transforming our future - alberta teachers' association · 6 • transforming our future...

TransformingOUR FUTURE

Together

Rocky View Local No 35 of the Alberta Teachers’ Association

The Conditions of Professional Practice in Rocky View Schools

A Research Study

Transforming Our Future Together • 1

ContentsForeword ...................................................................................................................................................... 3Preface .......................................................................................................................................................... 6Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 7Teaching and Learning Conditions ........................................................................................................... 8

Morale and Commitment to Teaching ......................................................................................................................8Class Sizes and Classroom Supports ........................................................................................................................9Reporting and Communication Requirements .........................................................................................................10

Professional Development .......................................................................................................................... 11Professional Development Priorities ........................................................................................................................12

Technology for Teaching and Learning..................................................................................................... 12Impact of Technology on Teacher Workload ............................................................................................................12Supports for Technology Integration ........................................................................................................................12Policies on Technology Use in the Classroom .........................................................................................................13

Bargaining and Advocacy........................................................................................................................... 14Bargaining Stance.....................................................................................................................................................14Work–Life Balance ...................................................................................................................................................15Noninstructional Workload ......................................................................................................................................16Hiring Practices ........................................................................................................................................................17Supporting New Teachers ........................................................................................................................................17

Members’ Perceptions of the Local ........................................................................................................... 18Communication with Members ................................................................................................................................18Engaging Members ..................................................................................................................................................18Advocating for Members .........................................................................................................................................18

Implications and Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 19Why Are Many Rocky View Teachers Struggling? .................................................................................................1921st-Century Initiative Fatigue and the Promises of Transformation ......................................................................21

Balancing Perspectives on Technology Integration ............................................................................................21The Costs Associated with Technology ................................................................................................................23The Persistence of the Digital Divide ..................................................................................................................23Infinite Information, Finite Time .........................................................................................................................23

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 24Building Capacity Through a Culture of Trust .........................................................................................................24Advocating for Conditions of Practice That Will Support Transformation .............................................................24

References .................................................................................................................................................... 26Appendix A: The Survey Instrument ........................................................................................................ 29

2 • Transforming Our Future Together


Foreword We live in a world characterized by accelerated integration. There is not much left that is linear. The page has

already ceded place to the screen. We open Windows instead of binders. We talk and we text. We no longer have to trudge to the bank or to the bookstore; we readily access their services and products online. Our bills also stalk us into the evenings. The desires and demands of our work lives are now our followers. Technology releases us and also invades us. We are both more flexible and more vulnerable.

Work and life, point and click, vocations and vacations—everything blends and bleeds into everything else. In 1967, iconic Canadian educator, philosopher and scholar Marshall McLuhan published a book entitled The Medium Is the Massage. The contents of this book were arranged in no clear order: images such as toenails and car mirrors—both profound and banal—were juxtaposed randomly. Far ahead of his time, McLuhan grasped how nonlinear digital learning and entertainment can enable images of human tragedy and of family pets to appear on a laptop screen at one and the same time. Profundity and banality exist side by side. The jackal lies down with the lamb.

These developments affect almost everyone. Watch the pedestrian who is texting and also listening to his iPod. Observe how work-related messages are still flying through the digital ether far into the night. Notice how long, challenging books are being replaced by shorter blogs and how books are looking more like blogs with each passing day. Yet who craves toiling with the toxic fluids of the Gestetner, which turned out thousands of worksheets a week, when one can now just click print or send and perform the same function much more cleanly and efficiently? And who has not experienced such joyous moments as receiving a text from one’s son to the effect that he has just ascended Mount Fuji at sunrise or videochatting with one’s daughter moments after she has survived a natural catastrophe? Skype connects us to people we love who used to be separated by hours and miles. Yet such easily available gossip and trivia diverts us from engaging more deeply in learning and life.

Digital technology, like steam technology, can be a force for good or for ill. For the good, think of students in Singapore who use Second Life simulation to walk around inside the aboriginal paintings they share with an Australian school in a remote community or shy students who use their cellphones to tweet instant responses to their teacher about their understanding of what she is communicating. For the ill, look at educators who surf the Internet in the middle of a professional development workshop or students who spend more time in front of computer screens than they do with their friends and family.

Digital technology is an integral and integrated part of students’ lives, a fact that we cannot ignore. Digital technology has also transformed the lives of adults, a fact that we can’t deny. Technology is not neutral—all tools are designed to change our behaviour, to enable us to do something that we could not do before. Digital tools are no different. They nudge us toward places we would otherwise be unlikely to go. We need to make sure that, as adults and as citizens, we have a collectively intelligent relationship with these tools. Those who prepare the generations of the future need to cultivate the most intelligent relationship of all.

Cultivating an intelligent relationship with technology does not always happen. In my own current research in Ontario, I am seeing assistive technologies provide enormous benefits to students with special educational needs. Yet I have also witnessed how some of these students abandon the very technologies that can help them when they are obliged to return to regular classrooms that have not integrated these technologies into teaching and learning. In such circumstances, students with special needs become stigmatized. I am also familiar with school districts that have introduced mandatory courses of online learning when there is no evidence that such courses benefit the majority of


students who are required to take them. In developing a culture that makes us more technologically enhanced, we must ensure that we do not perpetrate a cult in which we simply become entranced by technology.

In The Wrong Drivers, Michael Fullan (2011) identifies technology as one of four wrong drivers of attempted change in instruction. Fullan applies this label because technology is often used to drive pedagogy, even when there is no evidence that it has a positive impact. Pedagogy should be driving technology, not the other way around. Our attitude to technology needs to be characterized by openness, inquiry and a sense of curiosity and balance about what we might be gaining and what we might be losing. Billions of dollars are being invested globally to infuse digital technologies into our schools. At the same time, no countervailing investment exists to encourage young people to engage with the outdoors and nature, to interact mindfully and thoughtfully with their peers, or to develop such values as compassion or humility. And this is why teachers and their leaders, in whom the Canadian public places such very high trust, just behind firefighters and the medical profession, need to put forward a collectively intelligent response that will sometimes require a necessary push in the other direction.

I have long encouraged schools to become dynamic, innovative, inclusive and cohesive knowledge societies (Hargreaves 2003). Technology is a significant part in such a society. In this increasingly diverse and integrated world, we need to figure out how technology can make us more innovative while helping us become more inclusive.

Alberta’s Inspiring Education (Alberta Education 2010a) and its sequel Inspiring Action (Alberta Education 2010b) present important and admirable new directions that are far ahead of many other educational systems. At the same time, they raise questions about how well schools and school systems can bring these inspirational ideas to the forefront in ways that benefit students and their teachers. Rocky View Schools is making important progress in helping to address and answer these questions. In this district’s efforts, as in all efforts to transform teaching and learning, teachers remain central to the success or failure of educational change. So an evaluation by teachers of teachers’ practices and the conditions that support their development and transformation is a welcome contribution of the profession to this and all other efforts at systemic educational change. Teachers are often the last to be consulted when changes to education are being contemplated. As this study suggests, this kind of work ought to place them at the forefront of educational change, where they should be.

The study also suggests that, in general, Rocky View Schools is a well-regarded district and a good place for teachers to work. It also shows that teachers in the district are, in general, quite open to technological change. At the same time, the study reminds us that systemic efforts to effect educational change by increasing the integration of technology are haunted by such perennial problems as a lack of time and support, increased workloads and a disruption of the work–life balance. To say that these problems are familiar is not to trivialize them. Indeed, these problems are a consistent and persistent part of what Seymour Sarason (1993) once called “the predictable failure of educational reform.” Findings that are disturbing for teachers’ practice can be equally disturbing for school districts. In both case, the findings can also be a spur to undertaking productive changes.

One other upshot of this much-needed report is relatively new: the importance of finding a balance between improvement and innovation. Professional development intended to bring about improvement is often directed toward delivering district priorities. Professional learning oriented toward innovation tends to be more self-directed, not so much in terms of individual autonomy as in terms of collective professional autonomy and responsibility. To want more self-directed professional development is not to want to return teaching to what it was in the 1970s. Self-directed professional development is essential for bringing about successful innovation. Innovation in new knowledge of the kind promoted by Inspiring Education will not be achieved using a professional development model that is overly skewed toward implementing existing knowledge. Therefore, rethinking the balance between different kinds of


professional development is important not only for teacher satisfaction but also for the likely success of any attempt at innovation.

Among the world’s teachers unions, federations and associations, the Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) is, in my experience, one of the most transparently intelligent and collectively responsible. It rightly patrols the teaching conditions of its members even as it works with other educational leaders in the province to bring about changes in education, including technological ones, that genuinely improve the teaching and learning conditions of all students and their teachers. In doing so, it resolutely refuses to capitulate to outside interests or passing fashions.

My colleague Michael Fullan once said that, if there are two of us in the room and we agree on everything, one of us is irrelevant. At the close of a book that Michael and I just cowrote—a book in which we agree on many things but disagree on others—we reflect on what we learned in the process of writing the book. More important than learning to agree, we concluded, was agreeing to learn. That is the spirit in which this study was produced and in which, hopefully, all its readers will receive it. Education in Alberta certainly inspires and informs me every time I come to the province. This report is one example of how Albertans can and do inspire and inform one another.

—Andy HargreavesThomas More Brennan Chair in EducationBoston College


PrefaceThis report summarizes the results of a study that Rocky View Local No 35 of the Alberta Teachers’ Associa-tion (ATA) undertook in the spring of 2011 to identify the conditions of professional practice that currently ex-ist in schools in the local. Data for the study was collected by means of an online survey (see Appendix A) that was designed with the assistance of researchers from the Faculty of Extension at the University of Alberta, the local’s executive and ATA research staff.

Rocky View Local is committed to advancing the forward-thinking vision outlined in Inspiring Education: A Dialogue with Albertans (Alberta Education 2010a) and the follow-up document Inspiring Action on Education (Alberta Education 2010b). This commitment involves enhancing the learning opportunities for students by identifying the teaching and learning conditions that will be necessary in the years ahead. Everyone in the school district needs to work together to develop a shared understanding of how they want their school–communities to look in the future.

