7
Improving Graduation Rates
What Does It Take?
One of the most common observations made by educators in Ontario is that the actions taken and the strategies that were used to improve the system also helped to change the culture of schools irrevocably. Once there was deep cultural change, the common refrain was that, as professionals, they could not go back to where they were before the improvements took hold. As stated in Chapter 1, there were other changes: philosophies, mind-sets, practices, outlook, motivation, and a sense of self-efficacy. Many moved from a focus on families being responsible for student success to one that indicated schools have significant control over student outcomes. Teachers and principals began to believe that instructional effectiveness and leadership quality play an important role in school improvement and that select research-informed, high-impact strategies had a pivotal role in improving learning. More importantly, having high expectations for learning was now the norm.
This chapter provides a summary of the key processes used and discusses a few of the other conditions that supported the approach. The contribution that building community alliances to support learning made and the importance of implementing a system-wide and systematic approach to character development are also discussed as key supporting conditions.
The Essence of the Improvement Strategy
In reviewing the process we used for system change and improvement in Ontario schools, it is important to point out that the strategies worked in combination. The focus was on bringing about improvement at all levels of the system: the Ministry of Education, school districts, schools, and classrooms. The alignment of goals, strategies, intentions, and focus that was sought at these levels is an important reason for the success of the strategy. These processes included
• establishing a “guiding coalition,” including the premier of Ontario and the minister of education, to support change and to monitor improvement;
• appointing as chief student achievement officer, a respected educator with experience at all levels of the system to champion the initiative;
• communicating the need for high standards and expectations;
• engaging system partners and creating the alliances necessary for improvement;
• adopting an inclusive approach and creating an important role for teacher unions and principal councils in the improvement process;
• involving other partners, such as faculties of education, to prepare research monographs to develop a strong orientation to research;
• ensuring ongoing dialogue and engagement with all stakeholders;
• forging consensus;
• developing a common sense of purpose;
• building commitment and motivation;
• selecting a small number of ambitious goals;
• supporting and guiding school improvement planning and the development of SMART goals;
• insisting on a focus on both excellence and equity and on closing achievement gaps;
• facilitating capacity building at all levels, with an emphasis on instructional effectiveness;
• investing in leadership development;
• providing positive pressure and targeted support;
• implementing research-informed, high-impact strategies to improve achievement;
• using data-informed decision making and a variety of assessment tools to improve practice;
• developing a “Statistical Neighbours” tool to validate the efforts of schools in challenging circumstances and to remove excuses for low performance;
• ensuring deep implementation and monitoring processes;
• providing targeted resources;
• promoting teacher collaboration and action research;
• conducting assessments of district and school effectiveness;
• using nonpunitive intervention strategies to improve low-performing schools;
• paying attention to the potential distractors;
• settling collective agreements;
• reducing and circumventing bureaucracy to protect the focus on the core priorities;
• supporting community outreach and engagement strategies;
• embedding opportunities for student leadership, voice, and choice;
• involving parents and community in meaningful ways;
• emphasizing the importance of professional accountability; and
• encouraging international comparability.
Reasons for the Success of the Strategy
As practitioners, we are often asked to identify the key reasons our strategy was successful in improving not only student achievement and graduation rates, but also instructional and leadership effectiveness, and teachers’ sense of self-efficacy and morale at that time. Knowing what we now know about school improvement, and the strategies used by high-performing systems, we can identify a few keys to success in bringing about lasting system improvement:
• Fostering a spirit of mutual trust and collegiality
• Developing a culture of high expectations for students and professionals alike
• Rejecting the shame-and-blame or one-size-fits-all approach to school improvement
• Establishing a few precise goals and ambitious targets
• Differentiating and targeting supports to meet unique needs
• Investing in people through capacity building at all levels of the system
• Using research- and data-informed decision-making strategies
• Monitoring progress and providing early and ongoing interventions and effective feedback
• Encouraging networks and professional learning communities
• Providing coaching and mentorship for both adults and students
• Sharing successful practices and approaches
• Recognizing and celebrating success
Working at Getting Buy-In Was Important
The Ontario improvement strategy taught us that long-term improvement is made possible when a system demonstrates respect for the professionalism of teachers; eschews the shame-and-blame, one-size-fits-all approaches to system improvement; and focuses on capacity building. The truth is that if people knew what to do, they would have done it! If improvement is not being made, it means that people need to be assisted in identifying what needs to be done and developing the capacity to do it.
