Meeting the diverse educational needs of students and fostering challenge is crucial for driving excellence in the classroom and both are equally important. Research reveals that pushing students beyond their limits positively impacts critical thinking, problem-solving abilities, and understanding of complex concepts. By encouraging students to perform at higher levels, educators urge them to always strive for their personal best.

According to theory, educators can support students in achieving their learning objectives by differentiating instruction and designing individual learning plans. However, in reality, this may not always be the case. Differentiating instruction in large classes can be challenging and for those teaching de-streamed classes, it may even seem impossible.

The process of de-streaming involves eliminating academic divisions and placing all students, regardless of their skills and interests, in one classroom. This approach can have negative consequences for both teaching and learning and particularly in the field of mathematics education.

Teaching in de-streamed classes presents certain difficulties, such as a heavy emphasis on standardized curriculum. In these classes, teachers are expected to follow a curriculum designed for the average student, which leaves little room for accommodating high-achieving and advanced learners. These students often have more complex and individualized learning needs, including a desire to explore more challenging academic concepts, especially in subjects like mathematics.

In de-streamed classrooms, where students are not separated into ability-based levels, educators often spend a lot of valuable in-class time managing disruptive behavior and motivating uninterested students to stay on task. This can have detrimental effects on the engagement and progress of more enthusiastic learners who work at a faster pace and benefit from enriched coursework.

Additionally, when classrooms are not divided by academic level, resources that were previously reserved for specific groups of students (such as advanced math textbooks and enrichment – before and after school – programs) are often not available or are only used sparingly. This lack of support does not only negatively affect motivated learners but can also lead to a decrease in the overall quality of education.

Finally, de-streaming can be detrimental to student motivation, regardless of their academic performance. Struggling learners may feel overwhelmed by the sudden surge in assignments, while high-achieving learners may become uninterested or bored due to being insufficiently challenged.

What does the current research suggest on de-streaming practices?

Research suggests that to support all students, educators and policymakers must prioritize differentiated instruction, provide enrichment opportunities, and allocate resources for advanced learners.  The question is: How effectively can educators do this in de-streamed classrooms?

We know that de-streaming allows for more inclusivity in the classroom, but we are also learning that it can have detrimental effects on high-achieving learners who benefit from enriched instruction. De-streaming can be detrimental to gifted learners and talented individuals, hindering their intellectual development, and causing them to feel disconnected and unrecognized. Research suggests that the consequences of de-streaming for high performers go beyond academic challenges.  Gifted and advanced learners face emotional struggles as they are denied opportunities to thrive and reach their full potential.

Chinese vs. North American approach to teaching mathematics

The cultural divide between North American and Chinese approaches to teaching mathematics is significant. While North Americans pride themselves on a more hands-on, experiential method of learning, the Chinese have long recognized the importance of structured and rigorous education. For them, mathematics is best learned through endless repetition, memorization, and steady determination. From a young age Chinese students are immersed in advanced mathematical concepts and pushed to excel by their educators who hold high expectations for academic success. In contrast, North American teachers place emphasis on hands-on learning, collaborative problem-solving (group work), and technology integration. Yet this approach often falls short as students struggle to apply their theoretical knowledge in practical situations.

Data shows that Chinese students outperform their North American peers in international mathematics assessments. For example, Chinese students have consistently achieved the highest scores in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and other global assessments.

Numerous individuals have challenged the topic of Chinese education discussing both its advantages and its drawbacks. In her article Why American students need Chinese schools, Lenora Chu shares her personal experience with Chinese schools and highlights the benefits of prioritizing the group over individual needs. According to her experience, in Chinese education system everyone is expected to keep up with the same pace, regardless of any exceptions or diversions. This creates a culture of perseverance that is believed to be more effective in achieving academic success. On the other hand, in the U.S., similar measures are often met with resistance from parents who fear their child’s self-esteem will suffer if they can’t meet certain standards in education. Chu asks: What if instead of focusing on intelligence or natural ability, we placed emphasis on dedicated effort? She writes: “Educational progress in the U.S. is hobbled by parental entitlement and by attitudes that distract from learning. We demand privileges for our children that have little to do with education. As a society, we’re expecting more from our teachers while shouldering less responsibility at home” (Chu, 2017).

