BC Teacher’s dispute 4DF assessment details


As promised, providing an explanation of the scores and reasons behind the 4DF graphic published on Friday covering the BC Teacher’s dispute.

First off, thanks again to those who have read that first blog post.  Second, the simpler explanation of the graphic is just that the bigger and more rounder the circle, the better.  For the scores on this assessment, only went up to a five point scale:

  • 0 – Leaders
  • 1 – BCTF / BC Government
  • 2 – Members (of both organizations)
  • 3 – Schools, including Management and Staff
  • 4 – Students
  • 5 – The Province

Four was the score the ratings generally revolved around as much of the strategy for both sides revolved around how they are seen to be serving the students.  Whether they could be considered to be addressing the interests of the province depended much on the economic, political, and/or social values involved.  Scores short of four meant their interests weren’t being fully met, in terms of number or the quality of education, whereas those greater than four as having a broader impact than the school system.  The ratings were mostly based on the actions and positions of the parties, though the impression they left with the students was sometimes considered.

Yes, this evaluation and its method is, by appearance, favored towards the side who is fighting harder for public education, however, this framework was developed to demonstrate and structurally illustrate how the public interest should be defined in terms of the overall effect on society, not through summation of individual interests. This doesn’t mean we sacrifice our children’s schooling, even those better suited for private schools, but does demand we look after interests beyond ourselves.

And yes, there are scores here that, upon review preparing this table, I’d want to reevaluate, but held them for consistency.  The conclusion remains the same, and the exercise, as with the model itself, is meant to demonstrate this perspective of what could define the public interest.

Providing the 4DF assessment graphic again for your reference.  Click here for he original post.

4DF BC Teachers graphic (Twitter) 2014-09-12

Broad-interest 4.25 3.75 BCTF’s position helps more students in the education system and through that, has a long term and broader impact on the students and their social view as they grow.  The Gov’t is more focused on economics rather than affect on the education system.  
Equality 4.50 3.50 The lessons of treating others equally start early which make it vital that the Gov’t ensure the resources for teachers to be attentive to every student are available. 
Interactivity 4.50 3.50 As with Equality, promoting Interactivity to students requires resources. For both dimensions, the Gov’t’s economic focus, as well as questions about private system support levels, raise doubts about their commitment to the public system.  
Generosity 4.25 3.75 Still favors the BCTF as their compensation demands have come down a fair way, but the Gov’t also has concerns about comparability with other public sector unions.  
Appreciative 4.50 3.50 Reflects the value by each side placed on the public education system and its impact on long term public interest. Also important toward instilling this value in our children.
Enabling 4.50 3.75 BCTF looks to educate and enable a broader range of students.  
Communicative 3.75 3.75 A positive development with the media silence as they talk over the weekend, but otherwise, both sides have been guilty of using communication to promote their position rather than truly attempting to achieve a solution to this dispute. 
Cooperative 4.50 3.50 Both sides also has not done well here on optics (BCTF could’ve been lower). Also important toward instilling this value in our children.
Future 4.50 4.25 Both sides looking for long term stability for different reasons.
Inclusive 4.50 3.50 Clearly the BCTF has more concerns about addressing the varying needs of all students in the school system.  
Universal 4.50 4.50 In principle, both intend for education to apply to all.
Economic (macro) 4.00 4.50 Gov’t more focused on the economic impacts of the issue.
Societal 4.50 3.50 BCTF paying much more attention to the social impacts of education.
Sustainable 4.00 4.25 Both parties taking different angles toward sustainability, with the Government having a larger responsibility.
External-based judgment 3.75 3.75 Not much indication either side is really listening to what the public is saying about the dispute, especially when it comes to getting the students back in school.
Detail 4.50 3.75 The Government’s economic focus and demand for consistency for public sector contracts are taking priority over student’s needs. 
Efficiency 4.00 4.00 Cannot address this dimensional well, but this is one which the bargaining process does press both sides toward the fair value of their positions.  
Creativity 4.25 3.75 Not too much can be said here about whether either side has been very creative in finding a solution to this dispute.  Can give a little more credit to the BCTF for continuing to seek the resources to promote this value to the students.
Diversity 4.25 3.75 Higher recognition from the BCTF side which constantly evolves due to demographics and greater awareness of student health and behavior issues. 
Complex 4.25 3.75 Needless to say this dispute is complex for both sides, but the Government has less credibility with its business-like focus.
Industrious 4.25 3.75 The BCTF’s demands for more resources is both more enabling and inspiring for the students. 
Excellence 4.25 3.50 Harder to have confidence in the Government’s priorities in student excellence with its economic-based position.  
Order 4.50 3.50 Probably could have narrowed the rating, but otherwise, still a category that needs resources for teachers to manage their classrooms.
Competitive 4.00 3.50 Resources are needed to keep the public system competitive, but the negotiations are driving it towards a minimum level.  
Truth 3.75 3.75 The manner the dispute has been played out in the media has not given the public much reason to be confident about the honesty of either side. 
Understand 4.00 4.00 Little reason to believe either side doesn’t understand the other’s position.  
Certainty 4.25 4.50 The Government has more reason to minimize uncertainty risk, especially with the legal cases still outstanding.  
Ability/Power 4.25 4.50 The score in this dimension reflects more how the Government has the greater power, and with it the broader impact, to control the direction of the dispute.  
Predictable 4.50 4.50 Along with certainty, both sides seek a predictability by which they can plan and conduct their work. 
Adapt 4.25 4.00 While teachers need to be able to adapt to their classroom conditions, respect is also given that the Government is representing school boards and management who are seeking flexibility to handle their responsibilities.
Knowledge 4.25 3.75 Generally favor the front-line worker, but again, respect that the Government side includes school boards and management who have their own expertise and experience. 
Intent 4.25 4.25 Both sides believe they are well intended in their motives for their disputes but from different directions.  
Average 4.26 3.87 From an overall standpoint, the BCTF position has a broader positive impact to the public interest that reaches beyond students.  The Government’s business-like approach appears to be willing to degrade the public system for economic reasons which is reflected in its average score falling short of the student domain of 4. 
Standard Deviation 0.242 0.353 This figure represents the fluctuation in the ratings around each other’s average for which the Government has the greater.  For this framework, this means its social impact is less stable, decreasing the probability that its maximum public interest is achievable.  
Posted in BC, Education, Labour Relations, Public Policy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: