An Alternative History of Alberta, 2004-2013

During Alberta's 2012 Provincial election, I became interested in the Alberta Party. I wrote about them here, here, here and here. Even though the Alberta Party won exactly zero seats, what interested me then still interests me now. 

I'm not naive enough to think that the Alberta Party will be governing this province anytime soon, but I am optimistic enough to believe that the Alberta Party can have some influence on those who do govern. I believe this because I think there are enough Albertans who are tired of plugging their nose and voting for the PCs or the Wildrose. 

While The Alberta Party understands that oil and gas are one of Alberta's greatest economic natural resources, they also understand the need to broaden our economic base by investing in Alberta's other most important natural resource --our people. I think there are enough Albertans who are tired of our volatile budgets that stakes our health and education on the price of a barrel of oil.

I think there are enough Albertans who are tired of politicians being the voice of government to the people when they should be the voice of the people to government. 

This was written by the Alberta Party's new leader, Greg Clark who tweets here. This post was originally found here.

by Greg Clark

It's October 2nd, 2013. Our strong energy sector has been the envy of the world ever since Greenpeace used our province as an example of responsible resource development because we've reduced our net carbon emissions every year since 2010, in spite of increased production from our oilsands. The Keystone XL pipeline is nearing completion and the Enbridge / First Nations Pipeline Corp. joint venture to build a bitumen pipeline that terminates at an upgrader on the BC coast is expected to start construction next summer.

There's a hard cap of 30 kids per class in high school, 25 in junior high and 20 in elementary school, although most schools are well under those numbers. Our healthcare system is the envy of the rest of Canada and is widely regarded as one of the best in the world. Social indicators like child poverty and suicide rates are dropping. Our universities and colleges turn out graduates ready to participate in the workforce and make a difference in a changing world.

Things aren't perfect of course. Prices for natural gas are lower than we'd like as a result of the rapid rise of shale gas, but they're higher than they would have been had we not started our transition from coal-fired power to natural gas and renewables 10 years ago. And there's reason for even more optimism; we're only a year away from the completion of a 2 BCF (billion cubic feet) pipeline to BC's new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facilities, with plans to twin the pipe in the next five years. The pipelines are being built by private industry but they are economic at this scale because of royalty incentives provided by the Alberta Government to create new markets and increase demand for Alberta's most abundant hydrocarbon, which happens to be the transition fuel to a low carbon future. Our government worked hard to make this happen. Everyone agrees that starting with the goal of creating a "win-win-win" for first nations, BC and Alberta was the key to our success.

Oh, and Albertans pay half the income tax we did a decade ago and we're on our way to zero. That's because we've been able to fund a significant portion of government operations from the interest generated by investments in the Heritage Savings Trust Fund, something we started taking seriously right after we paid off the debt in 2004. In addition to having more money in our pockets, Alberta's business community is more diversified than it's been in recent memory due to the attractive investment climate and prudent investments in clean energy technologies and energy services innovation, which are funded by Alberta's carbon tax. Alberta's success led the Economist magazine to call our province the "Silicon Valley of Energy".

The path to get here wasn't easy; it took a lot of political will, a long-term view, a lot of listening and some brave moves by the government of the day. First, it was decided that we would keep our progressive income tax rather than moving to a flat tax, but the government heeded Albertans' calls to stay away from a sales tax. We also kept the healthcare premium, although it was indexed to income to make it more fair. Alberta kept a lid on expenses by building a relationship of trust and respect between the government and public servants of all kinds; teachers, nurses and doctors included. Although it cost some support at the ballot box, the government resisted the temptation to ramp up spending in an election year just to win votes, but benefitted our key systems and the people who work in them by not cutting spending immediately after the election. Stable funding has led to much better services and outcomes across the board, which means the people working in those systems are proud of their work and feel their pay is fair.