It is the local’s hope that this research-based document will encourage district leaders and the public to step back and ask some important questions about the conditions of professional practice and student learning that exist in Rocky View Schools (RVS). For example, what do we mean by such terms as personalized learning, inclusion, informed transformation and 21st-century skills? Do schools in the district have the necessary resources, information and technology to equip students with the skills that they will need to fulfill their career ambitions and become engaged citizens in a vibrant democracy?

Shared leadership is essential if Rocky View is to create the kind of schools that it wants in the future. I believe that this report, which reflects the professional voice of teachers, is an important first step in initiating an ongoing conversation about how to make that possible.

Michelle GlavinePresidentRocky View Local No 35


IntroductionA total of 544 teachers and administrators responded

to an online survey that Rocky View Local administered in June 2011. Most respondents were classroom teachers. Between 85 and 90 per cent of respondents held full-time continuing contracts and taught in regular school settings. All jurisdiction levels and geographic regions were well represented in the sample.

• The median ranges for teaching experience were 5 to 9 years (23 per cent of the sample) and 20 to 30 years (23 per cent).

Although very few respondents reported having non-standard teaching assignments, their comments highlight the importance of thinking creatively and holistically about staff complements. As one teacher noted, Rocky View Schools needs to “ensure that roles/assignments are not eroded by budget constraints.” This teacher suggested that “guidance positions should be protected to ensure that nonacademic barriers to learning continue to be addressed.” An administrator made a similar observation: “While we’re only a small percentage of the membership, advocacy for administrators cannot be forgotten.” Strengthening the role of administrators also pays dividends for staff. For example, one teacher observed that “better development and support” are required to enable present and upcoming administrators to “become more [like] instructional leaders,” who could, in turn, support teacher growth and learning.

Among the sub-populations whose interests tend to be overshadowed in general surveys are early childhood educators; administrators; substitute teachers;1 early career/beginning teachers; and CTS, career education and work experience teachers and coordinators.2 All of these groups have special needs for which the local needs to advocate.

Advocating for a strong staff complement, which includes educational assistants and clerical/support staff, may help to reduce the complexity of teachers’ work. The complexity of teachers’ work contributes significantly to their stress and reduces the quality of their core instructional work. As one respondent put it, teachers need “fewer non-instructional assigned duties/expectations so that [they] can focus on meeting the needs of students.”

Figure 1: Distribution of Study Sample by Area

The sample was also well distributed in terms of age and years of teaching experience:• Three per cent of respondents were administrators, 5

per cent had combined administrative and classroom duties, and 2 per cent were substitute teachers.

• Sixteen per cent of respondents were teachers with less than 5 years of experience.

• Seventy three per cent of respondents were female.• The median age range of respondents was 36 to 40

years (17.1 per cent of respondents fell into this category).

1 Two recent ATA surveys of Alberta’s substitute teachers (ATA 2010b; ATA 2011a) suggest that many substitute teachers feel marginalized by their district and local. Participants in these studies indicated that they want better access to benefits, earlier placement on the salary grid for consecutive employment days, and fair and transparent hiring practices. Up to half of Alberta’s substitute teachers are “waiting in the wings” for full-time contract positions.2 Youth unemployment is a significant international concern. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD 2009) argues that schools and labour markets need to be better coordinated. Bell and Bezanson (2006) discuss the long-term consequences of school-to-work transition systems that marginalize non-university-bound youth and those on trades-oriented career paths.

Other School 1%

Springbank and area

10%

Cochrane including Bearspaw

and Westbrook

18%Airdrie and area

40%

North and East of Airdrie

9%

Chestermere and area

17%

Langdon/Indus and area

5%


Teaching and Learning ConditionsMorale and Commitment to Teaching

The survey leaves little doubt that Rocky View teachers derive much satisfaction from the positive relationships they enjoy with students (99 per cent), parents (93 per cent) and colleagues (90 per cent). Overall, 77 per cent of respondents agreed that Rocky View Schools is a good place in which to teach, and 84 per cent agreed that they work in “a safe environment, free from harassment.”

Related questions, however, reveal simmering problems with morale. For example, only 64 per cent of respondents agreed with the statement, “I feel teaching in Rocky View Schools brings me great satisfaction.” Approximately half of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that Rocky View Schools values their perspectives with respect to teachers’ professional judgment, AISI goals and implementation, and teachers’ perspectives on key educational decisions and programs in the district.

One respondent suggested that the local needs to “defend autonomy and promote professionalism.”

Approximately 20 per cent of teachers—a significant minority—do not feel that the jurisdiction is hearing their voices.3 This sentiment is particularly evident in respondents’ remarks about work–life balance. Teachers feel that the school board, and in some cases their administrator colleagues, continue to impose demands without regard for the working hours and well-being of teachers:

I think a better job needs to be done in monitoring the number of hours outside of instructional time that teachers must spend to meet the constantly increasing demands of the profession. More and more is being asked of teachers from all levels—the province, the board and the school—but we are not given sufficient time to complete it all effectively.

Teachers also feel that their voices are not being heard with respect to professional development priorities. Teachers want (1) a greater say in their own professional development, (2) “more time in classrooms with colleagues to improve practice” and (3) less “centrally based or dictated professional development.”

Figure 2: Teachers’ Perceptions of the School Board

3 In all, 61 per cent of teachers agreed that they were meaningfully involved in decision making in their schools, 21 per cent disagreed with this statement and 18 per cent were neutral on the topic. Twenty per cent felt they lacked input on the introduction of digital technologies in their schools.

d) RVS is a good place to work as a teacher. (n=548)

c) The RVS board values the professional judgement of its teachers. (n=545)

b) The RVS board values teachers’ views in planning and delivering the Alberta Initiative for School Improvement

(AISI). (n=542)

a) The RVS board values teachers’ views in determining key educational decisions and programs. (n=544)

100% 50% 0% 50% 100%

1 Strongly Agree 2 Agree 3 Neutral 4 Disagree 5 Strongly Disagree

3

6

5

8

5

14

14

18

16

26

31

30

51

45

42

40

26

9

8

4


Teachers also seek “more input on topics such as digital reporting, IPP creation [and] school day hours.”

Class Sizes and Classroom Supports

When asked about the various factors that contribute to teaching and learning conditions, respondents expressed general satisfaction with the tools and resources available to them. Seventy-six per cent are satisfied with access to professional development, 74 per cent with access to print materials and resources, and 73 per cent with access to computers and other instructional technology.4 Up to 20 per cent of teachers are not satisfied with their classrooms and/or their access to needed IT equipment and infrastructures. Small classrooms, portable classrooms and unreliable technology were among the chief concerns. Although 52 per cent of respondents were satisfied with resources and funding for field trips, a sizable minority of 28 per cent ranked this item as “neutral.”

Classrooms must come equipped to teach. All of the teaching supplies should be there in that classroom. I should never have to spend my money to teach the curriculum. Yet we all do because we...care and want the best for our students. New teachers walk into a bare classroom, collect that first-line grid salary and turn around and furnish that empty classroom.

Respondents’ most pressing concerns centred on class sizes and the availability of supports for diverse student populations. Support for special needs students is an area clearly in need of improvement. Almost half (48 per cent) of respondents were “somewhat” or “very” dissatisfied with available supports, and 51 per cent were dissatisfied with the supports they receive to successfully teach in “an inclusive classroom model.” In an open-response question, 19 per cent of respondents stated that the availability of supports was a bargaining priority.

Teachers want more support in the classroom from educational assistants and/or reduced class sizes to compensate for the increased planning and instructional duties imposed on them by diverse classroom compositions. As one teacher stated, “With all of the demands and pressures teachers face that are not directly related to classroom and instruction, it is difficult to

find time to modify lessons for our diverse learners, especially when we are not trained in this areas. Extra time embedded into the teaching day to meet with special education teachers and to plan/modify lessons would be very helpful.” Some other respondents added that existing supports do not recognize non-coded students who still require significant investments of teachers’ time and energy. One respondent reported having “five students this year (two on IPPs and three not, but needing as much as, if not more, help than the ones on IPPs) and zero classroom support.”

High

light

s

• Fifty-one per cent of respondents were satisfied with class sizes, while 39 per cent expressed dissatisfaction with class sizes.

• Teachers require more support to teach effectively in inclusive classrooms. Fifty-one per cent were dissatisfied with the supports they are presently receiving.

• Teachers’ ability to manage larger classes depends on the number of special needs students they have and the supports they receive for these students.

• Teachers are frustrated when they lack the resources to support all learners in their classrooms.

Given the jurisdiction’s growing population of students for whom English is not a first language, some respondents expressed concern about classroom composition and student diversity. Forty-three per cent of respondents were “neutral” on the question of whether adequate supports were available for visible minority and English language learners (ELL). This finding may reflect an urban/rural split among respondents and/or the relative presence of these student population groups in different schools. However, this facet of student diversity was an important or critical issue for up to 30 per cent of survey respondents. As one respondent put it, “Teachers in Rocky View Schools need more professional development on how to support English language learning in the classroom: the stages of culture shock, family stress and how to assess ELL students.”

As noted earlier, respondents were aware of the

4 Satisfaction figures here include teachers who were “very satisfied” and “generally satisfied.” Overall, a greater number of responses on all items fell in the “generally satisfied” range.


importance of finding the right mix of staff to support student learning. Specialist positions and educational assistants are the positions most likely to be eliminated or cut back if budgets are reduced, and teachers appear to be feeling the effects of these cumulative losses. As one early education specialist said, “We badly need to continue and boost support for learning issues in ECS, where it is shown to be most effective. This support, through early intervention, has been eroded over the past five years.” Another stated, “It is becoming more and more difficult to meet the needs of ... students when you are trying to manage with very little support for the students that require a great deal of your time. I am very fortunate that I have a principal who sees this as a priority and uses money from the school budget to hire assistants.” Teachers also require the support of special needs specialists as well as time during the school day to consult with them on IPPs and differentiation strategies.

If the class-size initiative is no longer considered a priority and if we need to provide for special needs learners and address behaviour issues, we will need support through extra teachers, trained

support staff or child development associates who can come into classrooms. All of a teacher’s time and effort goes into the behaviour or special needs children, and our average or strong learners are left to fend for themselves.