Undoubtedly, many factors contributed to the success of the strategy. This includes the time spent on securing buy-in from the people who were responsible for implementing the practices and innovations that would bring about success in the schools and classrooms. In other words, the focus had to be “where the rubber hits the road.” Having the implementers on board was both wise and essential.
It must be made clear that there was also a need to bring about change with a sense of urgency. Too often, the idea that working at achieving buy-in requires a lot of time and should not be a focus is simply unfounded. For us, this was not the case. We worked expeditiously and were able to bring key stakeholders on board and keep them involved in providing regular input on key directions. There was also fidelity to the notion that there should be no surprises in working with partners.
Developing Partnership and Alliances With Parents and Community
The commonly used African saying “It takes a whole village to raise a child” reflects the importance of partnership development to support learning. We recognized the need to build a coalition of all partners—parents, community organizations, social agencies, business and unions, and religious, cultural, and athletic groups—to create the links necessary to facilitate student success. The fact is that schools cannot achieve success alone. Partnerships facilitate success and sustainability.
Drucker (1999), in his article “The New Pluralism,” paints a picture of the expansive role that leaders play within communities and in society at large. He emphasizes the need for leaders to take care of the common good by leading beyond the walls of their institutions. In fact, he states that leaders will have to learn to create community. He exhorts educators to use the capital they have to build the communities they all wish to inhabit and leave for their children and grandchildren.
One of the conversations that is necessary today is the role of schools in society and whether or not schools can live up to the many expectations that society now has of that role. These expanded expectations and responsibilities must be shared among all community partners. The need to create the alliances necessary to support learning is one that must be embraced if student needs are to be met.
To foster the healthy development of students, it is also necessary for schools to bring together the human, financial, and material resources that exist within the community. This would allow educators to focus on the academic needs of students as their primary purpose. As a long-term strategy, this idea does resonate with educators, but with dwindling resources, optimism can sometimes be in short supply. But even in these times of challenge and uncertainty, we are convinced that it is still necessary to find new ways for people and groups to come together and combine their expertise and resources for the purpose of raising children and creating a new sense of community.
The authors support strongly the notion proposed by Sergiovanni (1994) when he said that community building must become the heart of any school improvement efforts. For him, regardless of what we are currently engaged in to support reform efforts—whether related to governance, structures, curriculum, assessment, or teacher or parent empowerment—these must all rest on a foundation of community building. More than ever, it is necessary for schools to expand their mandate well beyond their traditional educational domain to support parents in their efforts and to provide the social, emotional, physical, and other needs of children and youth today.
Raising children is a community partnership endeavor. It requires many groups and individuals to ensure that students are engaged in their learning and are successful in their educational and career pursuits. Developing school–community partnerships has many benefits to school programs, climate, and services for families. It has the potential to increase parents’ skills and leadership, connect families with others in the school and in the community, and help teachers with their work (Epstein, 2001). Most importantly, school–community partnerships can help students become even more engaged in their studies and achieve the standards set out by policy makers, parents, community members, and teachers.
There are many challenges inherent in developing partnerships, especially those between schools and communities. Tensions often exist because these are two very different communities trying to work together (Israel, Schulz, Parker, & Becker, 1998). Nonetheless, the benefit of engaging in partnerships outweighs the tensions including those related to building capacity, improving efficacy, and improving outcomes (Edelstein, in press; Lasker & Weiss, 2003). Three of the most prominent characteristics that affect the development of collaborative partnerships stemming from the literature are those related to leadership, trust, and communication.
The challenges in building a relationship between the school and community lie in addressing the needs of both. Educators need to be able at all times to teach the students the curriculum, but teachers are also often mentors to their students and role models of how to behave and conduct oneself in a social forum. Some parents may not be available at all times to respond to student challenges in a timely manner due to work responsibilities or other circumstances. Teachers and principals need to be able to work with parents and the community to address the needs of students, given any external challenges. Likewise, the community body needs to be responsive to both the school and its own cultural priorities as they arise (Epstein, 2001).
