comme le notent Parsaye, Chignell, Khoshafian et Wong (1989), les usagers de bases de données ne recherchent généralement pas une information spécifique sur un sujet donné, mais veulent plutôt approfondir ou mettre à jour leurs connaissances. Par conséquent, ils recherchent des connaissances, c’est-à-dire un ensemble organisé de faits et d’idées (Bell cité dans Parsaye et al., 1989). Plutôt que de donner accès à de telles connaissances, les bases de données présentent généralement un ensemble de faits qui ne comportent pas nécessairement de liens évidents entre eux. Malgré la cohérence de la banque de faits contenue dans une base de données, il n’est pas toujours facile pour l’élève de synthétiser et d’interpréter les informations recueillies afin d’obtenir une

56

DEAUDELIN, LOISELLE ET PRATTE

connaissance bien articulée du sujet à l’étude. La base de données fournit donc à l’élève le matériel de base nécessaire au traitement de l’information, mais offre peu d’aide au niveau du processus de traitement de cette information. De plus, les bases de données traditionnelles présentent généralement les informations d’une façon standardisée qui ne s’avère pas toujours adaptée aux différents profils des élèves en termes d’acquis cognitifs, de maîtrise de la langue et de profil d’apprentissage. Elles permettent à l’usager de rechercher une information spécifique sur un thème donné, mais ne lui offrent pas la possibilité de contrôler le degré de difficulté ou la nature des informations recherchées, ni d’obtenir des informations adaptées à son profil d’apprentissage. Ainsi, l’usager pour qui l’information apparaît trop complexe aura généralement peu de recours lui permettant d’obtenir une information mieux adaptée à ses besoins. De même celui qui privilégie une approche inductive face à un problème donné n’aura pas nécessairement besoin du même type d’information que l’élève privilégiant une approche déductive. L’accès aux informations contenues dans une base de données peut également poser certains problèmes. Bien que les SGBD offrent des possibilités multiples au niveau de la recherche de l’information, ils imposent à l’usager un mode de consultation structuré duquel il ne peut déroger. Lorsque l’élève désire obtenir une information, il devra connaître les descripteurs qui le lui permettront. Or, dans bien des cas, l’élève qui a besoin d’information sur un sujet donné ne connaîtra pas les mots-clés associés à ce sujet et ne pourra donc accéder à l’information requise. Malgré ces limites, les bases de données et les SGBD actuels présentent un intérêt pédagogique certain et constituent des outils intéressants pour l’élève engagé dans une démarche de résolution de problèmes ou d’exploration scientifique. Il apparaît également que les limites décrites antérieurement ne sont pas inhérentes à la nature même des bases de données, mais décrivent plutôt un stade de leur évolution. Prospective Les écrits font état de diverses expériences de recherche-développement où l’on décrit une nouvelle génération de bases de données et de SGBD qui présentent des possibilités nouvelles. Ces produits s’inspirent des développements récents dans le domaine de l’intelligence artificielle et des hypermédias et proposent des approches innovatrices au niveau de l’organisation des données, du mode d’accès à ces données et du contenu de la base de données. Parsaye et al. (1989) formulent un ensemble de suggestions et de recommandations visant à augmenter l’efficacité et la pertinence des bases de données actuelles. Afin de diminuer les difficultés que l’usager peut rencontrer en interrogeant une base de données, ces auteurs suggèrent entre autres de combiner le mode de recherche à partir de descripteurs habituellement utilisé dans les

OUTILS INFORMATIQUES À L’ÉCOLE PRIMAIRE

57

SGBD aux possibilités de navigation offertes par les hypermédias. Ainsi, l’usager peut avoir accès au besoin à ces informations supplémentaires en sélectionnant, à l’aide de “boutons” à l’écran, l’information qu’il juge incomplète. Selon Parsaye et al. (1989), la navigation par hypertexte ou hypergraphique offre un mode d’accès à l’information moins structuré mais plus naturel qui s’avère mieux adaptée à un usager qui connaît peu le domaine et qui désire l’explorer librement. Par contre, le caractère associatif et non-linéaire de la navigation par hypertexte peut entraîner certaines difficultés. Dans de tels systèmes, l’absence de moyens sophistiqués de recherche de l’information oblige l’usager à naviguer de façon intuitive à l’intérieur du système pour tenter de trouver un cheminement qui l’amènera à l’information voulue. Comme le note Barden (1989), il est possible que l’usager se “perde” dans l’ensemble d’informations et de cheminements disponibles. Dans un tel cas, un SGBD qui offre ces deux modes de recherche de l’information conviendrait donc mieux à un plus grand nombre d’usagers. D’autres développements contribuent à améliorer l’interface nécessaire à la recherche d’informations à l’intérieur d’une base de données. Plusieurs SGBD offrent maintenant la possibilité de questionner la base de données de façon simple et naturelle. Par exemple, certains SGBD disponibles sur le marché permettent un questionnement à partir d’exemples (“query-by-example”). Ces produits permettent de retrouver tous les enregistrements qui correspondent à un ensemble de caractéristiques particulières décrites à l’aide d’un tableau. Ces méthodes de questionnement sont généralement simples et adaptées à l’élève. Cependant, elles n’offrent pas toujours une grande souplesse et l’usager doit se conformer aux règles syntaxiques qui les régissent. D’autres produits offrent des langages de questionnement proches du langage naturel qui permettent de réaliser des recherches complexes. De tels langages simplifient la recherche de l’information pour l’usager qui n’a pas à maîtriser un ensemble de conventions complexes. Malgré leur plus grande souplesse, ces langages demeurent toutefois formels et axés uniquement sur une forme textuelle de questionnement, ce qui limite leurs possibilités (Goldman, Goldman, Kanellakis et Zdonik, 1990). Certains auteurs (Bryce et Hull, 1990; Goldman et al., 1990) proposent des SGBD qui offrent un mode de questionnement à partir d’éléments graphiques. L’usager peut alors stocker l’information ou effectuer des recherches au moyen de schémas représentant la structure des données contenues dans la banque. Ces schémas mettent en évidence les liens unissant les données de la base, en illustrant la nature des principaux champs, les attributs associés à chacun de ces champs et les descripteurs possibles. L’usager peut effectuer une recherche à l’intérieur de la banque en sélectionnant les divers éléments du schéma qui correspondent aux champs et aux descripteurs appropriés et en liant ces éléments à l’aide de divers symboles (→, >,