Reporting and Communication Requirements

Survey respondents were asked to evaluate the level of stress they experience with respect to various reporting requirements.5 The results are summarized in Figure 3. Overall, 71 per cent of respondents were generally or very satisfied with reporting requirements. However, respondents also mentioned concerns about reporting and commented on the array of responsibilities that contribute to a long work week. Seventy-six per cent of respondents disagreed with the statement, “I work less than 50 hours a week.” As one respondent put it, “I barely have time for my family with all of the increased demands at school (learning new technology, updating and reporting grades every two weeks, and maintaining communication with students outside the classroom).”

Figure 3: Stress Level Associated with Student Assessment and Reporting Requirements

5 In a different question from the one that produced the results reported in Figure 3, teachers were asked to evaluate, among other teaching and learning conditions, their level of satisfaction with “expectations to report student progress to parents.” Fourteen per cent reported being “very satisfied” with respect to this item, 57 per cent were “generally satisfied” and 13 per cent were dissatisfied with overall reporting requirements.

d) Developing school-based assessments (i.e., rubrics). (n=515)

c) Analyzing student/school results of provincial examinations. (n=337)

b) Administering and supervising provincial examinations. (n=315)

e) Communicating with and responding to parents and students online. (n=496)

f) Completing digital report cards. (n=459)

a) Marking and evaluating student work. (n=523)

g) Completing Individual Program Plans (IPPs). (n=453)

100% 50% 0% 50% 100%

Low Moderate High

19

22

37

16

18

16

9

39

55

39

39

33

29

43

42

23

24

45

49

55

48


Professional DevelopmentRespondents were asked to assess the usefulness of

a range of professional development strategies/venues for achieving their professional growth plans. Not surprisingly, teachers varied widely in their preferences. Approximately 25 per cent of respondents evaluated Calgary Regional Consortium workshops, school-based PD and “other conferences” as “very useful,” and an additional 40 per cent evaluated each of these activities as “somewhat useful.” Lower on the scale of perceived usefulness were annual teachers’ conventions, district-based workshops and ATA specialist council conferences, which 15 to 20 per cent of respondents rated as “very useful.” Self-directed professional development—“online resources and websites” and “independent reading and self-study”—were rated the most useful by participants, at 87 per cent and 82 per cent, respectively. With respect to professional development that is specifically mediated by technology, videoconferencing was the least-used form of accessing professional development. Indeed, 49 per cent of respondents indicated that they do not participate in videoconferencing. Of those that do, only 25 per cent find it useful. However, the majority of teachers are using websites and other online resources for their own learning and planning, and they report that this form of professional development is time well spent.

I would like the many PD days that are in the calendar (including AISI) to be self-directed. That

way I could produce work that is creative, meets my needs and applies to my situation. Although I enjoy the collaborative nature of many PD days, I find that they are not always as productive as they would be if I worked with my grade team or even alone.

Fifty-five per cent of respondents felt that they had a high degree of autonomy with respect to determining their professional growth plans, and 36 per cent stated that they had “some degree of autonomy.” As the quote above suggests, what most teachers appear to want—and what they likely mean by autonomy—is a balanced approach that involves both self-directed and collaborative learning opportunities. That teachers are looking for a balanced approach is also evident from the wide range of activities that they deem as valuable for professional development purposes. The responses suggest that teachers have unique professional development needs that are determined by such factors as their area of specialization, their individual learning style and the needs of their students. In other words, professional development must be flexible. Teachers must be trusted to evaluate their own professional development needs and to seek out appropriate opportunities to have those needs met.6

In addition to issuing report cards, developing IPPs places high demands on teachers. Although IPPs apply to a minority of students, they were the most highly ranked in terms of requirements. Whereas 15 to 20 per cent of respondents reported experiencing stress in relation to other aspects of reporting and communicating with parents, 37 per cent reported stress in developing IPPs.

With respect to technology integration, the majority of teachers now feel they are expected to use digital technologies to produce report cards (58 per cent) and to communicate with parents and students (54 per cent). A number of respondents indicated that they needed more training and dedicated time to master reporting and communication systems and other technologies.

6 The ATA’s longitudinal study of beginning teachers (ATA 2011b) suggests that professional growth plans are often underutilized as a professional development tool. Evaluation and follow up with administration on professional growth plan goals and progress are often cursory or weak. The extent to which teachers value professional growth plans and take them seriously is influenced considerably by the extent to which they believe that their administrators value these documents and consider growth plans as cornerstone contracts for individual professional growth.


Professional Development Priorities

Support for technology learning and integration is clearly an urgent need. Many teachers specifically mentioned that they needed appropriate support to integrate technology, and many observed that technologies are being introduced too quickly, leaving teachers insufficiently prepared to use them. As one respondent put it, “We need training, not just professional development. We need training that focuses specifically on digital technologies and software. It is an urgent need that is being ignored.”

Apart from this one area of urgency, however, the professional development needs that respondents cited varied considerably. The local might be wise to advocate for an approach to professional development that involves two or three key areas of need over an extended period of time. The task is

to support teachers without unintentionally further straining their work–life balance.

Technology for Teaching and LearningIn 2011, the ATA undertook a major study on the

ways in which digital communication technologies are changing the nature of teachers’ work.7 Many of the concerns identified in that study are echoed in the survey of Rocky View teachers. Participants in both studies, for example, expressed concern about the increased demands that technology imposes on teachers’ time, the absence of an effective technology infrastructure and a worrisome blurring of the distinction between work time and private time.

Impact of Technology on Teacher Workload

Although Rocky View teachers believe that technology has pedagogical value, they also express concern that technology has made their job more difficult and more complex. Seventy-five per cent of respondents agreed

that technology integration has increased their workload, a finding that is reinforced by their comments on the topic. As one respondent put it, “All the technological demands need to be accompanied with time to post daily on Plone (a free open-source content-management system), to respond to parents and to complete individual assessment and paperwork for IPP students.”

Teachers and administrators are burning out trying to meet executive expectations for technology integration. A slower and more thorough implementation would be far more successful than trying to do it all at once but in a cursory manner.

Supports for Technology Integration

While teachers generally agreed that technology has had a positive impact on teaching and on their own

7 This report (ATA 2011c) notes that technology is increasing teachers’ workload by raising expectations that teachers will (1) communicate more frequently with parents and (2) individualize their instruction to meet the needs of each student. According to the study, teachers are also frustrated by the lack of an effective technology infrastructure and by the paucity of support to help them integrate technology.

High

light

s

• Videoconferencing is the least-used method of accessing professional development.

• Respondents rated self-directed professional development as the most useful overall.

• Twenty-nine per cent of respondents disagreed with the statement, “I have the skills I need to effectively use digital technologies.”

• Teachers want more embedded professional development and collaboration time. Thirty-six per cent of respondents disagreed with the statement, “I have access to professional development/embedded learning time during the school day.”


professional learning, they are also struggling to learn what is required of them by the district to manage the new demands created by technology. As one respondent observed, “The transition to Plone 3 and Moodle represents a commitment of hundreds of hours over the next several years to build and maintain.” Yet, the board believes that “teachers will simply have to make do as best they can.” Another teacher put it this way:

“If I continue in the profession, my greatest need will be for technological support so that I can be completely comfortable using such new programs as Plone, Moodle and Power Teacher.”

Teachers also emphasized that equipment, infrastructure and training are needed to support technology integration. “The network is slow at my school,” one teacher said, “especially during report card periods. If we wish to move to a more digital platform for learning, we need to have an infrastructure that will run in real-time format and that can be counted on to be up and running every day.” “If we are to be on the leading edge in technology,” another teacher said, “we need the most recent technology. Some of the laptops in the jurisdiction are outdated and, as I understand it, there is no evergreen plan for this.”

Policies on Technology Use in the Classroom

Few respondents expressed strong opinions about the need for policies governing such technology-related matters as acquisition protocols, student use of the Internet and the use of technology for reporting purposes. However, 29 per cent of respondents were dissatisfied with existing policies related to cell phones and hand-held devices.

Figure 4: Respondents’ Perceptions of the Impact of Technology on Teaching and Learning

b) Digital technologies have increased my workload. (n=545)

c) Digital technologies have enhanced my effectiveness as a teacher. (n=543)

d) Digital technologies have enhanced my professional development and learning. (n=549)

a) Digital technologies have significantly enhanced my students’ learning. (n=547)

e) I have the skills I need to effectively use digital technologies. (n=549)

100% 50% 0% 50% 100%

1 Strongly Agree 2 Agree 3 Neutral 4 Disagree 5 Strongly Disagree

5

3

3

2

1

24

13

10

10

11

20

22

23

23

13

40

49

49

52

48

11

13

15

13

27

High

light

s

• Sixty-seven per cent of respondents agreed that technology has enhanced their ability to teach, while 11 per cent disagreed with this statement.

• Policies and practices governing the use of technology by students and teachers appear to be only somewhat developed and could be improved.

• Technology is producing demands for teachers to report to, and communicate more frequently with, parents. As a result, most workload issues related to technology also concern assessment and reporting practices.

• Almost a third of teachers feel that they lack the requisite skills to effectively implement the programs they have been asked to use.


was appropriate with respect to the board of trustees and to student evaluation and reporting. However, a sizable minority (approximately 30 per cent in each case) felt that assertiveness was needed in these areas as well.

As Figure 5 demonstrates, respondents believe that “classroom conditions” and “non-instructional duties” should be priorities in collective bargaining. This finding is reinforced by the responses to the open-ended questions, which contained frequent references to the frustration resulting from large classes and the lack of supports for teaching students with special needs.

The fact that 50 per cent or more of delegates ranked each of the bargaining issues as at least “somewhat” important makes it difficult to clearly identify the local’s advocacy priorities. However, the issues that were ranked the highest—and these findings are reinforced by the respondents’ comments—were support and advocacy for work–life balance, including flexibility for leaves, at least one additional personal day and leaves to care for sick children (see Figure 6). These items are relatively straightforward in a bargaining context. Other advocacy issues like “more effective processes for consultation with the local on educational matters” and “more professional development time during the school day/week” are also high priorities but require longer-term strategies that cannot be readily addressed in bargaining. As one Calgary area teacher recently

Bargaining and AdvocacyAs the five-year agreement between the ATA, the

province and the school authorities draws to a close, teachers in Rocky View are struggling to establish bargaining priorities in a climate in which everything is important. Understandably, respondents tended to focus on factors that increase stress: large classes, the lack of support for special needs students and for technology integration, and an ever-expanding list of non-instructional commitments.