Are there any similarities between the two approaches?

In a study conducted in 2020, researchers compared the teaching methods of Chinese educators and their North American counterparts. While there are noticeable differences, the study also revealed common factors that impact student learning. Cultural values, beliefs, and expectations heavily influence the teaching approach of Chinese educators, who were observed to have well-structured lessons and high levels of student engagement. Instead of strict academic rigour, Canadian educators were surprised to find a collaborative learning environment in Chinese classrooms where students actively worked together in groups and participated in lively discussions. Additionally, they observed how Chinese instructors combined mathematical concepts with subjects like history and astronomy to design and deliver engaging lesson plans and activities.

Despite various criticism, Chinese education possesses many remarkable strengths. These include its emphasis on academic success, structured and comprehensive curriculum, early introduction to important subjects, highly qualified teachers, continuous professional growth opportunities, cultural beliefs that prioritize education, and focus on advancements in science and technology. These strengths are most evident when we witness the impressive performance of Chinese students on global assessments.

International testing is not flawless, but it offers valuable insights on the quality of classroom instruction and its ability to prepare students for higher education and the workforce. Through analyzing and comparing various education systems, policymakers can identify strengths and weaknesses and offer targeted recommendations to educators on how to enhance their teaching practices.

Data suggests that in today’s demanding job market, a basic education is simply not enough. Employers seek individuals with highly developed skills in all subjects, particularly in language and mathematics. Hence the greater need for enriched instruction which plays an important role in students’ personal development, societal progress, and economic success. Yet, despite overwhelming evidence supporting such arguments, there are still governments, policymakers, educators, and parents who advocate for one-size-fits-all education completely disregarding the unique needs and potential of high-achieving and gifted learners.

In my previous blog read more on how Canadian students compare to others on international exams.

References:

Cao, L., & Aihui, P. (2021). How Chinese Teach Mathematics : Canadian Teachers’ Perspectives. Front.Educ.   China, 16(1), 31-59.

Chu, L. (2017, September 9). Why American Students Need Chinese Schools. The Wall Street Journal.

Geake, J. G., & Gross, M. U. M. (2008). Teachers’ Negative Affect Toward Academically Gifted Students: An Evolutionary Psychological Study. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52(3), 217-231.

Hu, X., Leung, F. K. S., & Teng, Y. (2018). The Influence of Culture on Students’ Mathematics Achievement Across 51 Countries. Int J of Sci and Math Educ, 16(1), 7-24.

Lianghuo, F., Ngai-Ying, W., Jinfa, C., & Shiqi, L. (Eds.) (2004). How Chinese Learn Mathematics: Perspectives from Insiders. River Edge.

Prior, S. (2011). Student Voice: What Do Students Who Are Intellectually Gifted Say They Experience and Need in the Inclusive Classroom? Gifted and Talented International, 26(1), 121-129.

Purcell, J. H., & Eckert, R. D. (Ed.) (2006). Designing Services and Programs for High-Ability Learners: A Guidebook for Gifted Education. Corwin Press.

Suprayogi, M. N., Valcke, M., & Godwin, R. (2017). Teachers and their implementation of differentiated instruction in the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 291-301.

VanTassel-Baska, J., Hubbard, G. F., & Robbins, J. I. (2020). Differentiation of Instruction for Gifted Learners: Collated Evaluative Studies of Teacher Classroom Practices. Roeper Review, 42(3), 153-164.

What led to this disappointment? What has changed in the Canadian education system in the past two decades? Have we failed our students? Has the system failed us (educators, parents, and students) and if yes, is there something we can do to better prepare our modern learners for the jobs of the future?

In this blog I will explore the following questions:

1. What is PISA?
2. How do Canadian students compare to others on international exams?
3. How important are PISA reports?
4. What is STEM and why is it important?
5. Who are the students that study science, technology, engineering, and mathematics at Canadian universities?

What is PISA?

PISA, or ”the Programme for International Student Assessment is a triennial survey of 15-year-old students that assesses the extent to which they have acquired the key knowledge and skills essential for full participation in society. The assessment focuses on proficiency in reading, mathematics, science, and an innovative domain (in 2018, the innovative domain was global competence), and on students’ well-being” (OECD, 2019). For more information on PISA, including PISA tests, visit the following website: https://www.oecd.org/pisa/

How do Canadian students compare to others on international exams?