Of course most of this is fantasy, but it's the kind of Alberta we could be living in if successive PC governments had the vision and guts to make it happen. It's not too late, but we need to start making these changes today. We need politicians who are willing to lay out a bold agenda and replace short term vote-seeking with a long term plan.

And that's why I joined the Alberta Party. We're a party with a vision for long term prosperity in our province. We're willing to invest today to build for tomorrow. We're willing to take a stand even when it's not politically expedient. It's what everyone who has come to our province for over 100 years has done. It's in our DNA and it's the right thing to do.

Now, we just need a government willing to do it.

The Alberta Party: a new political alternative

The 2012 Alberta Provincial Election is likely to bring about some change with how politics are done in Alberta. It would appear that the Progressive Conservative Party's 40 year reign of power is coming to an end.

I am a fifth generation Albertan whose family has farmed in the Red Deer area for over 100 years. In 1907, my great-great grandfather James Bower purchased the first International Harvester gasoline tractor in western Canada and in 1909 he became the first president of the United Farmers' Association.

While I still live and work on the family farm, I am also a teacher. After 10 years in a middle school, I moved to teach at the Red Deer Regional Hospital's Unit 39 (Children's Psychiatric Assessment Unit).
While my family has an appreciation for tradition we have also thrived as pioneers with an entrepreneurial and humanitarian spirit.

In order to improve, we have to change. If we aren't changing, we're standing still, and because the world never stands still, standing still means we risk irrelevancy.

However, change for the sake of change is no better than tradition for the sake of tradition. We must be acutely mindful of our choices.

For the first time in my life, I feel the need to vote for someone other than the Progressive Conservatives.

I really don't have a problem with Alison Redford. I think she has the experience and education to be a progressive leader, but I don't think her party wants her. Alberta's Progressive Conservatives have been dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st Century, and I don't think even Redford can get the PCs to move from their last out of the past mentality.

So what are my alternatives to the Progressive Conservatives?

I've come to two conclusions:

1. WILDROSE PARTY

-Ultimately, I am unsure how Alberta's education and health care systems would survive the Wildrose.

-I can't trust a party of politicians who have to be bribed by their own party with $1000 to behave appropriately during an election.

-I have no idea how the Wildrose can get away with elaborate promises that involve large savings plans, tax payer dividends, balancing the budget and limiting spending increases to population growth plus inflation while allegedly NOT CUTTING front line services for health, education, municipalities and seniors.

--Danielle Smith will unleash social and political chaos unlike anything Alberta has seen. For a brilliant read on conscience rights see David King's post.

-As an educator and a human being, I can't support a political party and leader who condones bigotry.

-I follow Education policy in Alberta and The United States very carefully and it is crystal clear to me that The Wildrose's Education policy is a page straight from the American Education Reform Playbook. Of course neither come out and say they want to destroy public education -- instead they sell their privatization agenda by talking about choice and competition. Competition is for the strong. Public education is for everyone. See the problem? Collaboration trumps competition. Always.

-The Wildrose would be happy to throw education and health care to the free market where many shadow industries await like vultures to turn a profit off of Albertans' needs.

-If the Progressive Conservatives have a "last out of the past" mentality, then it is the Wildrose who are committed to leading us straight into the past.

2. THE ALBERTA PARTY

Glenn Taylor, Leader of the Alberta Party

-Any time there is a close election coupled with a need for change, some people talk about "voting strategically". In Alberta's case, some people are so desperate for change that they are willing to vote for a perceived lesser evil (Wildrose) in a bid to vote against a greater evil (Progressive Conservatives). The problem with strategic voting is that it invariably maintains the status quo by scaring people out of voting with their hearts and minds for real change. I refuse to resign myself to holding my nose and voting for the Wildrose or the Progressive Conservatives out of fear of the other one.