Bargaining StanceRespondents were asked whether the local should

take a more assertive or a more cooperative approach to the following matters: (1) collective bargaining, (2) improving classroom conditions, (3) non-instructional duties, (4) influencing the Rocky View board of trustees and (5) student evaluation and reporting.

Sixty-one per cent of respondents preferred an assertive approach to improving classroom conditions, and 49 per cent preferred an assertive approach to the issue of non-instructional duties. Forty per cent felt that the local should take a more assertive stance with respect to collective bargaining overall, whereas 34 per cent preferred a more cooperative approach. Half of respondents believed that a more cooperative approach

Figure 5: Preferred Approach to Bargaining Issues

a) In reaction to collective bargaining. (n=545)

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

b) In reaction to improving classroom conditions. (n=544)

c) In reaction to dealing with non-instructional duties. (n=544)

d) In reaction to influencing the Rocky View Schools board of trustees. (n=543)

e) In reaction to student evaluation and reporting issues. (n=543)

A more assertive approach A more cooperative approach Not sure


pointed out, some of a local’s most important advocacy work is the relationship building and evidence gathering that needs to take place between contract negotiations. These kinds of activities can help support major reforms such as changing the school calendar and embedding professional development time into the school day.

Work–Life BalanceAs Figure 6 shows, programming that supports

wellness and work–life balance was the most highly ranked item for advocacy. Based on their comments it was clear that many respondents are struggling to maintain a balance between their work and home lives. Here’s how one teacher put it:

All the extra supervision, coaching, work demands, learning about new technology, adapting to the demands of 21st-century learning and so on are killing people! The balance between work and home life is gone! All you do is work. There are days when you have supervision and no

Figure 6: Advcocacy Priorities

i) Provide programs related to wellness and work-life balance. (n=541)

f) Improve access and flexibility for leaves (including personal days). (n=542)

a) Provide more professional development time during the school day/week. (n=540)

g) Improve district processes related to awarding continuing contracts. (n=540)

b) Improve communication about professional development opportunities. (n=541)

j) Develop more effective processes for consulting the local on educational matters. (n=535)

d) Provide supports for new administrators. (n=537)

c) Support new teachers by reducing their instructional load. (n=541)

e) Devise programs to raise awareness regarding cultural diversity. (n=540)

h) Improve access and support for graduate work. (n=541)

100% 50% 0% 50% 100%

1 A very important priority 2 A somewhat important priority 3 Not an important priority 4 Not sure

4

4

2

12

3

13

15

12

9

17

15

17

31

13

33

20

20

31

41

31

41

41

39

44

49

47

40

33

38

38

40

39

29

31

14

20

24

24

12

15Hi

ghlig

hts

• Forty-eight per cent of respondents disagreed with the statement, “I am able to balance my work and personal life.”

• Fifteen per cent of respondents indicated that their financial situation (salary and benefits) had declined; eighty per cent indicated that conditions had improved somewhat and nine per cent indicated that conditions were unchanged.

• Teachers would like recognition—and, in some cases, compensation—for time spent on extracurricular commitments. This was particularly the case for coaching.

• Teachers perceive that multiple initiatives are dividing their attention and increasing their workload.

• Forty per cent of teachers agreed with the statement, “My noninstructional duties interfere with my ability to teach.”


Respondents would like to see the local oppose the board’s practice of making teachers pay for their own subs when they take a personal leave day. As one teacher observed, “Other jurisdictions do not charge teachers for subs on personal days. Interestingly, Rocky View charges for subs even when the personal day was not taken on a day for which a sub was required. This practice is questionable at best and definitely does not meet the personal day benefits offered by other jurisdictions.”

2. Health Care Spending Accounts: Some respondents suggested that health care spending accounts should be “more accessible” and that teachers should be able to use them not only to reimburse the costs associated with treating illness but also to pay for proactive health services that promote health and well-being. Rocky View teachers and staff would like to be able to use their health care spending accounts to cover the cost of fitness programs, equipment and gym memberships.

3. Extracurricular Activities: The profession’s view is that teachers’ involvement in extracurricular activities should be strictly voluntary. However, a significant number of respondents cited extracurricular activities as a source of tension among staff members and as something that can substantially increase the workload of teachers.

4. Job Sharing: Some respondents suggest that, as a way of helping teachers achieve a better work–life balance, the board should offer more part-time work and encourage job sharing. Here’s what one respondent had to say on the topic: “I wish we had more access or support for part-time positions and job shares. A full-time position makes it impossible to have a balanced home life, yet Rocky View rarely supports job shares. The Calgary Board of Education, by contrast, posts job shares as positions. We would have a lot more happy and well-balanced teachers if part-time classroom teaching positions were available.”

Noninstructional WorkloadMany teachers commented that the difficulty

they experience in achieving a work–life balance is exacerbated by the fact that they are expected to perform a wide range of complex noninstructional tasks. The problem is not only the sheer volume of tasks that are assigned but also the necessity of juggling multiple demands. A number of respondents suggested that the

preparation time. You go nonstop from morning until the end of the day.

Another respondent talked about a “continual barrage of new expectations with little time available to implement these programs effectively. … The board [needs] to present new initiatives with a balanced workload for teachers and must be aware of the significant issues related to time management, stress and mental illness that teachers face.”

I get the feeling that board members don’t consider our work–life balance when they continually implement new technology and reporting systems, increase reporting expectations, increase class sizes and delay inschool overpopulation solutions. My wellness has declined substantially in the last three years, a decline that, interestingly, corresponds with the increase in demands at work. As much as board members say they support wellness, they do not work to decrease the bulging workload of teachers.

Although respondents clearly value “programs that support wellness and work–life balance,” the local and the board should be aware that some work–life balance initiatives, if they become add-ons to what teachers are already doing, could inadvertently increase time and performance pressures on teachers. When it comes to developing programs and initiatives, most respondents appear to take the view that “less may be more.”

Respondents had some specific suggestions about how existing benefits could be improved to promote a better work–life balance:1. Personal and Sick Leaves: A number of respondents

suggested that teachers should have at least one additional personal leave day. Respondents also noted the need for “greater access to sick days to attend to their children’s health.” One respondents suggested that teachers who don’t take sick days and paid personal days should have “flex days off.” Teachers feel that the board, in declaring that “absences cannot be taken due to appointments, illness or illness of children,” is disregarding the wellness of teachers and that of their families.

As a hardworking and committed teacher and a full-time parent, I feel that we must advocate for family sick days. If my wife is sick or if my daughter needs to go to a doctor’s appointment, I don’t think I should have to be forced to use a personal day. We are expected to give our all to the students we teach. Shouldn’t we be expected to give at least that much to our own families?


board should scale back and slow down its initiatives. As one respondents put it, “Advocate for fewer tasks that are not about teaching. ... Have the board choose only one or two really important initiatives, not 20.”

A number of respondents see administrators as caught between the expectations imposed by central office and the desire to create sustainable and viable conditions of practice. A couple of respondents noted that, although administrators could play a role in advocating for reduced noninstructional loads, doing so would be difficult in the context of the board’s current budget priorities. As one respondent observed, “Sometimes, even with the best of intentions, administrators overload us.” Another respondent put it this way: “Administrators at the school level must learn to encourage a work–life balance by setting reasonable goals and expectations. Constantly adding more [duties] frustrates staff.”

Hiring PracticesAlthough 90 per cent of respondents had continuing

or probationary contracts, 75 per cent of them were adamant that the board should ensure that its hiring practices are transparent and fair. One respondent, who still did not have job security in her third year, suggested that the board should “improve the process for new teachers to know when and how they will be continuously employed.” Another untenured teacher observed that “politics and favouritism at the school level” seemed to be determining many hiring decisions.8

The biggest stressor to Alberta teachers is the way the jurisdiction decides to offer or not offer continuing contracts. The process is unclear and abstract and leaves far too much room for the decision to become a personality contest. Teachers should be hired and given contracts based on

seniority. If the jurisdiction encounters challenges with new teachers it has hired, it should provide guidance and development for them.

Supporting New TeachersHigh attrition rates among early-career teachers have

alerted policymakers to the importance of providing new teachers with the supports they need to develop a solid, satisfying practice in the long run. Fifty-seven per cent of respondents suggested that the board should make “support for new teachers through reduced instructional load” a priority. In their comments, respondents suggested several strategies for supporting new teachers, including access to mentor teachers, access to release time and more preparation time to enable beginning teachers to observe and meet with experienced teachers and administrators. Like the teaching population in general, early-career teachers can benefit from increased opportunities to consult and collaborate with colleagues during the school day. The ATA’s longitudinal study of beginning teachers (ATA 2011b) found that the most effective mentorship programs are those that provide structured opportunities for mentors and mentorees to meet.9

Many respondents expressed concern for the well-being of their more junior colleagues. One veteran teacher said, “I am nearing retirement, and I feel that new teachers need as much support as possible, including less supervision time and more preparation time.” Another stated, “We have new administrators and new teachers that have work overloads. It is essential to give them the opportunity to be successful without burning them out. First-year teachers need to have at least one full preparation period each term, and new administrators need to have less committee work and more in-school time with staff and students.”

8 The ATA’s longitudinal study of a cohort of beginning teachers (ATA 2011b) and its two reports on the working conditions of substitute teachers (ATA 2010b; ATA 2011a) suggest that lack of transparency in hiring practices is a common problem. Teachers seeking continuing contracts are doubly frustrated when they are unable to get clear feedback on how to improve their practices and/or enhance their likelihood of being hired.9 The study also found that new teachers who are able to work in professional learning communities and/or with grade-level partners are better able to ride out the demands of the first years. Colleagues provide resources and help new teachers with lesson planning and classroom management.