Epstein’s (2001) framework of six types of involvement and sample practices has been used extensively in parent and community development initiatives. She identifies the major involvements of parents as those of parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision making, and collaborating with the community. Each of these is broken up into specific tasks that support the major priorities. All the activities that parents engage in are seen as important—whether inside or outside of the home, political or nonpolitical. Whatever parents are able to do can help to support their role in partnering with schools to support student learning and well-being.
Ross’s 1994 survey of research indicates that many benefits accrue when parents are involved in their children’s education. These include
• better long-term academic achievement,
• higher marks,
• higher test scores,
• higher motivation,
• more positive attitudes,
• increased commitment to schooling,
• fewer students retained in a grade,
• decreased placement in special education,
• fewer behavioral problems,
• improved average daily attendance,
• fewer school dropouts,
• lower suspension rates,
• more successful programs, and
• more effective schools.
Throughout our implementation process, we were mindful of the research on the importance of parental engagement. Involving parents was an important aspect of the strategy—one that contributed to the improvement of the system.
The Ontario Ministry of Education’s parent engagement policy is outlined in Parents in Partnership: A Parent Engagement Policy for Ontario Schools (2010). Parent engagement is also an essential component of Ontario’s equity and inclusive education strategy, which formally recognizes and supports the vision of Ontario schools as places of partnership and inclusion, where all students, parents, and other members of the school community are welcomed and respected.
The policy outlines the vision for parent involvement and recommends strategies to support parent engagement. It includes an action plan for schools, boards, and the ministry, and showcases some of the many exemplary practices that are being employed across the province. The policy includes new directions to help ensure that all partners have the skills, knowledge, and tools they need to build positive partnerships in support of student success.
Many teachers already pay special attention to the engagement of parents. In particular, teachers of children in kindergarten programs spend much time getting to know parents before students begin school. In some school districts, these programs take many forms because of the belief that it is necessary to gather information from a variety of sources to plan effective programs for students. As well, the focus on holistic education—bringing together the demographic information that can influence the academic, social, and emotional well-being of students—helps to paint a picture of their needs and the supports that are necessary from all partners in the educational process.
All administrators are encouraged to ensure that community outreach and engagement is an important component of their entry plan when they assume new assignments in school districts. It must also be an ongoing aspect of strategic direction setting if school systems intend to adopt an inclusive approach to educating children and youth. Special attention needs to be paid to the demographic makeup of communities to address unique cultural, religious, and other needs. As well, school leaders today are well advised to live up to the spirit of human rights codes and to model for students what values are inherent in living in diverse and inclusive contexts.
The Ontario Schools, Kindergarten to Grade 12 document (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2011) states that Ontario Regulation 612/00 also mandates school boards to establish school councils and parent involvement committees (PICs) to engage parents and benefit from their advice at the school and board levels. The purpose of school councils, the policy document indicates, is, through the active participation of parents, to improve student achievement and enhance the accountability of the education system to parents. A school council’s primary means of achieving its purpose is to make recommendations, in accordance with Ontario Regulation 612/00, to the principal of the school and to the board that established the council. The purpose of PICs is to support, encourage, and enhance parent engagement at the district level to benefit the success of students in achieving a well-rounded and successful education.
The intent of this policy is to ensure that a PIC of a board achieves its purpose by providing information and advice on parent engagement to the board, communicating with and supporting school councils within the board, and undertaking activities to help parents support their children’s learning at home and at school.
The following documents provide detailed information on these related policies:
It is true that most organizations are currently experiencing cutbacks and dwindling resources—human, physical, and material. They are all re-evaluating the services they provide in an effort to optimize scarce resources and to ensure both efficiency and effectiveness.
One of the roles of principals and other educators is to help broker the services that students need. In these challenging times, when some parents and caregivers are losing their jobs, there is a need to ensure that programs are in place to supplement what homes are not able to provide. Many schools have breakfast, before- and after-school, and recreational programs to assist students. These are particularly important in neighborhoods that are experiencing high levels of poverty and dislocation.