-I struggle with the idea that funding for things like education and health-care should be based on the price of a barrel of oil. While The Alberta Party understands that oil and gas are one of Alberta's greatest economic natural resources, they also understand the need to broaden our economic base by investing in Alberta's other most important natural resource -- our people. Couple the need for softening the effects of our boom and bust cycles with their vision of a fiscally responsible government (with balanced books) and I think The Alberta Party is on to something.

-Despite being excluded from the main stream media's Provincial Leader's Debate, The Alberta Party refrained from whining and instead engaged in getting their message out via social networking. This is the kind of creative, constructive and innovative thinking that I'm looking for.

-Democratic renewal is at the heart of The Alberta Party's policies. Bringing decision-making closer to the people is a critical part of their approach. MLAs should be citizens’ voice to government, not government’s voice to us.

-As an educator, I'm excited to see their education policy focus on making education funding more stable and consistent. I'm also relieved to see that they are dedicated to ending Alberta's over reliance on standardized testing and reduce grade 12 Diplomas from 50% to a more reasonable 30% of a student's report card grade. I'm also confident that The Alberta Party is committed to continuing the transformation of our province's education system by taking action on what Albertans told the government they wanted done with their schools.

The more I look at the Alberta Party's policies, the more I think they are the breath of fresh air Alberta needs.

Robert Reich on the American Economy

I'm not an economist nor will I claim to know much about the economy (but I'm learning), however, I found this 2 minute video very interesting.

It would appear that Warren Buffett might agree with at least some of what Reich has to say. Buffett wrote in the New York Times:

My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.

I am currently reading Reich's book Aftershock. Here's a synopsis from it's back cover:

When the nation’s economy foundered in 2008, blame was directed almost universally at Wall Street bankers. But Robert B. Reich, one of our most experienced and trusted voices on public policy, suggests another reason for the meltdown. Our real problem, he argues, lies in the increasing concentration of wealth in the hands of the richest Americans, while stagnant wages and rising costs have forced the middle class to go deep into debt. Reich’s thoughtful and detailed account of where we are headed over the next decades—and how we can fix our economic system—is a practical, humane, and much-needed blueprint for restoring America’s economy and rebuilding our society.

Rick Orman vs Doug Horner on Testing

On August 10, Doug Horner announced at the Alberta Teachers Association's Summer Conference Progressive Conservative leadership Q and A that he if elected as Premier of Alberta that he would eliminate grade 3 Provincial Achievement Tests.

Horner rightfully received a room full of applause. After all, this is simply the logical conclusion to what Motion 503 started in spring 2009 when it called for the government to do away with grade 3 provincial achievement tests in favour of an alternative assessment for learning.

There are lots of reasons to oppose standardized testing, but that's not what I want to do first.

Instead, I want to challenge how one of the other candidates, Rick Orman, has chosen to oppose Doug Horner's move to abolish Grade 3 Provincial Achievement Tests. Here's how Orman's website responded to Horner:

"The education system works best when there is clear communication and understanding between teachers, parents, school administrators, and government," said Orman. "Trying to win the support of one group with a ploy like this only polarizes groups and entrenches respective positions. 

"I'm sure the teachers in our province wouldn't appreciate dealing with thousands of angry parents who believe their children are falling behind, after a measure like this is invoked."

First of all, you would be hard pressed to find many teachers in Alberta who would support grade 3 Provincial Achievement Testing.

Secondly, because test anxiety has become it's own subfield of educational psychology,  I doubt you could find many parents who would defend subjecting their 8 and 9 year olds through hours of standardized testing.

Thirdly, the results of these tests are not returned to parents or teachers until the children are already done grade three and moved on to grade four. This is one of many reasons why these tests can not be used as a diagnostic tool to actually help teachers help children learn better. 

To use parents and teachers as a reason to not remove the grade 3 Provincial Achievement Tests makes Orman either uninformed or deceitful. 

However, Orman leaves himself an out:

"If there is clear evidence that testing is not in the best interest of students, then it should be eliminated - but only if resources are allocated to address parents' legitimate concerns that their children are not keeping up to the curriculum."

