For the Love of Learning

Volume III: The Educators

Chapter 12 - Section A: Professional issues

A statistical snapshot

In 1992, there were approximately 120,000 full-time teachers in Ontario, with another 10,000 designated as part-time. Over the past several years, about 3,000 new teachers have entered the profession each year. Of the active teachers in Ontario, 84 percent hold at least one university degree.

Approximately 62 percent of all full-time teachers in the province are women - a percentage that is expected to remain constant or even to grow in the next few years. However, only 31 percent of Ontario principals or vice-principals are women, and among senior school-board personnel, the percentage of women is even lower: approximately 20 percent of supervisory officers, and 5 percent of directors of education are women. Beyond the issue of gender, there has been significant concern about the under-representation of minority groups in the profession. Although no provincial data exist, some board employment equity surveys show few minority and aboriginal teachers, and we have no reason to believe that this is not a province-wide phenomenon.

A recent cross-country survey of over 17,000 teachers, conducted by Alan King and Marjorie Peart for the Canadian Teachers' Federation (CTF), indicates that significant numbers of teachers are experiencing difficulties with, and have second thoughts about, teaching.(1) In this regard, however, teachers may not be significantly different from members of other professions: changing societal conditions and decreased faith in social institutions have created new pressures and uncertainties for many people in all fields.

In its most profound form, teachers' stress is manifested in a concern about their physical safety in the school. In a 1991 survey conducted by the Ontario Teachers' Federation (OTF), teachers were asked to respond to the statement: "I worry about being physically injured by some students in this school." Twenty percent responded "yes," with frequency ranging from "sometimes" to "almost always." The study cited 441 reported major episodes of student abuse of teachers in the preceding three years in Ontario. In the study, major abuse was defined as physical assault or threatening with a weapon. The same study listed 6,300 cases of minor abuse.

Why they become, and stay, teachers

According to the CTF survey, the majority of teachers consistently maintain that they enter and remain in the profession primarily for reasons related to the nature of teaching itself. When asked to rank why they entered teaching, 55 percent rated "to work with young people" as very important; 36 percent rated "to render an important service" as very important; and 35 percent rated "interest in subject area" as very important. "Length of school year" was rated as very important by 21 percent, while 5 percent rated "status" as very important.

Other research studies(2) support the finding that most teachers tend to enter, and remain in, the profession because of the satisfaction of relating to students.

The culture of teaching

The "culture of teaching" refers to the deeply embedded but not always recognized patterns that shape the nature of work in schools. One of the distinguishing characteristics of the culture of teaching is that it is regulated by the annual cycle of the school year and by the compartmentalization of the school day. Ironically, despite the highly structured context for teaching, the task is, by its nature, open ended and not clearly defined. Collective agreements and contracts establish minimal working conditions, but the majority of teachers go far beyond these requirements. The personalities, gifts, and needs of the unique combination of students a teacher encounters each year determine the real working conditions of the teacher, namely, what goes on in the classroom.

As schools and school days are currently organized, teachers tend to work, plan, and teach individually. Teacher successes and failures, unless they are spectacular, tend to be private and largely anonymous. While this laissez-faire structure allows gifted teachers to shine, they often do so in isolation. It does not encourage creative interaction with colleagues and does not foster a spirit of excellence. Teachers in difficulty frequently struggle in silence, and generally do not benefit from a coherent program of formative professional assistance. This may account for the CTF finding (cited earlier) that a positive relationship with administrators is more central to teacher job satisfaction than a positive relationship with colleagues.

According to many researchers, several characteristics of the culture of teaching inhibit professional growth and co-ordination of staff energy to resolve broad-based school problems.(3) The same characteristics were also consistently described by teachers during the public hearings and in subsequent written submissions. It is clear that any effort at educational reform must address these concerns.