In 2018, Canadian students scored higher than the OECD average in reading, math, and science (OECD, 2019). In the table below see how we compare to the rest of the countries who participated in PISA, 2018, testing:

Looking at the above table, we see that Canadian students are doing well, in both language and mathematics, in comparison to their international peers. They have maintained their record as highly competitive performers and have been placed in the upper tier of the 78 participating countries. However, there is a downward trend in our performance. As PISA reports indicate, in “each subject, Canada’s average scores have been declining over time, as have the percentages of high performers. Comparable metrics in other G7 countries have either been stable or improving, which means Canada has been slowly but steadily losing ground, especially in science and math” (Allison, 2022).  What are we doing wrong?

How important are PISA reports?

PISA is what it is – a form of standardized testing. Those who argue against standards in education will always criticize such assessments. For example, a number of educators signed an open letter in which they criticized PISA for:
– Increased number of standardized testing;
– Fast shifts in education which allow countries to quickly climb the rankings;
– Taking away from “immeasurable educational objectives like physical, moral, civic and artistic development”
– Increased number in global testing which “harms our children and impoverishes our classrooms, as it inevitably involves more and longer batteries of multiple-choice testing, more scripted ‘vendor’-made lessons, and less autonomy for teachers”
– Increased stress levels in schools, and
– Placing too much emphasis on preparing young men and women for gainful employment, instead of preparing them for “participation in democratic self-government, moral action and a life of personal development, growth and wellbeing” (as cited in Strauss, 2014).

According to a more recent article from the same source “There is a consistent pattern that shows students in high-scoring education systems in international tests such as the PISA and TIMMS have lower confidence, enjoy the subject less, and place less value in it” (Strauss, 2017). The same source criticizes PISA for putting too much emphasis on STEM subjects instead of “citizenship, solidarity, equity, curiosity, engagement, compassion, empathy, curiosity, cultural values, physical and mental health” and other similar characteristics which are important in student development and overall education (Strauss, 2019).

As a parent and 21st century educator I agree that these skills are important; however, I cannot underestimate the importance of STEM education. Research suggests that students who successfully develop math, language, and science skills do not only find employment more easily, but also improve the quality of the workforce and contribute to their country’s economic growth (StanfordCEPA, 2014).

According to Dr. Eric A. Hanushek from Stanford University, PISA test results are extremely important because they point to gaps in our education that can be reduced (StanfordCEPA, 2014). He states that we can improve our performance by learning from other countries and making necessary reforms in education (StanfordCEPA, 2014). Many countries, including Germany and Poland, have used PISA test results to review and improve their student performance.  For example, in 2000 PISA found that more than 1 in 5 students in Germany did not reach the baseline level of proficiency in reading. The country policy makers began taking action and making necessary reforms in education. As a result, in five years Germany moved from below average performance in reading to above average performance in reading (OECD, 2016).  

In defence of PISA testing, Dr. Hanushek also responds to those who advocate for the development of perseverance, determination, and other non-cognitive skills arguing that those “traits are probably important [but] we don’t have good evidence on how they affect the economy [whereas] we do have good evidence on how tests on math, reading, and science” skills have significant impact on our economy (StanfordCEPA, 2014).

What is STEM and why is it important?

STEM pertains to programs in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. These programs attract special attention because of the idea that “workers with skills in these areas are vital to the nation’s economic performance, especially with respect to its information and communication technology (ICT) sector” (Finnie & Ross, 2017, p. 44). 

Who are the students that study science, technology, engineering, and mathematics at Canadian universities?

