Ontario vs Saskatchewan . . .

A Comparative Research Assignment

Understanding the vision of accountability in English within my school, board and province has its merits; however, how do our measures of accountability in Ontario equate to our surrounding neighbours throughout Canada? In essence, there is great value in locating and considering what aspects of accountability best serve and support the full integrity of study in English from province to province. Thus, in order to obtain a better understanding and validation of Ontario’s study of English and accountability, I’ve examined it in comparison to that of Saskatchewan’s. The guiding elements of accountability in which I used to assist in my research include: system and diploma requirements, time on task, streaming, standards and testing.

System and Diploma Requirements

Before investigating the specific elements of accountability in English, I thought it necessary to first acquire more knowledge of the Saskatchewan education system and requirements. To review, students in Ontario begin Secondary School in Grade 9. It is expected that students earn 8 credits a year revolving around 2 semesters (4 credits per semester). Thereby, each student must complete 30 credits to receive their Ontario Secondary School Diploma. In Saskatchewan, students do not begin Secondary School until Grade 10. As a result, only 24 credits are required to be obtained for Secondary Level Completion. Like Ontario, the Saskatchewan school year revolves around 2 semesters as well. Overall, this means that students are earning the same amount of credits per year in Ontario as they are in Saskatchewan, but the culminating number of credits varies solely on the fact that credits are earned at the secondary level one year earlier in Ontario than Saskatchewan. Therefore, in numerical terms, the requirements for a "High School Diploma" in Ontario and Saskatchewan are equal.

Time on Task

Despite the similarity in semester rotations and credit requirements, there is an immense difference in the amount of time spent studying English in Ontario and Saskatchewan. In Ontario, students are required to complete 1 English credit at each grade level. Each credit is earned after completing a single course in any given semester. The time allotted to each course in Ontario is 110 hours adding up to a total of 440 hours of English for students in Ontario. In Saskatchewan, students are required to obtain 5 credits in English. Students must obtain 2 credits in their Grade 10 year, 1 credit in their Grade 11 year and 2 more in their Grade 12 year. Additionally, each course revolves around 2 thematic units each outlined to be fulfilled in 50 hours. Thus, each Saskatchewan English course equates to 100 hours. Therefore 5 credits at 100 hours add up to a total of 500 hours of English study. Additionally, consideration must be made to the fact that Saskatchewan’s 500 hours of English takes place in only 3 years whereby Ontario’s 440 hours is completed in 4 years. For further clarification of the time spent studying English in each of the provinces compared, refer to the chart below:


Streaming

In Ontario we implement the practice of streaming in English. In layman’s terms, this means, we teach students of varying academic backgrounds in different classes beginning in Grade 9. To further explain, when students enter Secondary School in Ontario they are advised by their Elementary School teachers to study in a particular stream based on their success in Elementary School. There are 3 streams in place for junior students: Locally Developed or Essential, Applied and Academic. These streams are in place to prepare students for the transition into the senior streams: Workplace, College and University. Evidently, the senior level streams are designed for students to prepare for their post-secondary goals and ambitions.

Saskatchewan on the other hand, does not implement streaming. Therefore, the English credits that must be earned in order to achieve Secondary Level Completion must be fulfilled at the same level by all students.

There are many benefits to the practice of streaming. First off, students are not placed in specified streams; they are given the option to choose between the three options based on their achievement level, personal interests and post secondary aspirations. Thus, students entering Secondary School with a low level of achievement in English have the opportunity to work in a class without students who have previously excelled in the subject area. Therefore, these students who struggled with English, found it challenging, or have been identified as having specialized learning needs, enter the Locally Developed / Essential stream. This stream features smaller class sizes, greater focus on the fundamentals of English and material that is more comprehensible to those with learning difficulties. Additionally, material is covered over a longer period of time in the Essential level than in the Applied or Academic streams. As a result, students are less likely to be “lost in the shuffle.” Moreover, with the material being geared toward their learning abilities they have a greater chance of success and can receive marks in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s which often boosts their self-esteem from having received low and failing grades in Elementary School. In the end, these students of the Locally Developed stream graduate with the skills necessary for the workplace. Another benefit to streaming is that students often choose between the Applied and Academic levels based on their interests or post secondary goals. The Applied level which becomes the College stream in senior years focuses on practical, concrete and creative skills that will essentially prepare them for success in College. Then, the Academic through University stream has a greater focus on abstract thought as well as theory and of course, prepares students with the appropriate skills for University. Therefore, students of streaming receive specialized education based on their unique learning styles and long term goals.

Contrary to the benefits of streaming, there are also some drawbacks. Students have been known to feel isolated in streamed classes. It is not unheard of for students to consider those in Academic classes “smart” and students in Applied or Essential courses “dumb.” Such negative connotations can discredit any self-confidence gained within the classroom environment of streamed programming. Additionally, where streaming offers specialized teaching, it can be argued that de-streaming offers a more equitable approach; as all students experience learning at the same pace, with the same material, approaches and expectations. Thus, students who graduate from a de-streamed program have been offered the same opportunities and could pursue any post secondary option of their choice (providing they are successful). In other words, the most common complaint I have heard from parents of students in streamed programming, is validated here. That complaint being, that students often miss out on opportunities or “close doors” in regards to the possibility of attending University or College when these streams are not elected.

Overall, from an educator’s view-point, I find the streaming more effective for both teaching and learning. I understand the student dilemma and self-confidence issues that come into play in regards to being in a streamed program. However, I believe that there is greater value in the streamed program because there is direct assurance that students graduating from each stream are prepared for a specific post secondary plan. Thus, I feel accountability is better served in the streaming of English. However, the full integrity of English may be better served in a de-streamed program. Regardless, I do not believe that all students need to be exposed to all aspects of English. Moreover, the students who choose to, in a streamed program, study English at the Academic / University stream exceed the aspects of English addressed in de-streaming and as a result reach the full integrity of study.