The isolation of individual teachers within the profession is the most frequently identified characteristic of the culture of teaching. The implications of this isolation, for the teacher and the system, are profound. It limits access to new ideas and better solutions; makes recognition of success difficult; and, according to Ontario education writers Michael Fullan and Andy Hargreaves, permits incompetence to "exist and persist to the detriment of students, colleagues and teachers themselves."(4) Others suggest that in a system where "shared problem-solving rarely occurs and teachers are expected to work things out on their own," it is to be expected that possibilities for stimulation and growth will be limited.(5)

Of course, teachers need autonomy and discretion to make professional judgments or decisions independently. However, rigid school timetables and structures often minimize professional interaction, and make the formation of collegial staff groupings almost impossible. Both research and teacher experience indicate that the best professional development of teachers, no matter what their experience or skill level, takes place in the context of shared planning and problem-solving with other professionals. According to Judith Warren Little, a noted Californian education writer:

The way teachers relate to their colleagues has a substantial impact on their beliefs about good teaching, and on their development as teachers. The demographics mentioned earlier (120,000 teachers currently in the profession and 3,000 new ones each year), indicate that it would be better to direct energies and resources towards improving current teacher practice, rather than relying solely on transforming the way new teachers, who constitute less than 3 percent of the profession, are trained.

The second problem characteristic of the culture of teaching is the pervasive sense of overload that teachers experience. Expectations of the school system have increased dramatically, without any clear identification of priorities or adequate professional development. Many teachers feel unable to carve out a degree of manageability in their work; the result is a siege mentality.

Elementary-grade teachers in particular can no longer reasonably be expected to cover all areas of the curriculum by themselves, and even those who are most knowledgeable and adaptable cannot be expert in all subjects. Teachers are beginning to feel overwhelmed by the pressures, by the combination of academic, behavioural, and emotional needs. It is an almost laughable understatement to say that we are expecting a great deal of our teachers.

This sense of overload has been compounded by the educational reforms and restructuring experienced over the last decade in particular. The destabilization of the education system by imposed educational initiatives has become a particular problem in Ontario. In the CTF survey, teachers were asked to respond to the statement: "Teachers in this province have meaningful input into the formation of educational policies in this province/territory." Ontario ranked last in the country, with only 14 percent of teachers responding in the affirmative.(7) This is in spite of the fact that many teachers are involved in the development of Ministry guidelines and documents, rounds of consultation about educational reform initiatives, and consultations between government and federations. One of the aggravating factors, of course, is the sheer size of Ontario. It is difficult for a group as large as the 120,000 teachers to feel they have meaningful input into provincial policy.

When the issue of overload is combined with professional isolation, the understandable result may be teachers who are somewhat defensive about issues of professional growth and evaluation, or reluctant to initiate reform.

A final characteristic of the culture of teaching is that teaching is structured as a flat career. Progress within the profession involves leaving the classroom and moving into an administrative position, or into a position with a teachers' federation. This frequently deprives classrooms of superior teachers and has skewed formal professional development toward administrative credentialism.

These observations suggest that emphasis should be placed on expanding and strengthening professional support for teachers. We must encourage excellent teachers to remain in the classroom, and provide them with continuous opportunities for professional growth. Recent research shows that schools differ in the extent to which they provide "school-level structures...to foster planning and problem-solving" and "a supportive school-level professional community and opportunities for reflection."(8)

Although large numbers of teachers succeed in maintaining high professional standards and enthusiasm for students and the classroom, there are obviously legitimate concerns.

The teacher and time

Teachers in North America are generally expected to spend their working time in classrooms with students, although collective agreements in Ontario now provide for some preparation time. However, the situation is quite different in China, Taiwan, and Japan, where teachers are given time to work with colleagues on a daily basis. An eight-hour day is structured so that they are in charge of classes only three-fifths of their time in school, and teaching is itself a group effort. They spend their time together discussing teaching issues, reviewing and improving lessons and problems for students, and otherwise working at becoming better at what they do.

Are there ways to free up time for Ontario teachers to work collaboratively this way? One possibility relates to another of our engines for change, our emphasis on building stronger links between schools and communities. We suggest that the overloaded curriculum, especially at the elementary level, be addressed by distinguishing between the mandate of the school and the responsibilities of the teachers within it. Throughout our report we recommend drawing more on community resources for delivery of some programs and activities.

We have made clear that we believe it is reasonable to expect the school, and the educational system of which it is a part, to educate all students effectively, and to include such non-academic "social" issues as drug awareness, sex education, AIDS education, and so on. However, we say that responsibility for education on these issues should be shared with other social and health agencies, rather than being solely that of the teacher.

The school may be the ideal large organizational unit within which to discuss these issues with young people, and may even be the best environment for large-group discussion. But, as both a community resource and a part of the community, schools should benefit from, and have access to, other community resources.