School-to-Work Partnerships
Many school districts have programs designed to assist students in bridging the gaps between school and work. These programs—developed with community members, business, labor, and industry—help students acquire knowledge and experience and develop the skills they need to take hold of opportunities related to the many pathways to college, universities, and the world of work.
Increasingly, business leaders have also become interested in helping to nurture the skills that they will need from future employees. Apprenticeship programs have long been popular in helping to develop marketable skills in students who will go directly to the workplace after high school. The Employability Skills Profile also helps to identify the skills that employers say they wish to see in the graduates of our schools.
Facilitating the Transition to Colleges and Universities
Successful transition to colleges and universities depends on the programs that students have taken in secondary schools and even as early as elementary schools. Course selection should be seen within the K–12 framework. Many programs, including those related to choices, are cumulative in nature, building on the skills that students need to make well-informed decisions.
In Grades 11 and 12, students focus increasingly on individual interests that help them prepare for their postsecondary pathways. In these grades, there are also increased opportunities for learning experiences beyond the school, including co-operative education, work experience, and specialized programs such as the Ontario Youth Apprenticeship Program, Specialist High Skills Major programs, and school-to-work transition programs. These all contribute to the improvement of graduation rates, as they address the interest of students. This, in turn, translates into increased credit accumulation.
School boards are required to ensure that students in Grades 11 and 12 have access to an appropriate destination-related course in at least English, mathematics, and science, in accordance with the course types included in the curriculum policy documents for these disciplines.
The Supervised Alternative Learning (SAL) Example
Section 3.2.3 of Ontario Schools (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2011) describes the provincial policy known as Supervised Alternative Learning (SAL). This policy recognizes that most students will attend and successfully complete secondary school. However, a small number of students are at risk of leaving school early for a wide variety of reasons. The Ministry has many retention and engagement strategies that schools and boards have applied. Nonetheless, if these are not successful, SAL was designed to assist school boards to meet the needs of these students.
The policy states that the goal of SAL is to help ensure that students maintain a connection to learning and to support their continued progress toward graduation or achievement of other educational and personal goals. Ontario Regulation 374/10, “Supervised Alternative Learning and Other Excusals From Attendance at School” (2010), came into effect on February 1, 2011, replacing Regulation 308, “Supervised Alternative Learning for Excused Pupils (SALEP).” The new regulation authorizes the SAL committee of a board to excuse students of compulsory school age who are at least fourteen years old from attending school while they continue to participate in learning under the supervision of the board or a school of the board. An eligible student may continue in SAL for multiple years, but renewal of the student’s program must be authorized by the committee annually.
Key features of SAL under Ontario Regulation 374/10 include the following:
• A SAL plan is required for each student.
• Timelines and procedures are specified for stages in the SAL process.
• A primary contact at the school or board is identified, who will monitor the student’s progress at least once per month.
• A transition plan to support the student’s transition to his or her next steps after SAL.
A request to participate in the SAL program may be requested by a parent, a student 16 years of age or who has withdrawn from parental control, or a principal. While in SAL, students can participate in a variety of learning activities. These can include taking courses or training, counseling, earning certifications, volunteer or other work, and developing job-search skills and the various essential skills, work habits, and life skills that will help them lead productive adult lives.
It is the responsibility of the principal to ensure that venues off school property have been visited and found appropriate, or are already known and considered appropriate, before the student starts the part of the program that occurs off school property. As much as possible, opportunities to earn credits should be included in the student’s program. Some students will eventually graduate or otherwise continue their education as adults.
Part-time study for up to a year is allowed for 16- and 17-year-old students for compassionate reasons, with the principal’s approval and without having to go through the SAL process.
These guidelines and implementation strategies may be found in the following documents:
Creating pathways to graduation requires the collaboration of all community members to bring together the resources to ensure student success. It is clear that schools cannot do this alone. Providing leadership to build alliances to support learning is necessary, as well as partnerships built on trust and communication.
The importance of parental and community engagement in education cannot be overemphasized. It takes many people and groups to ensure that students are fully engaged in the learning process and are successful in school. School–community partnerships bring together educators, parents, and community members to focus on their common purpose—that of student success and high school graduation. Communities today are highly motivated to find ways of overcoming the challenges inherent in partnership development. They also wish to strengthen the alliances necessary for students to feel supported in their quest to receive a high school or equivalent credentials that will help them to pursue other career-related programs.