We know that much of the Canadian student population consists of international students and first- and second-generation immigrants. Research suggests that “visible minorities, especially those who are first-generation immigrants, and particularly those from a specific set of regions, participate at much higher rates in STEM disciplines” (Finne & Childs, 2018, p. 43). According to Statistics Canada, “immigrants make up a very high proportion of the supply of STEM-educated individuals in Canada, particularly among master’s and doctoral graduates, and those in the engineering field. In 2016, over half (54%) of the university-educated STEM graduates in Canada were immigrants. Among master’s and doctoral STEM graduates, 64% were immigrants and yet, immigrants represented about 22% of the Canadian population in 2016. Their overrepresentation among engineering and computer science graduates and those with higher-level degrees is very significant, rendering knowledge of their outcomes even more important. Immigrants’ share of STEM employment reflects their overrepresentation of labour supply. They accounted for 42% of bachelor’s level STEM employment, and almost two thirds (63%) of master’s and doctorate level STEM jobs” (Statistics Canada, 2016).

An interesting Statistics Canada study of 2022 reveals that immigrant children have a higher postsecondary education rate and earn higher wages after their mid-20s than the overall Canadian population. The study is based on information from the Longitudinal Immigration Database (IMDB) which explores how well immigrant children integrate into Canadian society. The results indicate that “Immigrants admitted as children participate in postsecondary education more often than the overall Canadian population, with those admitted at younger ages participating the most” (Statistics Canada, 2022).

Research suggests that various factors affect one’s decision to obtain university education. These include urban living patterns, parents’ education, high school grades, PISA scores, etc. (Finnie & Mueller, 2012).  More recent findings reveal that “visible minorities, especially those who are first-generation immigrants, and particularly those from a specific set of regions” access post-secondary STEM programs “at much higher rates than others” (Finnie & Ross, 2017, p. 43).  Those who are both visible minorities and immigrants go to “university at a much higher rate than the Canadian-born non-visible minority group” and “the greatest share of this difference is due to their much higher relative entry rate into STEM discipline (Finnie & Ross, 2017, p. 50; Finnie & Mueller, 2012).  Additionally, those of Chinese origin are also more likely to attend university “and a substantial portion of this overall effect is related to their higher rates of participation in university STEM programs” (Finnie & Ross, 2017, p. 53).  Similarly, immigrants from India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh ”also attend universities and participate in STEM disciplines at much higher rates” than those of Canadian origin (Finnie & Ross, 2017).  Based on research findings we can conclude that “visible minorities, especially those who are first-and second-generation immigrants, and particularly those from a specific set of origins, including China and some other Asian countries participate in STEM disciplines at particularly high rates and these patterns hold after controlling for student characteristics, family background, high school grades, and PISA reading scores” (Finnie & Ross, 2017, p. 54).

I wonder: What are immigrant parents doing that the rest of the Canadian population is not? Why are international students and first- and second-generation immigrants dominating STEM university programs in Canada?

My next blog post will delve into the topic of how well our public schools prepare students for STEM university programs. Through specific research findings I will explore the contrasting teaching styles of Chinese and Canadian educators and their distinct methods of teaching mathematics.

References

Allison, D. J. (2022, September 8). Canada’s PISA scores – good news, bad news. Fraser Institute. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/canadas-pisa-scores-good-news-bad-news

Finnie, R., & Childs, S. (2018). Who Goes into STEM Disciplines? Evidence from the Youth in Transition Survey. Canadian Public Policy, 43-55.

Finnie, R., & Mueller, R. E. (2012). Access to Post-Secondary Education in Canada Among First and Second Generation Canadian Immigrants: Raw Differences and Some of the Underlying Factors. Education Policy Research Initiative, 1-43.

OECD. (2016, December 6). How does PISA help education reform? The cases of Germany and Brazil. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xpOn0OzXEw&t=66s

Richards, J. (2017). Red Flags for Educators: Lessons for Canada in the Pisa Results. CD Howe Institute Commentary 488. 2-16.

StanfordCEPA. (2014, January 9). Why the U.S. Results on PISA Matter. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5FsEsffP9E

Strauss, V. (2019, December 3). Expert: How PISA created an illusion of education quality and marketed it to the world. The Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/12/03/expert-how-pisa-created-an-illusion-education-quality-marketed-it-world/

Strauss, V. (2017, September 19). There’s a new call for Americans to embrace Chinese-style education. That’s a huge mistake. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2017/09/19/theres-a-new-call-for-americans-to-embrace-chinese-style-education-why-thats-a-huge-mistake/

Strauss, V. (2014, May 13). Academics call for pause in PISA tests. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/05/13/academics-call-for-pause-in-pisa-tests/

Statistics Canada. (2023). Socioeconomic outcomes of immigrants admitted to Canada as children, 2019. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/220203/dq220203b-eng.htm?CMP=mstatcan

Every year we spend a lot of time on Šolta doing what we love: swimming, sunbathing, enjoying local food and wine, walking around the old part of Grohote, exploring Maslinica, discovering hidden coves, spending time with friends, creating art, and loving everything that this magical island has to offer. As you can imagine, all this is very inspiring so while here we also write, sketch, and paint. Below are some fun projects I recently did.