Shifting the primary responsibility for teaching non-academic social issues from teachers will have several benefits: it will allow teachers to focus on clearly defined common curriculum areas; teachers will be able to work together to co-ordinate, plan, and improve their collective work; finally, the shift will clarify the educational responsibilities of the school and diminish the number of expectations and burdens placed solely on teachers.

This shift is not intended to, nor will it, lighten the teachers' workload; rather, it is intended to strengthen the academic impact of teachers' work by ensuring that their efforts are focused primarily on developing each student's intellectual competence, and that they engage in on-going professional planning and reflection with their colleagues.

Reaching into the community

Although teachers must have a solid understanding and appreciation of the social, health, political, and economic issues that affect children and schools, we propose that those in the school's network of alliances/community services assume greater responsibility for delivering some non-academic programs to students. Throughout this report, we propose ways to strengthen school-community links; for example, such agencies as parks and recreation departments and health-service agencies could work with students in the school setting, either during the regular day or in an extended school day.

Such arrangements would be more difficult for French-language schools, given the paucity of social, health, and recreational services in French; but there may be ways of providing access. One possibility would be to have a French-language team travel across the province to provide these types of services. As a start, an information package could be developed for French-language teachers and schools, informing them of various programs and services available in the French-speaking community. Whatever the result, problems and possible solutions for francophone schools would need to be thoroughly examined.

Recommendation 57

*We recommend that the Education Act be amended to allow instructors who are not certified teachers to supervise students, under specified conditions and circumstances, and to deliver certain non-academic programs. Instructors might be health, recreational, and social-work personnel, or other members of the community, as designated by the school's principal.

School-based professional development

We know that teachers need to continue to learn and develop throughout their careers, and it turns out that one of the best vehicles for such growth is the school itself. One of the most effective ways of promoting both teacher growth and student learning is for teachers to work in a school setting that emphasizes two things: continuous improvement of teaching, and regular monitoring and feedback about results.(9) In other words, a "collaborative culture" focused on instruction and student achievement is a powerful force for improving schools.

Since time for collaborative work is scarce, we suggest that community instructional time might provide opportunities for teachers and school administrators to organize such school-based professional development. We believe that the principal, working with teachers, the extended school community, and with the support of senior administrators, should be responsible for designing a systematic plan of staff development for the year. Such time should give teachers the opportunity to plan, design, study, and work collegially, thereby strengthening school programs.

With regard to secondary schools, because the organizational context is somewhat different from that of elementary schools, arrangements for in-school professional development might also be different. The departmental structure has the potential of providing more manageable working teams, but it also tends to split the staff into isolated, even balkanized, groups.

We suggest that it is possible to capitalize on the strengths of the departmental system by having departments take collective responsibility for such initiatives as working with student-teacher interns, supporting new teachers in their subject areas, investigating and learning new teaching approaches, reviewing courses, and ensuring that links are made between courses.

At the same time, inter-department initiatives can build collective responsibility beyond department boundaries, and break down the walls that too often divide teachers in large schools. Our school-within-a-school concept (introduced in Chapter 9) would provide multiple opportunities for teachers to work together on issues such as improving the rate at which students remain in the school, planning a new program for a particular group of students, or improving links with parents. Again, what is most important is that teachers together work on the continuous improvement of teaching.

Both elementary and secondary schools must be learning organizations for teachers if they are to be effective learning organizations for students. It is crucial to ensure that such collaborative groupings are not experienced as contrived or imposed; not unreasonably, teachers who do not feel they are working on a genuinely important task will find ways to drop the project.

It is up to the school board to set priorities within the Ministry's broad guidelines. Schools can then collectively decide how they are going to address these priorities, given the particular school context.

The flexibility introduced by relying more on community, social, and health resources might provide some schools with the necessary time for such staff development and planning. Others might find further measures necessary. We would encourage both schools and school boards to consider more flexible schedules, and strategies such as combining classes occasionally to free some teachers for collegial work.

Regardless of how the time is allotted, however, we agree with the recent report of the American National Education Commission on Time and Learning, that"...time for planning and professional development is urgently needed - not as a frill or an add-on, but as a major aspect of the agreement between teachers and [boards]."(10)

We also agree with the report's comment that teachers' needs should not be met at the expense of students' learning time. The need for time, for both student instruction and professional matters, may necessitate considerable reworking of current schedules and agreements. The Ontario Catholic Supervisory Officers' Association, in its brief to our Commission, argued in favour of setting aside time during the school year for teachers

We believe that greater flexibility in the use of time is long overdue; schools must move out of the constraining effects of often rigidly defined schedules.