The Role of Character Development
The implementation of character development helped to create school cultures conducive to learning and to help students develop qualities such as honesty, integrity, fairness, courage, and optimism. The nurturing of these qualities is too important to be left to chance. It becomes necessary for educators to renew their emphasis on preparing students for responsible citizenship in schools and in their communities.
Over 100 years ago, John Dewey (1900) said, “What the best and wisest parent wants for his child, that must the community want for all its children.” This points to the importance of all community members ensuring that certain universal values are accessible to all in their desire to take care of the common good. Admittedly, many parents do teach character in their homes. In fact, parents, as a group, are the first character educators. But the fact remains that character development is also a responsibility of educators who are responsible for nurturing all aspects of learning in all domains of education—academic, personal, and interpersonal. When educators place the student at the center of all we do, and when home and school forge partnerships to influence student outcomes intentionally, we create the web of support that is necessary for student success and the continuous improvement of our schools.
Not a New Curriculum, but a Way of Life
Society wants schools to foster positive attributes and to be the embodiment of caring and civility. A systematic character development program nurtures the universal attributes that transcend racial, religious, socioeconomic, cultural, and other lines that divide people in communities and in society at large. To be effective, character education should be a whole-school effort—one that helps to create community and promote the highest ideals of student deportment and citizenship. Character educators agree that these skills and expectations must be nurtured in an explicit, focused, systematic, and intentional manner.
Character education is not a new curriculum; it is a way of life. It is the way we treat others and hold ourselves accountable for ensuring that our actions are compatible with our stated values and beliefs. In implementing the strategies that embed the character attributes into the fabric of the school, all members of the school community seize the “teachable moments” to reinforce the attributes that are identified in co-operation with a wide cross section of community members. Teachers use every opportunity to integrate these attributes into their curriculum and make connections where appropriate. To be effective, these attributes must permeate all policies, programs, practices, and interactions within the school.
As stated consistently by leaders in the field of character education, the development of good character is not inherited but inculcated—it is taught, not caught (Berkowitz, 2007; Lickona, 2004; Vincent, 2004). Students must see what good character looks like and have an opportunity to put it into practice. Popular sayings such as “Children cannot heed a message they have not heard” or “A child is the only substance from which a responsible adult can be made” reflect and reinforce the focus on these programs.
A few years ago, the Financial Post carried a series of articles on public views of education. Not surprisingly, parents who saw character development as a primary purpose of schooling rated character education very highly. Studies by Leithwood and Jantzi (2006, 2008), Leithwood and Beatty (2007), and others at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education also found that, by and large, parents want schools to focus on character education and citizenship development.
A Worldwide Concern
The Character Education Partnership has collected data on the status of character education across the globe. In England, for example, there has been a renewal of commitment to citizenship development. Other countries emphasize character education, describing it as social and emotional learning (United Kingdom); values, ethics, and morals (New South Wales); virtue development and life skills (Lesotho); civic and ethics education (Mexico); value development (Estonia); moral development (Hungary); personal and social development (Malta), to name a few. Countries like Australia indicate, from research conducted in its jurisdiction, that when schools engage in explicit teaching of values, students are more engaged in learning, resulting in improved outcomes.
What we do know is that, increasingly, governments are recognizing that a holistic approach to education includes some form of character development. A common theme that runs throughout these programs is respect for self and others.
As early as the 1990s, we spearheaded initiatives to implement character education in two Ontario district school boards—first, in York Region (outside Toronto) and, later, in Kawartha Pine Ridge (in Peterborough). Then, in 2008, the Ontario government launched a character development initiative province-wide. Whereas we did not see character development as a panacea, we believed in its possibility to create positive school cultures. We also recognized that it would take all the institutions in our community, working together, for character education to be successful. The saying “It takes a village to raise a child,” though perhaps overused, is applicable in this context.