Uvala Šipova, Šolta
Palette knife acrylic painting on paper

One of the questions that I’m very interested in and researching in Master of Education program is related to the benefits and impact of parent involvement on student achievement.  If you search scholarly articles, you’ll find numerous studies that demonstrate how parent involvement can positively impact academic achievement.  For example, Epstein and Sanders’ research study of 2000 found a strong correlation between parent involvement and students’ scholastic achievement.  So, what’s the problem, you ask yourself.  Let’s get involved and everyone will be happy.  Well, it turns out, it’s not as simple as it seems. Why, for example, are some immigrant families or families with children with learning disabilities often struggling or unable to find ways to become active participants in their children’s education?  In this blog I’ll briefly outline some benefits, perceptions, and barriers of parent involvement.

According to their earlier research, Epstein and Dauber (1991) argue that it is a school’s responsibility to help parents “build home conditions for learning, understand communications from school, become productive volunteers, share responsibilities in their children’s education in learning activities related to the curriculum at home, and include parents’ voices and decisions that affect school and their children.” As you can see, a lot of it depends on the school you’re working with.  Many parents hesitate to get involved because their school is not giving them a chance.  What does this, actually, mean? Let’s examine some barriers to parent involvement and explore what schools can do to encourage parent participation.

Communication: language as a potential barrier

Consider this: you’re an immigrant family that just moved to Canada.  You’re homesick and alone, adjusting to your new environment, learning the language of communication, and trying to find work.  The process of acculturation and adaptation is a long and challenging one. Add children to the equation and you have an entire family struggling to overcome various challenges. 

Think of this process as a crash course, demanding and challenging.  You’re both: student and an educator. You make your own decisions and learn from your mistakes.  I know this because I was raised by a first-generation immigrant family.  My parents, who couldn’t speak English, never attended parent-teacher interviews.  If there was a concern or an issue, I (just a teenager then) advocated for myself or my younger brother (also a student) and discussed my questions and concerns with my teachers and school administrators.  I also couldn’t speak English fluently.  As you can probably imagine, many of my questions remained unanswered. I was young, inexperienced and unable to effectively communicate in English or advocate for myself, but I made it through high school and things eventually got better.  Today we have thousands of families and students in the same situation.  As educators, we must acknowledge that and ask ourselves: what can our schools do to help immigrant families become more involved in their children’s education? 

How confident are immigrant parents in their skills and ability to effectively communicate with their school?  We know that communication is important. Research demonstrates that if the school doesn’t engage in a regular communication with parents, the chances of parents becoming involved are slim.  What choices do immigrant families have if they can’t help their children with homework assignments, for example?  What can they do if their work, lifestyle or their socio-economic status prevents them from actively participating in their children’s education?  In my opinion, there are many initiatives our schools and educators can take in order to encourage parent involvement. Listed below are some examples:

• Introduce culturally reflective texts. Allow students to bring in their own reading materials (ie: dual-language books) so that parents too can participate in reading and homework activities. Also, as an English (and ESL) teacher, I know that this is an effective practice in engaging students and encouraging them to participate in class. 
• Invite parents to more casual and parent-friendly school events. Encourage them to bring others (ie: translators, family, friends) to the meetings.
• Reach out to parents – call, email, invite and encourage them to attend events, share concerns, and ask questions.
• Demonstrate interest in other cultures by inviting classroom speakers. Provide opportunities for parents to talk about themselves and what matters to them. This will help the parents feel appreciated and valuable.  It will also give them a sense of belonging (ie: belonging to the school community and mainstream culture).
• Provide after-school help and organize extra-curricular activities for those families who can’t afford to pay for them.
• Become involved in the community and get to know your students and parents.
• Give working parents a chance to become involved.  Understand that many are unable to volunteer during the school hours because they work.  Give them a chance to contribute and show their support in a different way – not necessarily through volunteer work.