Accordingly, it would appear I prefer Ontario’s model of streaming over Saskatchewan’s lack thereof. However, when comparing the two, one must consider the fact that Ontario and Saskatchewan possess inherit geographical and demographic difference. Thus, due to Saskatchewan’s vastly rural areas, there is less need to stream students as there are fewer students in general. Therefore their needs are better met in de-streamed classes than students of Ontario’s would be. In essence, each province seems to be implanting the best practice for the students of their region.

Standards

In Ontario we have 4 strands of Overall Learning Expectations in English, they are: Oral Communication, Reading and Literature Studies, Writing and Media Studies according to the Ministry of Education (2007). In Saskatchewan, they have 5 strands of what they call Foundational Objectives, they include: Speak, Listen, Read, Write and Represent and View according the Government of Saskatchewan (2004). In comparison, the strands are interchangeable. However, the difference between the standards in Ontario and Saskatchewan is that for each level of English in each grade the Overall Expectations in Ontario differ; whereas, the Foundational Objectives in English Language Arts remain constant throughout all grades in Saskatchewan. Thus, in comparing 2 compulsory courses it would be necessary to compare the multiple specific expectations of Ontario’s curriculum with the multitudinous specific Learning Outcomes of the Saskatchewan Guide. Moreover, the courses offered vary a great deal in accordance to the streaming of Ontario schools and the additional hours spent allotted to English Language Arts in Saskatchewan. However, the chart below offers a clear comparison of the fairly equal categorization yet altogether vague overall expectations for Grade 10 Academic English and the Foundational Objectives that would be in place for students in Grade 10 in Saskatchewan:



In addition to the Foundational Objectives in English Language Arts in Saskatchewan teachers are required to cover Core Curriculum Components including: Common Essential Learning (concepts, skills and attitudes), Communication, Numeracy, Critical and Creative Thinking, Personal and Social Value Skills, Technological Literacy, and Independent Learning. Additionally, English Language Arts in Saskatchewan incorporates what is called The Adaptive Dimension which encourages teachers:

. . . To make adjustments in approved educational programs to accommodate diversity in student learning needs. It includes those practices the teacher undertakes to make curriculum, instruction, and the learning environment meaningful and appropriate for each student (The Adaptive Dimension in Core Curriculum, Saskatchewan Education, 1992).

Overall, these Saskatchewan standards may seem like a lot to cover and could in essence take away from the full integrity of English which seems to be more direct in Ontario; however, one must take into account that in Saskatchewan they spend a great deal more time studying English. Moreover, it is not specifically English, it is English Language Arts.


Testing

In Ontario there is a great deal of responsibility placed on English teachers to help students obtain the reading and writing skills necessary to pass the Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test (OSSLT). The OSSLT is designed to ensure literacy upon receiving an Ontario Secondary School Diploma (OSSD). The test is administered in Grade 10; however, students who are unsuccessful are given multiple opportunities to rewrite the test until they are successful. This would appear that Ontario English teachers are highly accountable for the success of students; yet, exceptions are granted to students who have been unsuccessful more than twice as they can earn a credit in the Ontario Literacy Course to meet the Ministry’s requirements for the OSSD. Thus, Ontario does implement standardized testing, but it is not altogether necessary to pass the test. In regards to testing skills or knowledge in Ontario classrooms, the curriculum suggests that students be tested in a variety of methods which, is similar to the testing approach of Saskatchewan, “Formal tests can be appropriate and useful assessment tools but, as with all classroom practices, there should be a variety of assessment techniques employed.” (2004) However, the Saskatchewan curriculum outlines classroom teacher accountability in greater depth by stating that:

Teachers, as reflective practitioners, should know what, why, and how they are using tests. Teachers should ask themselves questions such as the following:

• Have the students been taught how to prepare for and write a test?
• Have the students been given sufficient notice and information to prepare adequately (e.g., have they been told whether the test will be open book, essay, short answer)?
• Have students been taught the vocabulary of questions (e.g., compare, explain, etc.)?
• Have students been taught how to use reference materials (e.g., dictionary, language usage handbook) during a timed testing situation?
• Have adaptations for students with special needs been considered?
• Have students been informed of how they are going to be graded?

Yet, in consideration to standardized testing there is no current provincial wide literacy test. Nevertheless, if in grade 12 Saskatchewan students have been taught English by a non-accredited English teacher, it is required of them to complete a provincial exam as opposed to an in-class exam to ensure their knowledge and skills are at the same level as those who have been taught by accredited English teachers. The provincial exams are usually written by approximately 25% of Saskatchewan students.

Conclusion

Comparing the aspects of accountability in Ontario and Saskatchewan as it relates to the study of English has proven to be arduous. At the onset of my comparison, it seemed that Saskatchewan’s extensive time allotment to English would contribute to their study of the subject to reach its full integrity over Ontario. However, after examining streaming, the standards and testing, I would have to say that I am proud to be of the belief and understanding that we in Ontario do a better job of covering the far-reaching realms of English. That is not to say that Saskatchewan’s English curriculum is less effective than ours in Ontario. We in Ontario just seem to place greater emphasis on specific elements of English, while Saskatchewan’s approach is more general; and, in having a true passion for English, I would prefer to stay here in Ontario where I have course options which allow me to explore minute elements of the subject that I happen to find fascinating!