Character Education in Schools
In Ontario, we first implemented character education district-wide in the York Region District School Board. We convened three education forums for a wide cross section of the community, involving some 250 parents, community leaders, and educators. We invited them to reflect on the culture that they wished to foster in York Region schools and the attributes they wanted our schools to emphasize. The forums created a space for a conversation about the role of schools in preparing citizens for the future and enabled us to forge consensus on the attributes we wanted our students to embody as members of their schools and community, and as future citizens. We convinced our community participants that by focusing on our youth during these very challenging times, we were helping to create the future we all wished to have. We emphasized that we would also be nurturing characteristics identified by the business community as integral to the development of a strong work ethic and as prerequisites for success in the workplace.
At the end of the three sessions, the participants decided on ten attributes that they wanted us to develop in our schools. These were respect, responsibility, honesty, integrity, empathy, fairness, initiative, perseverance, courage, and optimism.
Of great interest is the fact that when we conducted a similar exercise in the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board, members of that community chose the same ten attributes. The editorial in the local papers suggested that we can, indeed, find common ground on the values that we espouse.
Ontario schools are at different stages in the implementation of this strategy. Many have collected data that demonstrate that when this strategy is implemented in a systematic and intentional manner, there are differences in areas such as suspension, attendance, and other negative behaviors. As well, positive behaviors are evident as students demonstrate the attributes in their day-to-day interactions. The government has collected numerous examples from schools on the impact that character development is having on the culture of schools and on student outcomes.
Building Communities of Character
Elected officials play a pivotal role in the development of a civil society. For this reason, the “building communities of character” phase of the character initiative solicited the support local mayors, politicians, and community leaders. This was an opportunity to establish partnerships to engage the community in an ongoing, systematic, and focused character education effort. The strategy included a wide cross section of the community, including parents and educators as well as members of our business and faith communities, government officials, the police, and labor and social work representatives—these individuals were interested in school improvement and in making the community safe, inclusive, and inviting.
Through our collective efforts, York Region became the first jurisdiction in Canada to develop a character initiative to serve as an example of how community development can be led by the education sector. York Region defines their character community as a community committed to keeping and enhancing a place where families are strong, homes and streets are safe, education is effective, businesses are productive, and neighbors care about one another. (For more information on York Region’s Character Community Foundation, visit http://www.charactercommunity.com.)
In diverse societies, especially, the need to find common ground on the values that we share becomes a necessity. It is also important for the youth to know what we stand for as a community. After all, they are receiving many messages through movies, television, and other media. How are we helping them to know that respect for self and others is a fundamental value that will help them live with others effectively in a community? How are we teaching them that respect for property and the environment will assist our efforts to sustain our resources? As stated before, these important aspects of education must be taught. They cannot be left to chance.
Character in the Workplace
York Region and Kawartha Pine Ridge may well have been the first school districts in Canada to establish “character in the workplace” initiatives in a systematic and intentional manner. We brought the school district employees together and asked them to consider participating in a program similar to those that were in progress in the district’s schools and the wider community. Once introduced, we insisted that the initiative should be led by employees, and asked for volunteers. The initiative was led by a secretary and a member of the business department who was a former janitor and custodian. The strategy introduced staff members to the common purpose of character development and assisted them in modeling and demonstrating the highest standards of character in dealing with their colleagues and with the public. The school board also began to celebrate a character attribute each month and encouraged everyone working for the district to put these tenets into daily practice and to embody them in interpersonal relationships and in customer service. Employees assumed leadership for the ongoing implementation of the initiative. Many volunteered to assist teachers in schools. The employees stated that this strategy had a positive impact on morale and organizational commitment.
There was a strong conviction that the character development initiative would make a difference in the culture of the organization and in the service quality that was provided to students, parents, and the community. The district’s next step was to take this initiative to the business community. In this community, as well, there was a call for volunteers to support teachers in schools. The notion that schools cannot educate children alone was widely communicated within the community. There was a surge of support for the district as parents and grandparents volunteered as tutors in the schools. College and university students were paid to support their local schools through the “Tutors in the Classroom” program we initiated.
Citizenship Development
Canada, as other nations around the world, is part of a governing process that attempts to serve the best interests of society. Citizenship is a right as well as a very important responsibility. With citizenship come rights such as freedom of expression, religion, and lifestyle. However, these rights come with expectations such as the responsibility all share to support the democratic process within the nation. These responsibilities are manifested in many ways. Citizens are expected to work hard to maintain and improve the economic, political, and social aspects of the society. Citizenship is a right, but it is more importantly a privilege that cannot be taken for granted.