Concerns of teacher federations

We recognize that teacher federations will have some objections to proposals to allow instructors who are not certificated teachers to supervise students, and to some proposals about revising schedules, because of the implications for collective bargaining agreements. We believe, however, that the professional benefits and clarified responsibilities that would accrue to teachers in the classroom constitute a genuine improvement in their work life.

Supportive technology

We suggest one further way to help teachers - giving them access to technological support. It is hard to think of another group of professionals who, for instance, are expected to function without the use of a telephone. At the same time teachers are being urged to communicate more regularly with parents, any number of them are expected, in many schools, to share one phone in the staff room. Not only is privacy difficult under such circumstances, it is hard to find time, given most teaching schedules, even to get to the phone.

Teaching: The vision and the reality

Throughout this report, we propose and advocate a vision of learning, of the teaching profession, and of the school as a professional environment. Such visions, however, are often in conflict with the reality of schools as they exist: clearly, there is a considerable difference between the image of teaching we outlined in Chapter 6 and our observations here about the actual conditions in schools.

Teacher organizations and professionalism

Over the past 50 years, teachers have looked to their federations for assistance and support. Under the Teaching Profession Act (TPA), passed in 1944, the Ontario Teachers' Federation (OTF) was established. All teachers in Ontario, as defined by the Act, are required to belong to the Federation, which is the official voice of the teachers of Ontario, and is the formal liaison between teachers and the Ministry of Education and Training.

There are five affiliate associations: the Federation of Women Teachers' Associations of Ontario (FWTAO, established 1918, membership 41,800); the Ontario Secondary School Teachers Federation (OSSTF, established 1919, membership 38,900); the Ontario Public School Teachers Federation (OPSTF, established 1921, membership 14,500); the Association des enseignantes et des enseignants franco-ontariens (AEFO, established 1939, membership 6,700) and the Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association (OECTA, established 1944, membership 32,200).

Once a teacher has been hired by an Ontario school board, the OTF assigns him or her to statutory membership in one of these affiliates, in accordance with the OTF's by-laws.

Because four of the affiliates were independent voluntary associations prior to the creation of the OTF, the federation was constructed as an umbrella whose affiliates retain a high degree of autonomy as exercised through their individual affiliate constitutions. Each affiliate offers services directly to its membership in areas such as professional development, counselling, and collective bargaining. In fact, the day-to-day life of a teacher in Ontario is affected more by the actions of the specific affiliate than by those of the federation.

Collective bargaining rights

Under Bill 100, the School Board and Teachers Collective Negotiations Act, passed in 1975, local branches of the five affiliates were identified as bargaining agents for their respective memberships. Bill 100 embedded into law the collective bargaining rights of teachers, established dispute resolution mechanisms, and granted teachers the legal right to strike.

With the passage of Bill 100, the salary and working conditions of teachers improved dramatically: in 1950, the average salary of a teacher in Ontario was $2,365; in 1990 it was $51,735. Within the professional lifespan of a single generation of teachers, they went from being members of the lower-middle class to becoming members of the upper-middle class. The consequences of this transformation have been enormous on both the profession and the OTF.

Professionally, better salaries and working conditions have attracted better-qualified candidates to teaching: Ontario teachers are among the best educated and trained. New teachers entering the profession today bring solid academic credentials and relevant life experiences to help prepare them for their new careers.

While the affiliates of the Ontario Teachers' Federation deal with both professional and union issues, their role in collective bargaining has gradually emerged as their essential defining activity. We think that teaching young people is one of the most important tasks within our society; obviously, teachers deserve to be well paid and their profession deserves respect and recognition as a crucial societal service. The question is: Has the orientation toward collective bargaining issues occurred at the expense of the development of teaching as a profession?

All the OTF affiliates, as well as OTF itself, have done substantial professional work on behalf of their membership through such services as publications, conferences, workshops, and courses. These have helped teachers deal with some of the complex issues facing Ontario's educators, and should be recognized and affirmed. They represent substantial commitments by the federations, of both resources and personnel, to professional development.

However, there are constraints within the OTF and affiliate structure that limit the participation of both levels in promoting teaching as a profession and in addressing broad-based educational issues. The dual nature of the affiliates, existing both as unions for collective bargaining and as the only professional bodies for teachers, creates competing internal priorities and concerns: as unions, the associations work to enhance the salaries, working conditions, and narrowly defined best interests of their members. However, union contractual imperatives may sometimes undermine professional interests and educational reform.