Members’ Perceptions of the Local

how the lack of involvement means that a small number of people are doing all the work.” Some respondents also suggest that their colleagues would participate more if they understood the importance of the ATA and the breadth of services it offers to its members. “Teachers need to know that the union represents their livelihood,” one respondent said. Another respondent suggested that the local “find a way to have teachers care and know the importance of the ATA and what it has to offer in the way of professional development, teacher welfare and so on. Some people believe it is just a union.”

In their comments, respondents had two suggestions for how the local could educate members about what it does and encourage broader participation: (1) describe roles and opportunities clearly and indicate the time commitments associated with each and (2) make meetings more attractive by holding them during working hours, releasing the agendas in advance and increasing the amount of compensation provided to attendees.

The local should work with Rocky View Schools to create a staff- and student-friendly calendar, not just a parent-friendly one. That way, I might have more time for my own family and would not feel guilty about taking evenings or weekends to devote some time to my professional association.

Advocating for MembersAlthough respondents rated the local’s advocacy

efforts with respect to the collective agreement very

Study participants were asked to evaluate Rocky View Local’s service to its members. Responses suggest that, overall, the local is doing a good job in key areas: 87 per cent evaluated communication with members as “excellent” or “good,” and 74 per cent ranked negotiation and enforcement of the local’s collective agreement as “excellent” or “good.” One teacher said, “So far, I am pleased with what you do for me. Thank you for your work on my behalf. I feel you are doing the right things and feel you will push where necessary and pull back where you think it is best. Keep up the good work.”

I feel that, as teachers, we are treated well and paid a salary that is fair for the work we do in the community. I would just ask that the local continue to help maintain what we have in these difficult financial times.

Communication with MembersAlthough respondents generally gave the local high

marks for the way it communicates with members, a few complained about receiving the same e-mails at their home and work addresses. Some respondents suggested that e-mails would be more effective if the local sent them at specified intervals. Few respondents commented on the local’s website or suggested alternative modes of communication. It is hard to say whether the dearth of comments on these matters indicates that respondents are not interested in alternative formats or that they don’t miss what they don’t have. Some respondents suggested that using social media might improve communication and invite more member feedback. One respondent suggested that the local should improve its web design and layout and make it more “personal and relevant by including live updates, Twitter feeds and blogs.”

Engaging MembersRespondents who are either currently involved in

the local or were involved in the past wish that more members would become involved in local activities. They identified three factors that prevent more members from engaging in the work of the local: a lack of time, a lack of interest and a lack of awareness. A number of respondents mentioned that they would like to be involved but are simply too busy. Others noted that some members either “have no interest” or “don’t understand

High

light

s

• Most members are satisfied with the local’s efforts in bargaining and enforcing the collective agreement.

• New teachers need to be invited to learn more about what the local does and how they can become involved

• Members desire face-to-face contact with members of the local executive and want the local to be more visible.

• Sixty-five per cent of respondents were satisfied with the local’s effort to “present a positive view of teachers and the work they do.”


positively, they suggested that the local could improve in two other areas.1. Engaging New Teachers: About one third of

respondents rated the local’s efforts to engage with and support new teachers as “fair” or “poor.” One participant noted that what new teachers understand about the ATA is “limited.” Respondents suggested that the local engage more directly with new teachers by organizing “inservices on various aspects of the local” and making “personal contact with new teachers through staff at the school who can explain how the local operates.”

2. Communicating with the Public: Fifty-nine per cent of respondents rated the local’s efforts to “inform the

public about Rocky View Schools issues” as “good” or “excellent,” and 65 per cent suggested that the local does a “good” or “excellent” job of “presenting a positive view of teachers and the work they do.” One respondent observed that the public remains “poorly informed about teachers’ perspectives on such matters as budget cuts, services and workload.” Another pointed out that the public needs to better understand that “when teachers and their union are fighting for more funding for education, they do this for the students, for classroom size and for extra support for the students in need. They do not (or rarely) do this to get pay raises!”

Implications and RecommendationsThis survey of Rocky View teachers and

administrators makes explicit concerns that the local has been raising for the past couple of years:• A significant number of teachers are feeling

overworked and overwhelmed by what the board is asking of them.

• Technology integration causes stress because it increases the demands for communication and reporting. In addition, many teachers feel they lack the training and infrastructures needed to implement new technologies.

• Teachers need time during the day to plan and collaborate with colleagues. The potential benefits of any initiative are diminished when teachers lack the onsite time and support necessary to integrate the initiative into their practice.

• Class sizes and compositions are significant concerns. Teachers lack the resources they need to support diverse learners, especially students with special needs and students learning English.

Rocky View Local’s challenge in working with the board and district office is to find common ground in championing ideas that promote students’ learning and growth and, at the same time, to advocate for the conditions of professional practice that teachers need to serve students well. This survey suggests that significant gaps exist between the mandate that the district has set for its schools and the capacity of teachers to fulfill that mandate given their current conditions of practice. Two

of the biggest challenges have to do with implementing technology initiatives and responding to increasingly diverse student populations. The local can help the board by documenting the ways in which policies and directives play out in the day-to-day lives of teachers and students. Too often, great visions are not realized because of unanticipated consequences and unforeseen complications. High-quality feedback is necessary to help decision makers who do not work in schools every day to respond effectively to teachers’ concerns.

I feel overwhelmed by the changes that are occurring. There doesn’t seem to be any time to assimilate and process the changes. They are rapid and appear urgent, and I often don’t feel that I understand the big picture. It just seems like I’m trying to survive....One recommendation I would have is to realistically lower the expectations of what Rocky View Schools is trying to do.

Why Are Many Rocky View Teachers Struggling?

Many Rocky View teachers are finding that their work is becoming more demanding, more complex and more intense. This finding not only reinforces what studies across Canada have been indicating for the past decade but also echoes international studies (Dibbon 2004; Naylor and White 2010; Kamanzi, Riopel and Lessard 2007). These studies consistently show that teachers work an average of 50 to 55 hours per week. In addition


to their actual work hours, teachers spend a lot of time engaged in inner dialogues during which they plan, reflect and worry about students (Dyck-Hacault and Alarie 2010).

The stressors and difficulties described by teachers in this study and by participants in similar studies suggest that the work of teachers is intensifying. Teachers are being pressured to perform at high speed and with increased mental and/or physical effort. Workers can recover from short bursts of intensity, which occur in most jobs. However, when an intensified work environment becomes the norm, the physical and mental health of workers begins to suffer (Green 2004; Kelliher and Anderson 2009). The following factors intensify work: (1) financial and political pressures to keep an organization lean and efficient, (2) destandardization of the work week and working hours, (3) employment insecurity and (4) technologies that blur the boundaries between working and nonworking hours.

Increased complexity also increases the sense that one’s work has intensified. Complex work is mentally challenging. It often involves an ambiguous situation that requires higher-order thinking and problem-solving skills. Although associated with higher job satisfaction, complexity can result in greater stress and burnout, especially when coupled with less autonomy in making decisions (Chung-Yan 2010). In describing their work, teachers often mention both the negative and positive aspects of complexity. On the one hand, teachers draw energy from the creative elements of their work that require ongoing learning, planning and problem solving. On the other, they experience stress because they cannot control the flow, volume or overall aim of their labour.

Another factor that intensifies teachers’ work is fragmentation, the obligation to handle many projects simultaneously or juggle competing priorities.10 The work of teachers is also fragmented because they are the end-of-the-line recipients of policies and demands that multiple stakeholders impose on the education system. Because stakeholders have only partial knowledge of how their initiatives and policies interact with those of other stakeholders, such demands are often uncoordinated and, as a result, can easily grow to unmanageable levels (Day and Gu 2010; Honig and Hatch 2004).11

Individual work ethic and school climate can also intensify teachers’ work. Ballet and Kelchtermans (2008) observe that school cultures in which high participation is the norm, coupled with teachers’ own standards for competence and caring, can further intensify teachers’ work. Asked what reduces their work satisfaction, teachers often point to not being able to do their best work. They are frustrated when they lack the time or resources they need to live up to their own standards. Ballet and Kelchtermans (2008) also note that strong collegiality can lead to overwork because teachers do not want to let their colleagues down or burden them with extra work

Higgins, Duxbury and Johnson (2004) have demonstrated the relationship between poor work–life balance and weakened physical and psychological health.12 Green (2004) notes that the stressful effects of work intensification are exacerbated in high performance/low autonomy environments. Teachers’ morale declines and stress increases when performance stakes are high and professional discretion is low.13 The

10 Zikaviktorsson, Sundstrom and Engwall (2006) observe that people attempting to manage multiple projects at the same time may experience “project overload.” In such situations, people may perceive their work as disrupted and fragmented, experience greater time pressure and have fewer opportunities to recuperate between periods of intense and strenuous work. Other negative consequences of managing several projects simultaneously are decreased competence and less ability to improve work routines. In such situations, people may spend a lot of time just setting up as they switch from one project to the next.11 Ballet and Keltchermans (2008) describe how uneven implementation can lead to inefficiencies and increase the demands on teachers’ time. Their case study concerned teachers who were developing resources on their own because a new curriculum had been implemented before resources to support it were available.12 Higgins, Duxbury and Johnson (2004) define “role overload” as “feeling overwhelmed, overloaded or stressed by the pressures of multiple roles” (84). The authors note that workers experiencing role overload are 2.6 times more likely to seek out mental health support and almost twice as likely to have high prescription costs and make six or more visits to a doctor in a year. The overall purpose of this Canadian study was to illustrate the links between work stress and use of the health care system.13 The stress that teachers experience in the face of low autonomy mirrors that of other knowledge workers. Although professional and managerial positions tend to pay better and to have other benefits (greater flexibility, higher status and more security), they also tend to be more intense, involve longer hours, impose a greater obligation to take work home, involve a greater tendency to forfeit holidays, have fewer family-friendly work policies and create more stress overall.


frequency with which respondents mentioned burnout, exhaustion, stress, lack of family time, neglect of physical health and lower overall well-being suggest that these conditions are present in Rocky View.