In Ontario, for example, through mandatory courses in civics and history, as well as optional courses in law and world issues, the public education system has introduced students to the ideals of a democratic society and fostered pro-social concepts of citizenship among the younger generation. The Ministry of Education also requires mandatory community service for students prior to graduation to encourage community involvement and responsibility and to promote civic engagement.
It is important, in a world dominated by popular culture in which very confusing messages reach our young people every day, to reinforce the need for an active and involved citizenry. We need to teach these important elements of democracy in a manner that engages young minds and harness their enthusiasm, optimism, and desire to help others. Voting, for example, is one way to demonstrate responsible citizenship. And with reports of fewer and fewer people taking the time to participate in civic pursuits such as voting in elections, the need to revitalize interest in citizenship development remains an important aspect of schooling.
Young people are willing to take on these responsibilities. Many fully realize the need to create a world where citizenship and all its privileges, rights, and responsibilities are extended to all. Schools can play a pivotal role in modeling what good citizenship looks like and in nurturing the behaviors, attitudes, and dispositions that sustain positive relationships and create civility and responsibility.
Implementing character development has helped us to create community in Ontario schools and school districts. The inclusive nature of the initiative brought people together, contributed to social cohesion, and helped community members find common ground. After one of the consultation sessions, one parent said, “You have put the public back into public education.”
The business community also depends on the school system to help develop the graduates who will ultimately work in their companies and institutions. Business leaders often say that they can develop the technical skills, but they want schools to develop qualities such as initiative, perseverance, and honesty.
There is definitely a need for schools to play their role in developing qualities such as empathy and respect, to take seriously the intent of holistic education to educate hearts as well as minds. It has become a priority for educators to ensure that the core value of preparing students to think critically, feel deeply and empathetically, and act wisely and ethically is critical today. With rapid scientific advancements, it is important that high school graduates be equipped to make ethical decisions and to contribute to the well-being of others within their communities.
Asking Ourselves Some Tough Questions
Reflection contributes to learning and improvement. It was necessary for us to ask tough questions about our own commitment to ensuring that schools contribute to positive outcomes for all students, especially those from diverse populations and those who live in poverty. These questions may serve as a means of self-reflection for others who are working at school improvement:
Are we truly committed to achieving both excellence and equity?
How are we ensuring that poverty does not determine destiny?
What are we doing to help individual teachers move to the next level of expertise and confidence?
How are we using evidence/data to propel change in individual student performance?
Are we intervening early to provide the necessary supports for students who are falling behind?
Is providing meaningful feedback to students and adults an essential component of the improvement strategy?
What is the agenda when district leaders visit schools? Is the monitoring of progress toward stated goals an objective?
How are we assisting principals in creating the conditions for student learning?
What are we doing to embed a sense of shared accountability for student achievement in schools?
How can we best personalize and customize learning?
Do we know how minoritized groups and other subpopulations, such as boys, are achieving in our schools? Have we disaggregated our data to have a clear picture of how each group is performing?
What are we doing to foster the notion of schools as networks to build lateral capacity?
Have we considered pairing high- and low-performing schools to facilitate the sharing of promising practices?
What are we doing to create a culture of inquiry and experimentation?
How do we ensure the consistent implementation of high-impact strategies in all schools?
What are we doing to embed some key components of successful leadership for school improvement? For example,
Developing a laser-like focus on achievement
Creating a culture of high expectations for learning
Ensuring rigor, relevance, positive relationships
Focusing on enhancing professional accountability
Maintaining a sense of urgency to improve graduation rates
Are we truly committed to ensuring meaningful parental and community involvement?
Are we providing the outreach necessary to bring other partners, such as the business community, to the table?
What intervention strategies will we use to assist students who are at the risk of dropping out of school?
How will we deepen the conversation to assume an even greater sense of responsibility for the role of schools in improving student achievement?
Future Directions
The province of Ontario has seen steady improvement in student achievement. In a spirit of continuous improvement, educators are sharpening the focus in areas such as critical thinking, creativity, and higher-order skills. The need to improve problem-solving and knowledge application is a priority. Future directions also include moving from the mastery of facts to an understanding of “big ideas,” using more interdisciplinary approaches. There is an even more intense focus on collaborative inquiry into problems of practice and on other enabling factors such as the implementation of a comprehensive early learning and childcare system.
