Educate me, folks!
In 2003, the Ontario government cancelled OAC (grade 13), creating the 'double cohort,' a year where two successive years of high school students vied for the same university spots.
Today, the Toronto Star did a full page piece gauging reaction from students, faculty and administration about how it has affected their respective views on university learning.
What interested me the most was the discussion of students coming in younger and thereby being 'less prepared for running their own lives.' One student talked about how some of his peers were unprepared for the high-level math that had to be learned and thus some professors were concerned that they couldn't teach the material they needed to and so students weren't learning the required material.
Before I continue, let me say that I loved OAC. I have no qualms graduating older than others. It definitely helped me figure out the subjects I was interested and I was definitely more mature, so coping with living away was easier than it would've been if I had entered university after grade 12.
But, every other province push their students into university after grade 12. We are merely leveling with them in terms of age of entrance. So how is it that we don't hear of faculty or administration over yonder complaining about the lack of preparation and maturity in their students? Surely Ontarians aren't any less mature than any other young adult in Canada? Are we more needy? A greater sense of entitlement in needing others to do things for 1st yr students? Are we still getting used to the idea of 18 yr olds entering university? Is it that the elementary and high school curriculum just hasn't caught up with the material needed for students to enter university?
Earlier in the year, Ontario talked about removing calculus from the high school curriculum completely, wanting to leave it to the university to teach the subject. That didn't seem like a good idea since even in places like BC, they give an introduction to calculus (I personally needed a full term to understand it...) in high school.
So all you readers (the 2 or 3 of you) involved in or know of people involved in the education system, help me out here. Why are we where we are?
1 comment:
Why are we where we are?
That's a pretty broad question, even with relation to the Ontario education system and the transition between secondary and post-secondary schools.
However,
As to the more specific question of "how is it that we don't hear of faculty or administration over yonder complaining about the lack of preparation and maturity in their students?" I think the answer is simply that it is still an issue in Ontario because the change is so recent.
The first generation of 4-year highschool grads are just going through university now, so its an easy story for the media to do. Interview some students and professors, guage reaction, fill some columns. Not that it isn't a news-worthy story, it is, because the changes are still recent. But that's the main reason you don't hear similar complaints in other provinces (at least not in full page news reports). In other provinces a four year highschool education and its effect on university isn't news.
Should Ontario have kept OAC?
I don't know. In part, I liked having the extra year, to spend relatively responsibility free, to save for university, to enjoy high-school and teenager things. But then, at other times, that fifth year just dragged on and on, and for a lot of people high-school isn't any fun.
But what the decision came down to for the government, I'm sure, is that eliminating a year of high-school saves public spending on education in the long-term. After that, everything else is logistical details.
Post a Comment