In his article Is Parent Involvement in School Really Useful, Alfie Kohn, an American author and lecturer,  writes: “There’s something both short-sighted and arrogant about exhorting low-income parents to show up at school events or make sure the homework gets done.  The presumption seems to be that these parents lack interest or commitment — as opposed to spare time, institutional savvy, comfort level, or fluency in English.”  And I agree.

Everything starts with the communication. In my opinion, the lack of communication between parents and teachers presents the greatest barrier to child’s learning and development.  We must understand and acknowledge that parents are the very first educators of their children.  I often ask myself: how can any teacher be confident in their ability to teach if they don’t realize the importance of communication with parents? 

Helicopter parenting is the term often used to describe overcontrolling and overinvolved parents.  As a parent and educator, I believe that the term is overused and often misinterpreted.  In his article “Helicopter Parenting” Hysteria – The Epidemic that Actually Isn’t, Kohn notes that the term is frequently used and doesn’t always reflect the reality.  He states that “Parents who are overly involved in the lives of their college-age children are the folks we love to scorn.” Why do we do that, I wonder.  What is it about parent involvement that is so terrifying or unpleasant?

In his article Kohn refers to contemporary research that actually favours actively involved parents.  He claims that children of involved parents perform better academically and communicate more successfully with their teachers and peers. 

Let’s get back to our question:  what are some barriers that affect communication between parents and teachers?  Here I would like to focus on one: self-confidence. Both teachers and parents can lack self-confidence which can negatively impact their communication and affect parent involvement.  An earlier study (Bastiani, 1989) analyzed teachers’ and parents’ perceptions and goals for parent-teacher interviews.  This is what the study found:

As you can see, their goals are similar and yet different.  Both parties have specific expectations of each other.  While teachers expect to identify and address potential conflicts with parents, the parents hope to learn more about their teaching methods. 

From my experience as a parent, I think that some teachers refuse to communicate regularly with parents for fear of being questioned or criticized.  Some lack the training, skills, and self-confidence to discuss their teaching practices, lesson plans, or assessment methods. Like teachers, the parents can also suffer from low-self esteem. Research shows that different factors, such as education level or socio-economic status impact parent involvement. Some findings also suggest that people who haven’t received formal education and who entered the work force straight out of high school (or even earlier) were less likely to value higher/post secondary education.

What to remember about communication?

To teachers: Getting the parents involved means opening your classroom doors and sharing your plans and teaching methods with the rest of the world – the world that’s not connected to the classroom or school community. This might seem uncomfortable at first, but please encourage and support that communication with parents.  Don’t be afraid to share your concerns, questions, observations, expectations, exemplars, and lesson plans with the parents who express an interest to actively participate in their children’s education.  Don’t be afraid of being questioned or criticized – constructive criticism is beneficial and helps us improve.  When parents insist on communication, that’s often because they need clarification or feedback from you.  Most parents only want what’s best for their children. However, when they don’t understand the curriculum or your specific expectations, they feel powerless because they cannot help their children improve or achieve their learning goals.

To parents: We know that you only want what’s best for your children.  Our teachers are highly educated and many of them are professional, patient and caring individuals who put a lot of work, effort (and imagination) into their lesson plans.  Stay involved but be patient and reasonable in your requests and expectations.  If you disagree with your child’s teacher, don’t be afraid to communicate your concerns or ask questions.  Insist on regular communication.  As a parent, you deserve to know how your children perform in school, what their strengths and weaknesses are and what you can do to help them achieve their learning goals.  Be polite. Be patient. If you can, participate in school events and attend meetings (and parent-teacher interviews), but remember Kohn’s argument: not everyone who is unable to participate in school events or volunteer in the classroom is disinterested in their children’s education.  Also, talk to your children and address their questions and concerns.  Listen to what they have to say about their educators and school experience.  Even the youngest of school-age children are very observant. If you’re a good listener, you’ll learn a lot from your kids.

Written and illustrated by: Vedrana Vodopivec
October, 2021