Several trustees on the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board have chided Hamilton’s teachers for not doing their jobs regarding improving scores on the EQAO. In fact, chairman of the board, Judith Bishop stated quite dramatically, “There is a crisis in education.”

Elsewhere in this article, Mountain trustee Laura Peddle is quoted as saying, “The real work has to happen in the classroom and, to me, I keep coming back to, what is going on for all the supports that are provided and the money and the funding and the literacy and the learning days and everything else that has been given by this board?” In addition, Flamborough trustee, Karen Turkstra suggested, “We need to take this professionally, personally, that we have a teacher-effectiveness problem in this school board.”

These are quite strong opinions that may have some validity in certain individual cases, but to tar an entire board’s teaching staff as the culprits behind lower EQAO scores is ludicrous, adversarial (especially from a body that is supposed to support its teaching staff) and discounts several other factors that must be taken into account.

For instance, despite what Ms. Peddle and colleagues suggest as to all the supports and resources they have given schools, why are some schools (for instance, Dr. John Seaton in Ms. Turkstra’s own riding) struggling to build up levelled book resources to help deal with struggling teachers? Why are the newer schools, such as Sir William Osler in Dundas, equipped with all the bells and whistles money can buy (such as Smart Board systems and computers in each classroom), while the older schools often do not have computers in each classroom and are lucky if they have one Smart Board system to share amongst every class?

Also, why does Osler have both a Literacy Improvement teacher and a math facilitator on staff, while others have to settle for periodic visits from math facilitators and usually share literacy improvement teachers with other schools? I could go on with the inequitable distribution of resources in this board, but it would be a lengthy list. I have always been very curious as to where all the money goes to in the HWDSB.

Right now, the HWDSB is obsessively determined to raise reading scores throughout the board. This seems a reasonable goal, but what about writing and math skills? Don’t they need to be a priority as well? With reading as its main current focus, is it okay that students performance in math go down? In a few years’ time, will the board switch its fever-pitched focus onto Math to make up for all this?

Do some teachers need to take responsibility for lower scores? Probably. I am sure there are some out there who take their duties less seriously than the majority of others. It is the same in any profession. However, why are these allegedly weaker teachers still in the system? Shouldn’t the teacher’s performance appraisal program weed them out? Apparently not. This responsibility lies with each school’s principal, but they seem to be laying down on the job.

Finally, I am disgusted with the teacher’s union local, HWETL. Despite numerous attacks in the media and by the public on educators, does HWETL even attempt to advertise the teacher’s position on any of the questions raised? No. Why doesn’t HWETL take out advertising to counter the criticism laid on its members? Apparently, they are too busy sitting in their offices on Nebo Road. HWETL too must take its share of the responsibility for people’s perception of teachers falling down on the job.

There are a number of factors causing our local education system to fail. Possibly the least of these factors are the teachers of Hamilton. Yes, Ms. Bishop, there is a crisis in education. Perhaps we should all work together to fix it, rather than lay blame on one party?

Robert Newton, Hamilton