My first question to Rick Orman and others who drag their feet when it comes to moving away from standardized testing: Have you looked to see what the research says about the costly effects standardized testing has on teaching and learning?

If not, may I suggest a few links for your reading pleasure:

The Limits of Standardized Tests for Diagnosing and Assisting Student Learning

Basing decisions on about teachers and schools on test results damages education

Standardized Testing: Seperating Wheat Children from Chaff Children

Standardized Testing and Its Victims

The Myth of Standardized Testing: Why they don't tell you what you think they tell you

The Case Against Standardized Testing: Raising the Scores, Ruining the Schools

Ted Morton and Education

On August 10 I attended a Progressive Conservative leadership question and answer session at the Alberta Teachers Association's Summer Conference. All six candidates attended: Doug Horner, Gary Mar, Allison Redford, Rick Orman, Doug Griffiths and Ted Morton.

I posted a summary of what the candidates said here.

Ted Morton

Afterward, the candidates made themselves available for discussion with individual teachers, so I approached Ted Morton.

Here is a summary of our discussion.

I introduced myself as a teacher and a farmer from Red Deer. Ted was very kind and asked me a number of questions about my family's farm. After some pleasantries I shifted the conversation to education.

During the Q & A the candidates were asked about whether they thought the Alberta Teachers Association should be restructured (read: separate union functions from professional functions perhaps similar to British Columbia). No candidate thought it would be appropriate for government to meddle in what is the teacher's responsibility to organize themselves.

Morton's response went something like this: student achievement in Alberta is very high so I see no need to fix what isn't broken.

Such a statement might at first seem awfully benign but whenever I hear someone use the words student achievement I always stop them and ask what they mean by student achievement. Sadly, student achievement has come to mean nothing more than higher test scores. And so that was my question to Ted Morton: what do you mean when you say student achievement?

Morton's response went something like this:

I am first referring to our scores on standardized testing. We test out well in comparison to other places in Canada and the world. But I know that there are other important things that are not a part of those scores that are more anecdotal evidence.

I then asked him if he was familiar with the American Education system and some of the troubles they are experiencing. His response was something like this:

Well, I know they rank like 30 something in the world in some subjects which is lower.

My response to Morton:

Ted, if all you know about a country, state, province, city, school district, school, classroom or an individual student's education are their test scores, then you don't know much about their education. If you know that some of that other anecdotal evidence is just as, or maybe even more, important than the test scores, then when you say student achievement you need to stop meaning test scores and start meaning the things that the tests can never measure like empathy, responsibility, ethics, creativity and sense of humor.

I then asked him if he was familiar with how the Americans are attempting to hold teachers "accountable" for student "achievement" by tying teacher pay to test scores. He was not familiar.

I asked him if he was familiar with Campbell's Law. He was not. So I took a minute to inform him why this was important for the Albertan context. It went something like this:

Every time we take something as complex and messy as real learning and reduce it to something as artificially and conveniently simplistic as a test score we distort and distract everyone from what is really going on in Alberta schools.

When test scores drive education two things happen. Firstly, the learning opportunities kids get are narrowed significantly to merely what will be tested and secondly, schools built on real learning and good teaching are turned into nothing more than test preparation factories and children into data.

When we place enormous importance and high stakes on any single measurement, like standardized test scores, Campbell's Law tells us that that measurement will become corrupted and will no longer serve as a reliable and valid indicator for the social processes it was suppose to monitor.

In the end, all politicians should heed what one American politician meant when he said:

Making students accountable for test scores works well on a bumper sticker and it allows many politicians to look good by saying that they will not tolerate failure. But it represents a hollow promise. Far from improving education, high- stakes testing marks a major retreat from fairness, from accuracy, from quality, and from equity.