21st-Century Initiative Fatigue and the Promises of Transformation

Over the past four years, Rocky View Schools has aggressively pursued a 21st-century learning mandate that it believes supports the province’s broader goal of educational transformation. On its website, Rocky View Schools makes this observation:

Gone are the days where teachers stood at the front of the room, where literacy focused primarily on the three Rs (reading, writing and arithmetic) and where memorizing facts was considered learning. Today’s classrooms are evidence that we are staying true to our goal of preparing learners by providing them with the skills necessary to be successful in the 21st-century workplace.

The school board clearly believes that technology will play a major role in implementing the changes it envisages in classrooms, curriculum and assessment. However, in all the excitement about technology, the board appears to have forgotten education’s most central and significant resources: the time, energy, and commitment of its teachers, administrators and support staff.

While Rocky View teachers see value in the 21st-century learner model, they are struggling to master and integrate the technology that they have been asked to use. Teachers need time to learn and become comfortable with new services, programs, curricula and technologies. Given that Rocky View is currently using or piloting 28 emerging technologies, it is not difficult to see why teachers are asking the board to slow down and scale back the pace of technological change to a manageable level.

Balancing Perspectives on Technology Integration

The term technological determinism has been used to describe the view that technology is the primary

determinant of our experiences. As Selwyn (2011) notes, technological determinism has influenced discussions about educational change for many years. In their day, filmstrips and televisions were characterized as having the power to radically transform public education. History offers perspective.14

The term technological instrumentalism has been coined to describe another common deception: the notion that technology is just a value-free tool that serves whatever subjective goals we chose. According to this view, technology is culturally neutral and innocuous (Kelly 2005; Levy 2001). Such a view ignores McLuhan’s (1964) caution that, just as we shape our technologies, so they subsequently shape our habits of mind and physical selves. In fact, technology is neither a neutral tool (as technological instrumentalists claim) nor the major driver of educational transformation (as technological determinists argue). Reality is far more complex.

Integrating technology effectively requires a flexible approach. When implementing technology, teachers, as pedagogical leaders, should take into account such factors as the age, gender and education level of students, the socioeconomic status of the community and the beliefs that a student’s parents and peers hold about the value of technology both in and outside a school setting (McRae 2011).

The psychosocial and physiological impact on children of a pervasive exposure to digital technologies is currently not well understood. In considering the suitability of educational technologies to facilitate learning, educators must take into account the stages of child and youth development. Recent evidence suggests that the amount of time that children and youth spend in front of a screen should be limited. In a period of rapid technological change, teachers and administrators must pay close attention to the impact of online digital activities on the offline health and mental well-being of their students.

Adults have more choice than do children with respect to how they consume technologies. Furthermore, children’s bodies, which are still developing, are more susceptible to the potential harmful effects of technology than are those of adults. For this reason, teachers need to

14 A professional development provider, 21stcenturyschools.com, has produced a chart illustrating the differences between 20th- and 21st-century learners. The chart implies that technology can be used to transform the “bad” education practices of the past into “good” educational practices. However, the history of modern education offers at least two important insights: (1) there have always been, and always will be, good and bad educational practices and (2) technologies in education, as Selwyn (2011) demonstrates, rarely live up to the utopian forecasts of their most enthusiastic advocates.


better understand how spending long periods of time in front of a computer screen can affect children and youth. Although research on this topic is still in its infancy, studies have already shown that playing violent video games can make children more aggressive; that sitting for long periods in front of a computer can contribute to obesity; that excessive gaming and Internet use can interfere with children’s psychosocial wellbeing, diminish their attention span and contribute to vision problems; and that using technology in the evening can disrupt children’s sleep patterns, which causes a number of negative consequences (Howard-Jones 2011; Canadian Paediatric Society 2009).

In assessing whether digital technologies are appropriate in an education setting, teachers might consider using the well-established Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) model (Koehler and Mishra 2009). As Figure 7 illustrates, TPACK tries to reconcile the complexity and dynamics of student learning as it relates to technology and the multifaceted nature of teachers’ knowledge. Rather than conceptualizing content knowledge (CK), pedagogical

knowledge (PK) and technology knowledge (TK) as isolated entities, TPACK focuses on the interplay between these knowledge sources.

The TPACK website (www.tpack.org) describes the TPACK model as follows:[The TPACK model] emphasizes the new kind of knowledge that lies at the intersections between [each knowledge source]. Considering PK and CK together, we get Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), Shulman’s (1987) idea of knowledge of pedagogy that is applicable to the teaching of specific content. Similarly, considering TK and CK together, we get Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), the knowledge of the relationship between technology and content. At the intersection of TK and PK is Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), which emphasizes the existence, components and capabilities of various technologies as they are

used in the settings of teaching and learning.

Finally, at the intersection of all three elements is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). True technology integration is understanding and negotiating the relationships between these three components of knowledge. A teacher capable of negotiating these relationships represents a form of expertise different from, and greater than, the knowledge of a disciplinary expert (say a mathematician or a historian), a technology expert (a computer scientist) or a pedagogical expert (an experienced educator). Effective technology integration for pedagogy around specific subject matter requires developing sensitivity to the dynamic, [transactional] relationship between all three components.

Teaching with technology is a challenging and creative act, which the TPACK model can help facilitate. In their efforts to integrate technology, teachers must consider how the various knowledge sources apply to a particular learning situation. No single pedagogical approach

Figure 7: The TPACK Model

Technological Pedagogical Content

Knowledge (TPACK)

Contexts

Pedagogical Content

Knowledge

Content Knowledge

(CK)

Pedagogical Knowledge

(PK)

Technological Content

Knowledge (TCK)

Technological Knowledge

(TK)

Technological Pedagogical Knowledge

(TPK)


applies to every teacher or every student. The teacher must traverse the elements of content, pedagogy and technology and understand how they interact in the context of learning. A more thorough explanation of TPACK can be found in Koehler and Mishra (2009).

Rocky View teachers are seeking a way of integrating technology that takes into account the board’s vision of the 21st-century learner and, at the same time, highlights other elements of infrastructure that are required to support student learning. Murgatroyd and Couture (ATA 2010a) argue that attempting to implement technology without first taking into account other changes—a diverse student population, integrated classrooms and the decline in rural populations—is to put the cart before the horse. Policymakers must determine needs and values before discussing how to meet those needs. Although technology factors into the educational-change equation, it should not be driving the change.

The Costs Associated with Technology

Rocky View Schools is currently investing a significant amount of capital and human resources in using technology to achieve goals and solve complex problems. These investments consist of time, energy and money not invested into such other facets of a full, rich and inclusive public education system as arts-based learning, support for English language learners and special needs students, community-oriented sports and recreational programs, school nurses, and career and guidance counsellors. According to this study, teachers in Rocky View need more classroom support for diverse learners and more time to draw on the support and expertise of their colleagues. These are two notable examples of how Rocky View’s focus on technology is preventing it from investing in other necessary resources.

The Persistence of the Digital Divide

Another problem with the 21st-century learning initiative and its tendency to view technology as a panacea is that students do not necessarily have equitable access to technology. Wealthy schools and school authorities that can implement economies of scale are much more likely to benefit from technology than smaller rural schools, many of which struggle to find the

learning and human resources they need to use advanced technology even when the hardware and infrastructures are in place (Looker and Thiessen 2003).

Infinite Information, Finite Time

Another negative consequence of too much technology is information overload. As the cost of technology has declined, the volume of information and the number of services that technology is capable of delivering have increased exponentially. In the past, most economic laws have been premised on the principle that resources are finite. By contrast, some commentators have characterized the proliferation of information that technology has made possible as an example of the “economics of abundance.” But as Wired editor-in-chief Chris Anderson (Anderson 2005) observes, “Although there may be near infinite selection of all media, there is still a scarcity of human attention and hours in the day.” In essence, “scarcity bottlenecks” have shifted “from the CPU to the user.” It seems we are still faced with limitations, after all.15

It is easy to be seduced by the appearance of abundance. In reality, what we are facing is a world of infinite choice and infinite information We still have to decide how to use all this information. Psychologist Barry Schwartz (Schwartz 2004) has called this phenomenon the “tyranny of choice,” pointing out that more choice can lead to paralyzing indecision, anxiety and decreased wellness. Because technology can greatly increase the choices available, it is not surprising that work intensification, as described above, is more likely to occur in information-rich work environments (Chung-Yan 2010; Green 2004).

Technology has made it easier for teachers to produce student achievement data. Rocky View teachers are using student achievement data not only for reporting purposes but also to improve their practice and to enhance their communications with parents. This situation is a good example of how the ability to produce nearly unlimited data surpasses the finite time and energy that teachers have to consume this data. Hargreaves and Shirley (2009) describe this scenario as a distracting path of technocracy, in which the capacity to produce data outstrips the critical skills and time that people have to evaluate the data and use it effectively.

15 Classical economic theory is rooted in the notion of scarcity: unlimited wants and needs in a world of finite resources. Theoretically, digitized information constitutes an “infinite” resource. For more, see Anderson (2005).


Conclusion

Building Capacity Through a Culture of Trust

Many years of research by universities and teachers’ organizations in Canada have confirmed the conditions of practice that must be in place for effective teaching and learning to occur. The results of the survey of teachers in Rocky View are consistent with this body of research.• Teachers experience a great sense of satisfaction and

purpose when they see their students happy, engaged and thriving as learners.

• Teachers are willing to collaborate and learn from one another but lack the time to do so. Collaboration has been shown to improve teaching practice.

• When teachers learn new curricula, teaching strategies and technologies, they need time to practise. In many cases, they also need support from peer coaches to ensure that what they have learned stays with them.

• To support all student learners, teachers need such resources as classroom assistants and time to consult with inclusion specialists.

To bring about the conditions described above, Alberta Education and school boards need to (1) embed in the school day time and space for teachers to plan, work and learn together and (2) trust that, given the time, space and support they need, teachers will work hard to meet their students’ needs. When teachers feel trusted, they also accept accountability. Unfortunately, education during the last three decades has been characterized by an atmosphere of high accountability and low trust (Hargreaves and Shirley 2009).

Research on work intensification and work–life balance has yielded the following conclusions, all of which apply to teachers:• Work intensification, over time, leads to poor work–

life balance and damages employees’ physical and mental health.

• Knowledge workers and professionals (including teachers) are more likely than other employees to work long hours and experience work intensification.

