‘Tired old script’ is not so tired

Re: “B.C.’s curriculum for failure,” comment, May 13. In trying to understand Tara Houle’s contrarian objections, I found myself distracted by her use of emotive language and her ad hominem attack on the education minister.

Houle begins by writing that “lifelong learning, technology, communication, collaboration and critical thinking skills,” as expounded by the education minister and educational leaders, is a “tired old script.” I suppose the same could be said of healthy eating.

Houle goes on to fault the minister for promoting what “he’s in charge of selling,” as though the opposite were more logical, and then she concludes with an insult, calling the minister “desperate” for doing what the ministry purports to do.

Houle further states that a rework of the English 12 exam will “no longer measure anything significant.” Does she mean to say that the data generated can’t be measured and will be statistically insignificant?

It is unclear what her statement means.

To add weight to her argument for retaining the current exam, she cites the support of a group (numbers please) of teachers who are “dedicated and knowledgeable,” presumably unlike those in support of updating.

The reader learns that regular classroom teachers (as opposed to the irregular ones) are unable to speak publicly, educational gurus are a dangerous breed and little children are dragging their lunch buckets to tutoring.

In short, this is the “tired” old debate of empirical evidence gathered through exams versus classroom assessment. Both still exist, always have and likely always will. R.N. Craig Victoria