While I can empathize with how Ted Morton might have felt at a Teachers' Conference, which might be described as the equivalent to dropping a vile of blood in a shark tank, I think Morton would have faired far better had he provided something more than familiar hollow promises.

PC Leadership Q & A

While attending the Alberta Teachers Association's Banff Summer Conference, I had the chance to attend the Progressive Conservative leadership question and answer session.

Below is a list of some of the things each candidate said. I tried my best to only record what they said without my input. I typed this quickly while they talked so go easy on judging my grammar.

TED MORTON

• Public education is a priority
• Former teacher. Wife was a former teacher.
• Teachers are often most influential people in children's lives.
• Best K-12 system in Canada. One of the best K-12 systems in the world.
• Change: Professional development is important. Success is built on enthusiasm between teacher and student. Choice is important - it creates enthusiasm. Chemistry is created through choice.
• Charters: Friends of people who attend charter schools and sees great enthusiasm at charters and private schools. Supports money following the child to create diversity and choice. Supports current system of funding 70% of money follows a child to a private school.
• Funding: Government got caught between teacher contracts and the economy. Still supports long-term contracts but with some flexibility. With Ted Morton government there will be no public service cuts because there will be no debt.
• Rural Schools: Supports status quo.
• Only candidate that does not believe the funding formula should be changed but you want sustainable and predictable funding - will achieve this with long-term flexible contracts.
• Critical of the United States and their public cuts. 
• ATA: achievement tests show us the system is working. Why change it? Collaboration with ATA about both financial and educational priorities.
• If we stick with the status quo - we won't have cuts.
• Peter Lougheed's vision of a sustainable saving's plan - Heritage Savings Plan - 
• Give students get back up to $20,000 of their post-secondary education over 7 years.

DOUG GRIFFITHS

• web site first policy
• 56% of Albertans are under 40.
• Farmer and teacher. Taught elementary and middle school.
• Two children 5 & 2.
• Change: success in the classroom is largely dependent on teachers. We don't have the best schools in Canada, we have the best teachers. If you don't give the tools teachers need is like asking a carpenter to build a house without a hammer. Technology comes second to focusing on supporting teachers.
• Charters: Public funding should fund public education. Specialized charters and private schools should not be funded publicly. Opt out of public system, you pay for it yourself.
• Funding: cutting education is like selling the top-soil off the farm. Funding is set up to make schools look poor.
• Rural schools: not a fan of funding following the students - creates inequity for low population schools. A school loses 3 students and loses 15 thousand dollars. School can't make up that money. We need more community minded schools. A community losing a school is not an option.
• ATA: we can't have an education system without the ATA and the teachers we have. Young teachers are graduating and are mistreated, squeezed out or discarded. There is no need for animosity between government and ATA. 
• Multi-graded classes and total lack of professional development time is a major problem. When I came out of university, I had more questions than answers. Professional development is how we maintain our excellence.
• We spend 36 billion a year. We depend on unstable areas such as taxes and oil revenues.
• The only candidate who supported more taxes if it went into education.
• It is stupid to cut education. It sabotages our future.

RICK ORMAN

• Former labor minister
• Three priorities: accessible healthcare, excellent education and safe communities
• Resources in the classroom is a primary focus
• Change: we need to attract top-notch educators - and this starts with our post-secondary institutions. Address pressures - learning disabilities, language barriers - top priority is resources in the classroom. Teachers are not police officers or social workers. Predictable funding, leading edge technologies.
• Charters: Funding doesn't need to follow the student to private schools. Government might want money in private schools to ensure some control over what goes on there.
• Funding: Government has been unpredictable and unreliable with funding. 
• ATA: It's up to the ATA to conduct their affairs. Fully supports the right to organize. It's not up to government to decide how the ATA conducts its business. 
• Asking about raising taxes is the wrong question. We have the money. We need to ask why our priorities are not education.