• Technology tends to increase work intensification by speeding up the pace of work and blurring boundaries between work and non-work time.

• Project overload—the attempt to carry out several initiatives simultaneously—leads to excessive task switching. The consequences are initiative fatigue, fragmented attention and poorer quality of work on any given project.16

• If workers feel pressured to perform, they will not take advantage of provisions designed to support a work–life balance. For teachers, this pressure can take the form of unreasonable demands from administrators, a sense of loyalty and concern for colleagues, and an unwillingness to let students down.

• Beginning teachers and teachers on temporary contracts experience the additional pressure of insecure employment. When asked to take on additional responsibilities, teachers seeking permanent contracts are often afraid to say no for fear of damaging their chances of future employment.

Strategies for reducing work intensification and achieving a better work–life balance are unlikely to succeed unless school authorities and governments are willing to provide teachers with the resources they need and trust teachers to use these resources wisely in enhancing student learning and well-being.

Unless school authorities and governments begin to value human time and energy in schools, teachers will continue to be overworked and will be less able to participate fully in the transformation of Alberta schools.

Advocating for Conditions of Practice That Will Support Transformation

Based on the survey results, the top two bargaining and advocacy priorities of Rocky View teachers are (1) reducing the intensification of their work and (2) getting more embedded collaboration and preparation time. With reference to the first priority, respondents indicated that they would like more leave days, more

16 Brante (2009, 430) has this observation: “As teachers have been given more tasks while none have been taken away, we can expect teachers to have less time available to complete each task.”


flexibility in using their health-spending accounts and better compensation when they undertake extracurricular activities. Although wellness programs, more flexible health-spending accounts and additional leaves would be welcome supports for teachers, such initiatives alone are unlikely to significantly improve the work–life balance. Research on the use of benefits and flexible work arrangements suggests that employees are unlikely to avail themselves of these provisions if the culture of the organization encourages competitive behaviours.17

Although Rocky View teachers have nothing to lose by pursuing concrete bargaining objectives, they would, at the same time, be well advised to consider some longer-term strategies that address the root causes of the barriers that prevent them from fully meeting students needs and achieving a work–life balance. Survey respondents clearly understand that improving morale and teaching

effectiveness is an ongoing process.In consultation with leading experts on

transformational change, the Association has developed a framework for informed transformation (ATA 2010a, 42). The aspects of educational change identified in the framework are fully compatible with the changes and reforms that Rocky View teachers and administrators have indicated are priorities for them. The Association has also embarked on an initiative to identify the broad, transformative changes that will be necessary to equip Alberta’s K to 12 sector to truly meet the needs of 21st-century learners. It is the Association’s hope that this provincial initiative, along with the study of teachers in Rocky View, will contribute to the discussion about the kind of changes that Alberta needs to make to ensure that its public education system remains one of the best in the world.

17 The work–life balance issues facing teachers—overwork, blurred boundaries between home and work, and work intensification—are consistent with patterns apparent in the North American labour force in general. Veiga (2004) and Brannen (2005) observe that employees who have access to flexible, family-friendly benefits often do not take advantage of those benefits, likely because the culture of the organization for which they work encourages employees to be competitive. In such an environment, using benefits could have negative repercussions for one’s career. Workers’ immediate supervisors also play a significant role in determining whether workers feel safe in asking for time during work hours to deal with personal and/or family needs.


ReferencesAlberta Education. 2010a. Inspiring Education: A

Dialogue with Albertans. Edmonton, Alta: Alberta Education. Also available at http://www.inspiringeducation.alberta.ca/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=BjGiTVRiuD8%3d&tabid=124 (accessed November 9, 2011).

———. 2010b. Inspiring Action on Education. Edmonton, Alta: Alberta Education. Also available at http://ideas.education.alberta.ca/media/2905/inspiringaction%20eng.pdf (accessed November 9, 2011).

Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA). 2010a. The Courage to Choose: Emerging Trends and Strategic Possibilities for Informed Transformation in Alberta Schools: 2010–2011. Edmonton, Alta: Ata. Also available at http://www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/ATA/Publications/Research-Updates/PD-86-11c%20The%20Courage%20to%20Choose.pdf (accessed November 9, 2011).

———. 2010b. The Experience of Substitute Teaching in Alberta Schools. Edmonton, Alta: ATA. Also available at http://www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/ATA/Publications/Research-Updates/PD-86-15%20Experience%20of%20Substitute%20Teaching.pdf (accessed November 9, 2011).

———. 2011a. Substitute Teachers in Alberta: A Research Report. Edmonton, Alta: ATA. Also available at http://www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/ATA/Publications/Research-Updates/pd-86-22%20Substitute%20Teachers.pdf (accessed November 9, 2011).

———. 2011b. The Early Years of Practice: Interim Report of a Five-Year Study of Beginning Teachers in Alberta. Edmonton, Alta: ATA. Also available at http://www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/ATA/Publications/Research-Updates/pd-86-19%20THE%20EARLY%20YEARS%20OF%20PRACTICE.pdf (accessed November 9, 2011).

———. 2011c. The Impact of Digital Technologies on Teachers Working in Flexible Learning Environments. Edmonton, Alta: ATA. Also available at http://www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/

ATA/Publications/Research-Updates/PD-86-21%20Impact%20of%20Digital%20Technologies.pdf (accessed September 26, 2011).

Anderson, C. 2005. “The Tragically Neglected Economics of Abundance.” The Long Tail. Available at http://longtail.typepad.com/the_long_tail/2005/03/the_tragically_.html (accessed October 1, 2011).

Ballet, K, and G Kelchtermans. 2008. “Workload and Willingness to Change: Disentangling the Experience of Intensification.” Journal of Curriculum Studies 40, no 1: 47–67.

Bell, D, and L Bezanson. 2006. Career Development Services for Canadian Youth: Access, Adequacy and Accountability. Ottawa, Ont: Canadian Career Development Foundation.

Brannen, J. 2005. “Time and the Negotiation of Work–Family Boundaries: Autonomy or Illusion?” Time & Society 14, no 1: 113–31.

Brante, G. 2009. “Multitasking and Synchronous Work: Complexities in Teacher Work. Teaching and Teacher Education 25, no 3: 430–36.

Canadian Paediatric Society. 2009. Impact of Media Use on Children and Youth. Ottawa, Ont: Canadian Paediatric Society. Also available at www.cps.ca/english/statements/CP/pp03-01.htm#RECOMMENDATIONS (accessed November 7, 2011).

Chung-Yan, G. 2010. “The Nonlinear Effects of Job Complexity and Autonomy on Job Satisfaction, Turnover and Psychological Wellbeing.” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 15, no 3, 237–51.

Day, C, and Q Gu. 2010. The New Lives of Teachers. London: Routledge.

Dibbon, D. 2004. It’s About Time! A Report on the Impact of Workload on Teachers and Students. St John’s, Nfld: Memorial University.

Dyck-Hacault, G, and R Alarie. 2010. Teacher Workload: MTS Task Force on Teacher Workload Final Report. Winnipeg, Man: Manitoba Teachers’ Society.

Fullan, M. 2011. Choosing the Wrong Drivers for System Reform. East Melbourne, Australia: Centre for Strategic Education.


Green, F. 2004. “Work Intensification, Discretion and the Decline in Wellbeing at Work.” Eastern Economic Journal 30, no 4: 615–26.

Hargreaves, A. 2003. Teaching in the Knowledge Society: Education in the Age of Insecurity. New York: Teachers’ College Press.

Hargreaves, A, and D Shirley. 2009. The Fourth Way. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin.

Higgins, C, L Duxbury and K Johnson. 2004. Exploring the Link Between Work–Life Conflict and Demands on Canada’s Health Care System. Ottawa, Ont: Public Health Agency of Canada.

Honig, M I, and T C Hatch. 2004. “Crafting Coherence: How Schools Strategically Manage Multiple, External Demands.” Educational Researcher 33, no 8: 16–30.

Howard-Jones, P. 2011. The Impact of Digital Technologies on Human Wellbeing: Evidence from the Sciences of Mind and Brain. Oxford, UK: Nominet Trust.

Kamanzi, P C, M Riopel and C Lessard. 2007. School Teachers in Canada: Context, Profile and Work: Highlights of a PanCanadian Survey. Montreal, Que: University of Montreal.

Kelliher, C, and D Anderson. 2009. “Doing More with Less? Flexible Working Practices and the Intensification of Work.” Human Relations 63, no 1: 83–106.

Kelly, K. 2005. “We Are the Web.” Wired Magazine 13, no 8. Available at http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.08/tech.html (accessed June 14, 2011).

Koehler, M J, and P Mishra. 2009. “What Is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge?” Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education 9, no 1: 60–70.

Levy, P. 2001. Cyberculture. Minneapolis, Minn: University of Minnesota Press.

Looker, D, and V Thiessen. 2003. The Digital Divide in Canadian Schools: Factors Affecting Student Access

to and Use of Information Technology. Ottawa, Ont: Statistics Canada. Also available at http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-597-x/81-597-x2003001-eng.pdf (accessed November 9, 2011).

McLuhan, M. 1967. The Medium Is the Massage: An Inventory of Effects. Berkeley, Calif: Gingko.

———. 1964. Understanding Media. New York: Mentor.

McRae, P. 2011. “Forecasting the Future Over Three Horizons of Change.” Media Awareness Network of Canada (MNET). National Media Literacy Week Press Kit. Ottawa, Ont: MNET.

Naylor, C, and M White. 2010. The Worklife of BC Teachers in 2009. Vancouver, BC: British Columbia Teachers’ Federation.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 2009. Helping Youth to Get a Firm Foothold in the Labour Market. Paris, France: OECD. Available at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/54/50/43766254.pdf (accessed September 29, 2011).

Sarason, S. 1993. The Predictable Failure of Educational Reform. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass.

Schwartz, B. 2004. “The Tyranny of Choice.” Scientific American Magazine (December): 71–75.

Selwyn, N. 2011. Schools and Schooling in the Digital Age: A Critical Analysis. London: Routledge.

Shulman, L S. 1987. “Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform.” Harvard Educational Review 57, no 1: 1–22.

Veiga, J. 2004. “Toward Understanding Employee Reluctance to Participate in Family-Friendly Programs.” Human Resource Management Review 14, no 3: 337–51.

Zikaviktorsson, A, P Sundstrom and M Engwall. 2006. “Project Overload: An Exploratory Study of Work and Management in Multi-project Settings.” International Journal of Project Management 24, no 5: 385–39.


Appendix A: The Survey InstrumentPlease complete this survey and return it to your CSR staff representative. All responses will be kept confidential.

A. CURRENT TEACHING AND LEARNING CONDITIONS

1. Following are several key elements relating to your current conditions of professional practice. Use the scale below to indicate your degree of satisfaction with each element.

1 Very satisfied 2 Generally satisfied 3 Neutral 4 Somewhat dissatisfied 5 Very dissatisfied

Please circle the appropriate number

a. The size of your classes. 1 2 3 4 5b. Composition of your classes. 1 2 3 4 5c. Support for students with special needs. 1 2 3 4 5d. Support for teachers in the inclusive classroom model. 1 2 3 4 5e. Access to computers and other information technology. 1 2 3 4 5f. Access to print resources and textbooks. 1 2 3 4 5g. Access to professional development. 1 2 3 4 5h. Resources available for field trips. 1 2 3 4 5i. Requirements to supervise and undertake other assigned tasks. 1 2 3 4 5j. Physical condition of your classroom. 1 2 3 4 5k. Expectations to report student progress to parents. 1 2 3 4 5l. Support for students representing visible minorities. 1 2 3 4 5m. Support for English language learners (English as an Additional Language). 1 2 3 4 5

B. YOUR OVERALL WELL-BEING AS A TEACHER

2. Using the scale below, indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements:

1 Strongly agree 2 Agree 3 Neutral 4 Disagree 5 Strongly disagree


a. I can carry out my job without having to purchase materials out of my own pocket. 1 2 3 4 5b. I work less than 50 hours a week. 1 2 3 4 5c. I am able to balance my personal and work life. 1 2 3 4 5d. I would change careers if I could have the same salary and benefits. 1 2 3 4 5e. I see teaching as a lifelong career choice. 1 2 3 4 5f. I feel teaching in RVS brings me great satisfaction. 1 2 3 4 5g. I have positive collegial interactions with my teaching colleagues. 1 2 3 4 5h. I work in a safe environment free from harassment. 1 2 3 4 5i. I have positive relationships with students. 1 2 3 4 5j. I have positive relationships with parents. 1 2 3 4 5k. I am meaningfully involved in my school’s decision making. 1 2 3 4 5l. I feel valued and respected in my school. 1 2 3 4 5m. I have access to professional development/embedded learning time within the school day. 1 2 3 4 5n. My noninstructional duties interfere with my ability to teach. 1 2 3 4 5o. Technology has enhanced my ability to teach. 1 2 3 4 5


C. STUDENT ASSESSMENT AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

3. In the past few years, Rocky View School Division No 41 (RVSD) and Alberta Education have focused on assessment and reporting initiatives. These initiatives include assessment for learning and revisions to student reporting practices. Using the scale below, circle the number that reflects your stress level regarding various workload student reporting and assessment requirements.

1 Not applicable 2 Low 3 Moderate 4 High


a. Marking and evaluating student work. 1 2 3 4b. Administering and supervising provincial examinations. 1 2 3 4c. Analyzing student/school results of provincial examinations. 1 2 3 4d. Developing school-based assessments (ie, rubrics). 1 2 3 4e. Communicating with and responding to parents and students online. 1 2 3 4f. Completing digital report cards. 1 2 3 4g. Completing Individual Program Plans (IPPs). 1 2 3 4

D. TECHNOLOGIES FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING

4. In past years, the growth of technology such as hand-held digital devices has profoundly affected society at large. The following questions assess your impressions of these changes on teaching and learning in your school and in education generally. Using the scale below, indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements:



a. Digital technologies have significantly enhanced my students’ learning. 1 2 3 4 5b. Digital technologies have increased my workload. 1 2 3 4 5c. Digital technologies have enhanced my effectiveness as a teacher. 1 2 3 4 5d. Digital technologies have enhanced my professional development and learning. 1 2 3 4 5e. I have the skills I need to effectively use digital technologies. 1 2 3 4 5

5. Use the scale below to indicate your level of satisfaction with the role of digital technologies in your school.

1 Very satisfied 2 Satisfied 3 Neutral 4 Dissatisfied 5 Very dissatisfied


a. My level of access to digital technologies to meet the learning needs of students. 1 2 3 4 5b. My input regarding the acquisition of digital technologies. 1 2 3 4 5c. Policies regarding firewalls and student access to the Internet. 1 2 3 4 5d. Policies regarding the use of cellphones and hand-held devices. 1 2 3 4 5e. The use of digital reporting tools to report student progress. 1 2 3 4 5f. The effect of the growing use of digital technologies on the quality of my work life. 1 2 3 4 5


E. LOCAL 35 SERVICES AND SUPPORTS

6. Rocky View Local No 35 works on behalf of members on a number of specific fronts. Use the scale below to rate the local’s success in carrying out the following responsibilities:

1 Excellent 2 Good 3 Fair 4 Poor


a. Negotiating the collective agreement. 1 2 3 4b. Enforcing the terms and conditions of the collective agreement. 1 2 3 4c. Keeping members informed about local activities. 1 2 3 4d. Keeping the public informed about RVSD’s issues. 1 2 3 4e. Presenting a positive view of teachers and the work that they do. 1 2 3 4f. Representing teachers’ interests with the provincial Association. 1 2 3 4g. Engaging new teachers in the activities of the local. 1 2 3 4h. Supporting new teachers in the early years of practice. 1 2 3 4

7. Some members say that Rocky View Local No 35 would achieve greater success by being more assertive in advancing its goals, while others see benefit in a cooperative approach. Use the scale below to identify the most appropriate approach in terms of the issues listed.

1 A more assertive approach 2 A more cooperative approach 3 Indifferent


a. Collective bargaining. 1 2 3b. Improving classroom conditions. 1 2 3c. Dealing with non-instructional duties. 1 2 3d. Influencing the RVSD’s board of trustees. 1 2 3e. Student evaluation and reporting issues. 1 2 3

8. Your involvement as a member of the local can take on many roles. If you could make one recommendation to the local that would assist you in becoming more involved, what would it be?

F. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AND ADVOCACY PRIORITIES FOR LOCAL 35

9. Considering your current salary and overall benefits, how would you compare your economic standing relative to your community over the last three years? Check [] one.

Improved significantly

Improved somewhat

No change Declined somewhat

Declined significantly


10. Using the scale below, indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements:



a. RVSD values teachers’ views in determining key educational decisions and programs. 1 2 3 4 5b. RVSD values teachers’ views in planning and delivering Alberta’s Initiative for

School Improvement (AISI).1 2 3 4 5

c. RVSD values the professional judgment of its teachers. 1 2 3 4 5d. RVSD is a good place to work as a teacher. 1 2 3 4 5

11 The local is committed to advocating for improvements in the well-being of its members. Use the scale below to indicate the degree of priority that the local should place on its advocacy with RSVD in the following areas outside of salary and other compensation:

1 Very important 2 Somewhat important 3 Not important 4 Not sure


a. More professional development time during the school day. 1 2 3 4b. Better communication about professional development opportunities. 1 2 3 4c. Support for new teachers through reduced instructional load. 1 2 3 4d. Support for new administrators. 1 2 3 4e. Programs to raise awareness regarding cultural diversity. 1 2 3 4f. Improved access and flexibility for leaves. 1 2 3 4g. Better district processes related to awarding continuing contracts. 1 2 3 4h. Improved access and support for graduate work. 1 2 3 4i. Programs related to supporting wellness and work–life balance. 1 2 3 4j. More effective processes for consulting with the local on educational matters. 1 2 3 4

12. Considering your greatest needs as a teacher, if you could make one recommendation to the local in advocating for improved conditions of practice on your behalf, what would it be?

G. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Each year in Alberta, teachers are required to complete a teacher professional development growth plan (TPGP). The following questions will help to determine the degree of support teachers receive for achieving the goals identified in their growth plans.

13. How much professional autonomy and choice are you given in developing and meeting the goals identified in your teacher professional growth plan? Check () one:

High degree Some degree Little


14. Using the scale below, evaluate the usefulness of the following resources in helping you meet the goals you have identified in your teacher professional growth plan.

1 Very useful 2 Somewhat useful 3 Of little use 4 Not useful 5 Not utilized


a. Workshops offered by the district 1 2 3 4 5b. Workshops offered by Calgary Regional Consortium 1 2 3 4 5c. Workshops offered by Rocky View Local 1 2 3 4 5d. School-based PD activities 1 2 3 4 5e. Teachers’ conventions 1 2 3 4 5f. Specialist council conferences 1 2 3 4 5g. Other educational conferences 1 2 3 4 5h. Independent reading and self-study 1 2 3 4 5i. Online resources, websites 1 2 3 4 5j. Video conferencing 1 2 3 4 5k. Postsecondary education 1 2 3 4 5l. Other 1 2 3 4 5

H. DEMOGRAPHIC DATA

Check () only one response to each of the following questions.

15. Your years of teaching experience, including the current year.

1 5–9 15–19 Over 30 2–4 10–14 20–30

16. Your current teaching assignment is related exclusively or mainly to students in which level?

ECS/kindergarten Grades 5–8 Other combinations (specify) ______________________ Grades 1–4 Grades 9–12

17. Your current status:

Full-time Part-time Substitute

18. Your employment contract status:

Continuing Probationary Temporary

19. In which area is your school located?

Springbank and area North and east of Airdrie Cochrane (including Bearspaw and Westbrook) Chestermere and area Airdrie and area Langdon/Indus and area Other school (specify): ____________________________________________


20. Your current work assignment:

Classroom teacher School administrator only Substitute teaching Other (eg, non-school based, cyber-school) Combined classroom and administrative duties

21. Your age:

25 and younger 41–45 56–60 26–30 46–50 61–65 31–35 51–55 Over 65 36–40

22. Your gender:

Female Male

COOR-85a 2011 11