Canada's Shifting Mind Model: Portfolio #6

“Any teacher that can be replaced by a computer, deserves to be.” David Thornburg



    It is important to note that the OECD PISA studies ranked Canada among the best performing education systems in the world. With a technology based design, Canada developed a system that is based upon local context, teacher’s abilities, and student’s needs. "Through this, it is hoped that educational leaders will develop a better understanding of how teaching, learning, and technology come together in the 21st-century school and classroom" (Glatthorn et al. p. 417). This shift from a traditional to transformative curriculum design allows both students and teachers to develop a partnership with each other supported by digital technologies. In this shifting minds model, collaboration, creativity, innovation, entrepreneurial know-how, and ethical citizenship infuse teaching and learning. Students and teachers co-design their work which is a very progressive, innovative, and impactful framework. The learning environment, which extends beyond the classroom, is purposefully designed for students to think, research, analyze, develop, and improve their ideas. This framework is based off of community involvement which allows students to directly connect to class content by making it meaningful. Therefore, it allows students to demonstrate a deep understanding through the work they produce.
In the 21st century, we are entering a time where technology skills are prevalent and evolving at light speed. Therefore, it is very important that we guide students to develop an optimistic and advantageous understanding of technology. They are the future, so their understanding of technology and programming is going to be what develops us on a worldwide scale. Thus, it is and educators job to allow them to develop positive efficient, effective, and influential skills while working with digital technologies.
    There are enormous differences in schools, curricula, student preparation, and expectations of students that precludes simple descriptions of the nature of U.S. schooling. It is important to take into account that understanding achievement in the United States is not an easy task, particularly because of the diversity among students, the multiplicity of experiences within schools, the inequality of access to materials and resources, socio-economic factors, and the fact that the education system was founded on systemic racism. I feel that the United States has some similarities to Canada’s education structure in which the Federal Government is not present on the individual schooling level, and decisions are made based on local district levels. In addition, each country has developed a democracy based system in which district leadership positions are elected. Compared to the U.S., the main difference is that Canada has a much smaller proportion of low performing students; performance at the top end of the distribution is quite similar.
    Of course, one can never be sure about the reasons for those differences. Each country has a unique combination of culture, history and institutional structures, both within and outside education, and one can never be sure which results arise from which differences. However, some important differences in education between Canada and the U.S. include: Better trained teachers, reasonably well paid, with good job security and unionization; A strong commitment across the country to equity for all population groups; Better basic services for all students and families, such as health care and social services generally; Much smaller differences in funding levels from one district to another, and generally more spending in higher need communities; Much consistency across schools and districts in curriculum and teaching methods. I think it is safe to say that in terms of equity, curriculum development, and teacher/ student value and appreciation, the United States should be taking notes from Canada.



Part 2: RTI
    “The RTI program is a tiered model of instruction that allows teachers to target students’ individualized learning needs and provide more focused instruction in areas of concern, as well as strengths (McAssey, 2014). RTI is proving to be highly successful for students requiring more intensive structure in their learning” (Glatthorn et al. pg. 448). Historically, it has been up to the classroom teacher to determine the next best action for a student performing below grade level. In many cases, teacher decisions lead to positive outcomes and improved student learning. However, in other cases, students continue to perform poorly without getting all of the support they need – not necessarily due to a lack of effort on the teacher’s part. There is a clear need for strategies and tools that can help educators identify these students’ needs more efficiently and systematically.
    RTI is not just a model for special education classrooms, but increasingly an early identification and prevention model that helps schools and districts nationwide broaden the range of interventions available in general education and ensure that the curriculum truly meets the needs of all students. Some challenges that could negatively impact RTI programs in a school are funding, staff resistance to change and support these students, and weak or inadequate professional development to understand the RTI basis. It is important to note that the majority of the early framework required by the RTI procedures takes place in the general education classroom, so it is vital that all educators are informed and on board to provide proper scaffolding for these students. Lastly, one must understand that this implementation positively impacts all students and not just the students with specific needs. Glatthorn et al states, “These interventions have a sound scientific base in order to ensure treatment fidelity. In that sense, implementation of RTI can benefit all students” (449).



References:
Glatthorn, A.A.; Boschee, F. Whitehead, B.M., and Boschee, B.F. (2019). Curriculum Leadership: Strategies for Development and Implementation. (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications


Comments