ALLISON REDFORD

• Focusing on kids who are at-risk whether they are in health or education system.
• Trust is what will allow us to change
• Inspiring Education was an important step but failed to garnish trust between stakeholders.
• Change: Refocus and go back to heart of education. Change the way classrooms are working. Support teachers by looking at things teachers have been asked to do. Rethink curriculum. Schools are much more complicated than they were years ago. This work happens inside and outside of the classroom.
• Charters: remembers when charter schools arrived in Calgary. If public education doesn't respond to parent and student needs then charters pop up. If public system meets the needs then we don't need private system. Real danger of public education becoming a second tier education.
• Funding: Long term sustainable and predictable funding. We need to honour contracts. We have to change the relationship we have with teachers. 
• Funding should be made by educational needs not infrastructure. 
• ATA: The government needs to talk with you and work with you. We need you. We need to trust each other and stop framing the conversation. Fully supports ATA. Wants a greater relationship.
• Lack of sustainable and predictable funding is hijacking education dialogue and creates predictable crisises. 
• In government, social programs and education are the first to get cut. Always. Prepared to put social programs and education as a priority.
• We can judge ourselves by how we treat those who are most vulnerable.
• The Education Act introduced this spring was not good enough.
• We need labour peace so that we can do the jobs we are suppose to be doing.
• Education is a huge part of our active economy.

GARY MAR

• Wife is a teacher.
• Former Education Minister
• Linked education with economy
• Students need to be prepared to be competitive in a competitive world.
• Mentioned Knowledge, Skills & Attitudes a number of times.
• Change: Wrap around services are needed to serve needs of children that go beyond the classroom.
• We can rethink curriculum but only if we are deeply engaged in dialogue with all stakeholders.
• Need early testing to identify kids that need help early.
• Charters: Very focused on outcomes - reading, writing and maths. Not concerned with who delivers the prescribed curriculum - charters, public, private. 
• Funding: We need stable and predictable funding. You can't plan without knowing where your funding is coming from inside of 3 years. Class size is important but having a less kids but with 5 kids with profound learning disabilities.
• Rural: we need to inspire those from small communities to become professionals for their small communities.
• ATA: Very supportive of the ATA. I am on the record to be opposed to splitting ATA. We can't do much without collaboration. We need wrap-around services. 
• There is a definitive linkage - cause and effect- between health and education.
• Early identification for children who need support. It's easier to bring health services into education where the kids are than dragging the kids to the health system.
• Changing taxes or royalties is not a priority.
• Huge administration cost for providing support for the most fragile.
• Some say progressive conservative is an oxymoron, but that isn't true. Important for government to maintain high expectations and standards. 
• Ultimately people will come to Alberta because it is an interesting place to be.
• Near the top of almost every Albertan is a great education.

DOUG HORNER

• Former agriculture minister
• Wants success in the classroom for our kids. Teachers need to be supported. Government needs to change how they do things. 
• Wants to work in partnership with teachers.
• Change: measure things together. Remove grade 3 PAT. Move to sampling rather than census. Change things like curriculum but only with teachers cooperation.
• Charters: I have faith in the public system. We need to properly fund public education. We need choice with private, public and charter schools.
• Funding: Do we value education? If yes, then how do we do stable and predictable. Separate the labor debate from the education debate.
• Rural Schools: Make rural communities economically viable. I don't want an Alberta where you come and make your money and you leave. We need to help rural communities to meet their needs to make it viable to live there.
• We are not poor. We need
• When things get tough in the financial field, it's time to buy.
• ATA: our education discussions get hijacked by talking about money. 
• When funding is unpredictable and unstable, the education debate are stunted. 
• Access to the health system is a major problem. We need a registered nurse in our schools. Wrap-around services. 
• There is a difference between fiscal responsibility and fiscal restraint. We need to fund education properly. Period. 
• We do have a debt problem in that we have an infrastructure debt.
• We have to redefine what it means to be a progressive conservative. I am not a unite the right candidate.