Educators today are strategically placed to achieve both excellence and equity, to focus on results, and to close the seemingly intractable achievement gaps. At this time in our development as a professional community, we need a new conversation about the role of schools and schooling. Variations in learning, for example, should no longer be attributed to background factors. Schools should persist in assuming even greater responsibility to remove barriers, engage students, and create the conditions necessary to ensure that more students graduate from high schools. Increasingly, schools must be builders of a civic society and advocates for students who are poor or disadvantaged in any way. School leaders must create the conditions for parents to participate fully in their children’s education and, at the same time, ensure that their school’s primary focus is to serve the needs of students. They must be architects of change, creating a legacy of developing global citizens and solution finders—individuals who have a strong commitment to improving the lives of others at home and abroad. Admittedly, there is no shortage of schools that are already engaged in these pursuits.
High School Graduation represents a continuum of developmentally appropriate ideas and strategies that contribute to student achievement. There is proof that these strategies contribute to improvement in student learning. In Ontario, for example, graduation rates have improved significantly, with over 93,000 more students graduating from high school. This did not happen by chance; it is the result of a sound strategy, with a focus on capacity building, and a nonpunitive, talent-releasing approach to education reform. This strategy eschewed the shame-and-blame, one-size-fits-all approach; instead, it was based on respect for the profession and validation of the pivotal role that educators play in improving school systems.
Ultimately, the success of the Ontario education system—and, indeed, other systems across the world—rests on the quality of our graduates—their knowledge, skills, values, and willingness to make a difference in the lives of others. Society depends on this rich resource of human capital that is nurtured in our schools. Early and ongoing success, from kindergarten to graduation, remains a societal necessity and educational responsibility.
References
Berkowitz, M. (2007). A brief history of character education in the U.S.: 1954–2004. Unpublished manuscript.
Dewey, J. (1900). The school and society: Being three lectures. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Drucker, P. (1999). The new pluralism. In F. Hesselbein, M. Goldsmith, & I. Somervilled (Eds.), Leading beyond the walls: How high-performing organizations collaborate for shared success (pp. 9–18). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Edelstein, H. (in press). Developing collaborative research partnerships for knowledge mobilization. University of Toronto, Doctoral dissertation in preparation.
Epstein, J. L. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. A., & Becker, A. B. (1998). Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 19(1), 173–202.
Lasker, R., & Weiss, E. (2003). Broadening participation in community problem solving: A multidisciplinary model to support collaborative research. Journal of Urban Health, 80(1), 14–47.
Leithwood, K., & Beatty, B. (2007). Leading with teacher emotions in mind. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2006). A critical review of the parent engagement literature. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2008). Linking leadership to student learning: The role of collective efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 496–528.
Lickona, T. (2004) Character matters: How to help our children develop good judgment, integrity, and other essential virtues. New York: Touchstone.
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2008). Finding common ground: Character development in Ontario Schools, K–12. Toronto: Queens Printer for Ontario.
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2010). Parents in partnership: A parent engagement policy for Ontario schools. Toronto: Queens Printer for Ontario.
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2011). Ontario schools, Kindergarten to Grade 12, policy and program requirements, 2011. Toronto: Queens Printer for Ontario. Retrieved from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/policy/os/ONSchools.pdf
Ross, P. (1994). Parent involvement and learning. Unpublished manuscript.
Sergiovanni, T. (1994). Building community in schools. San Francisco. Jossey-Bass.
Vincent, P. F. (2004). Developing character in students: A workbook for teachers, parents, and communities. Chapel Hill, NC: Character Development Group.
York Region. (2002, January 24). Character community update and resolution (Report No. 1 of the regional chief administrative officer). Newmarket, ON: Regional Municipality of York. Retrieved from http://www.york.ca/NR/rdonlyres/x5pdxstrcxucaeoycvsom2dwchddn6xhrubtwcyucmrwag4ad6c4oijdsb4x6otqokeldlky372zknsvu5xlmrhb7c/rpt1.pdf