A College of Teachers

The Commission believes that the teaching profession in Ontario must now be considered equal to other established professions. Structures such as the Ontario Teachers Federation and its affiliates are in place to protect the economic interests and workplace rights of teachers. They also respond to some of the professional development needs of teachers, but not to the need to develop the profession of teaching itself.

There is no comparable structure to view broad-based educational issues from a purely professional perspective. In the mid-1980s, Bette Stephenson, then the Minister of Education, proposed the establishment of a College of Teachers for Ontario. The idea was dropped after it was rejected by the teachers' federations, primarily because of concerns related to collective agreements.

Although we acknowledge that there were difficulties with that proposal, we believe that the complexity of contemporary education in Ontario, and the best professional interests of educators, dictate a transfer of governance issues to a newly created provincial professional body. Giving teaching full professional status is a logical extension of trends in education and developments in the teaching community. While the vast majority of Ontario teachers conduct themselves with a high degree of professionalism, teaching itself cannot truly be called professional because an essential characteristic of a profession in Ontario is the exercise of self-regulation, under statute.

The Education Act and the Teaching Profession Act regulate admission, certification, and practice for teaching in Ontario. Governance is currently exercised under the Acts by universities through admission to faculties of education and control of the pre-service teacher education program; and by the Minister through authority over certification and decertification, and post-certification qualifications. As long as these crucial areas of governance in teaching remain outside the control of teachers, the profession of teaching will remain in a state of limited development.

In order to promote teaching to full professional status, we propose that a provincial self-regulatory body, a College of Teachers, be established. The College would be responsible for determining standards of teaching practice, regulating initial and on-going teacher certification, and accrediting teacher education programs, both pre-service preparation and on-going professional development. A majority of members of the College would be professional educators selected by their peers, but there would be substantial representation from the public, that is, non-educators. The fuller details of membership should be determined by the Ministry and education stakeholders, with the aim of achieving a balance between education providers and consumers.

Experience in other jurisdictions

Such professional bodies of teachers exist in other jurisdictions. For example, under the Teacher Council Act, Scotland established the Scottish General Teaching Council (SGTC) in 1966.(11) The SGTC is governed by a council, the majority of whom are registered, full-time teachers, directly elected by their peers. Other councillors are appointed from a variety of interested parties such as universities, directors of education, employers, and churches, with a small number nominated by the secretary of state from among parent groups, the business community, and other professional organizations.

We see two crucial features in the way the SGTC is constituted: first, a clear majority of councillors are registered teachers, ensuring that the Council and thus the profession are truly self-regulatory. The second is that significant representation is accorded to representatives of other educational stakeholders and to the community at large. This ensures that the Council serves the professional interests of its teacher members and the broader community they serve. Both these conditions would have to be met in a College of Teachers in Ontario.

Under legislation, the SGTC is assigned jurisdiction over key areas of teacher self-governance: it accredits all courses for teacher training. To be used toward a teaching credential, a course must be identified as "acceptable to the General Teacher Council." Effectively, this means that the Council has control of admission to the profession and of standards within it.

These features ensure that initial certification of teachers and in-service programs rest with the profession. Because it regulates admissions to the profession, the Council maintains a register of all qualified teachers, and is thus able to advise on the supply of teachers available to the system.

Finally, the SGTC is responsible for the exercise of disciplinary matters within the profession, including suspension and decertification. For purposes of comparison to a proposed Ontario College of Teachers, it is important to note that the SGTC has functioned effectively for 28 years in the context of pre-existing teacher associations and unions. While there are undoubtedly areas of overlap and complementarity between the SGTC and the unions, their responsibilities and tasks are quite distinct.

We envision an Ontario College of Teachers with a comparable mandate to that of the SGTC, including jurisdiction over teacher certification at both the pre-service and in-service level, maintenance of a register of teachers and their professional credentials, and disciplinary matters up to and including decertification, as well as accreditation of all teacher education and training programs.

A College of Teachers was established in British Columbia in 1988, and is responsible for certification, professional development, and discipline. Membership is automatic for all teachers, principals, and supervisory officers, although they may opt out by making a formal request to do so. The College is governed by a council of 20-15 elected by members, two appointed by the Lieutenant Governor, two by the Minister of Education, and one by the deans of British Columbia's faculties of education.

Critics of the British Columbia College assert that it is too directly connected to the British Columbia Teachers' Federation, and would function more effectively if it had a more arm's-length relationship with the BCTF, and had a broader membership base.

This criticism brings us to an important point regarding teacher membership in the Ontario College. Having said that professional educators should form the majority of its governing council, we do not see the college as an extension of the teacher federations and associations. Certainly, some of the educator councillors could be elected from their membership by OTF affiliates during their individual annual general meetings. However, we think it very important that the college reach out to educators through other mechanisms: direct elections might be held, or representatives might be selected by provincial subject councils, by curriculum co-ordinator groups, and from private schools. There are many potential vehicles for broadening the base and interest profile of the College's councillors. Whatever mechanisms are adopted, it is critical that no one interest group have undue influence in the College.

In proposing a College of Teachers as a professional body of teachers at arm's length from the federations, the Commission seeks to complete the development of teaching as a mature self-governing profession. We believe that practitioners in the profession are most qualified to establish what is required for a teacher to function effectively, and decide which programs constitute appropriate professional preparation and in-service. Finally, we believe that teachers themselves, in partnership with the broader community, should define professional conduct and practice. We are providing the blueprint for such a College; we believe the actual model should be developed through consultations by the Ministry with federations and other interested parties and stakeholders. In order to set up the College, the 1944 Teaching Profession Act and the Education Act would have to be amended to allow establishment of an Ontario College of Teachers.

Recommendation 58

*We recommend that a professional self-regulatory body for teaching, the Ontario College of Teachers, be established, with the powers, duties, and membership of the College set out in legislation. The College should be responsible for determining professional standards, certification, and accreditation of teacher education programs. Professional educators should form a majority of the membership of the College, with substantial representation of non-educators from the community at large.

__________
Endnotes (Chapter 12, Section A)

1. A.J. King and M.J. Peart, Teachers in Canada: Their Work and Quality of Life (Ottawa: Canadian Teachers' Federation, 1992).
2. See, for example:
   • Daniel Lortie, Schoolteacher (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975).
   • Milbrey W. McLaughlin, "What Matters Most in Teachers' Workplace Context?" in Teachers' Work: Individuals, Colleagues, and Contexts, ed. Judith Warren Little and Milbrey W. McLaughlin (New York: Teachers College Press, 1993), p. 79-103.
   • Seymour Sarason, The Predictable Failure of School Reform (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990).
3. Writers who have addressed such issues include:
   • Linda Darling-Hammond and Lin Goodwin, "Progress Toward Professionalism in Teaching," in Challenges and Achievements of American Education: 1993 Yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, ed. Gordon Calvelti (Alexandria, VA, 1993), p. 19-52.
   • Sharon Feiman-Nemser and Robert E. Floden, "The Cultures of Teaching," in Handbook of Research on Teaching, 3rd edition, ed. M.C. Wittrock (New York: Macmillan, 1986), p. 505-26.
   • Michael G. Fullan and Andy Hargreaves, What's Worth Fighting for in Your School? (Toronto: Ontario Public School Teachers' Federation, 1992). In this section, we use their characterization of the culture of teaching.
   • Susan J. Rosenholtz, Teachers' Workplace: The Social Organization of Schools (New York: Longman, 1989).
4. Fullan and Hargreaves, What's Worth Fighting For? p. 5.
5. Feiman-Nemser and Floden, "Cultures of Teaching," p. 506.
6. Judith Warren Little, "Teachers as Colleagues," in Educator's Handbook: A Research Perspective, ed. V. Richardson-Koehler (New York: Longman, 1987), p. 505.
7. King and Peart, Teachers in Canada, p. 121.
8. McLaughlin, "What Matters Most?" p. 92.
9. See, for example, Andy Hargreaves, Changing Teachers, Changing Times: Teachers' Work and Culture in the Postmodern Age (Toronto: OISE Press, 1994); and Rosenholtz, Teachers' Workplace.
10. National Education Commission on Time and Learning, Prisoners of Time (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1994), p. 35.
11. Stuart Maclure, "A General Teaching Council for England and Wales?" NCE Briefing no. 11 (London, England: National Commission on Education, 1993).

ISBN 0-7778-3577-0
©Copyright 1994, Queens Printer for Ontario