Today's online forum featured Ontario Education Minister Gerard Kennedy, who answered your questions on everything from funding for religious schools to mandatory phys ed for elementary students. Thanks for joining us.
Q: Learning about gender/women's issues is an important part of our everyday lives, affecting how we think and act. It is so important to have children understand gender and its implications in our society as it gives us an alternative viewpoint to analyze issues such as development, violence against women, eating disorders, homophobia ... The list is endless ... So why is it that something so fundamental to each individual's development and the development of our society is not taught in our school curriculums?
A: All new curriculum policy documents released as part of the current curriculum review process now contain a section on Antidiscrimination Education. Gender issues may also be highlighted here. For example, the just-revised Grades 9 and 10 mathematics document refers to the fact that some girls may need extra encouragement to see themselves in careers involving mathematics. Gender issues have also been integrated into the curriculum in various areas. For example, the Charter of Rights, as well as the impact of the women's movement in Canada are discussed in the Canadian and World Studies curriculum. Eating disorders are a topic covered in the Health and Physical Education program. In addition, we are working with the Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration on a plan to educate and motivate children, aged eight to 14, to put an end to gender stereotyping and perceived inequality between women and men, girls and boys and help them learn social skills for healthy relationships that are free from all forms of violence.
Q: Why are high school students allowed to "earn" so many credits at independent credit mills where the credits and the marks are demonstrably related to the fees paid? These students then go on to occupy spaces in universities and colleges that they are unqualified for, squeeze out other students and create a greater demand than necessary for remediation in these higher institutions where there is greater than necessary cost to taxpayers. Students should be learning to learn and gaining literacy and numeracy skills before they go on to college or university.
A:The ministry is currently investigating the allegations concerning credit mills and will ensure that OSSD credits can only be earned by the same standard across the province.
Q: When is the government going to take the big leap and make physical education compulsory for Grades 9-12? I am amazed at the stats that indicate low levels of activity in kids of this age group. Your government seems to be treating the problem only on the surface. Think of the money spent in the health care system because of poor habits learned early in life.
and ...
Q: Your government has banned junk food in elementary schools which is a great idea. When (if ever) do you plan to do the same for high school students? Almost every high school caf sells fries, and that is what most high school students eat (along with a nice rush of sugar pop). I personally would like to see a ban at the high school level on junk food too.
A: The Daily Physical Activity announcement and the junk food announcement for elementary students are two components of an overall Healthy Schools Initiative that will soon be launched in the secondary panel. We will have more information about that shortly. We are formalizing this initiative and will have opportunities in the near future for parents, educators and students to fully participate in the development of the high school program.
Q: The Rozanski report had a number of recommendations, but all hinged on updating the base funding for teacher salaries. Unless the government does that, all funding for ESL, inner city kids, caretaking, etc. is wasted because it goes to prop up the government's failure to pay the full cost of teacher's salaries. When will you update the board's funding for teacher's salaries?
A: The premise of this question is incorrect because we already pay the full cost of teacher salaries. What we've done, in addition, is put extra funding in the ESL grant, Learning Opportunities Grant, Rural School Grant etc. because we knew those were the areas that boards were borrowing from.
We make the argument that, effectively, the amount of investment recommended by Rozanski has been met and, in some areas, delivered in a different fashion. There is still more work to be done. But the substantial component of the recommendations has been accomplished. We are now going to work with boards to make the work transparent and obvious to all communities across the province. We will publicly disclose what the province funds, how the funding formula has changed and what work is still required.
Q: We have various concerns about split grade classes. Our daughter is in Grade 3 and started the year in a single class of 17 students. On September 30, due to less than anticipated enrollment, my daughter's class became a split Grade 3/4 class of 28 students. My wife and I are not happy about this as there are now 11 grade 4 students in the class ... Also, the concept of split grades is very problematic for us. With all the time constraints put on teachers with our new curriculum, and the addition of new physical activity guidelines, teaching time is already at a premium, yet you are asking a teacher to teach two full grade curriculums in one class. A split grade, in our opinion, means split teacher attention and split time to work effectively on each part of the years curriculum. This is ludicrous. A teacher cannot teach two full grades in one year without sacrificing other valuable teaching resources, such as reading time and art. Many of the teachers in this situation have told us that they would prefer to teach large single grade classes instead of smaller split classes.
Our question to you is this: While you have committed to limiting class size to ensure that each child has more access to the teacher, why have you not committed to eliminating split classes, a process which, once again limits teaching time and teaching effectiveness?
A: What matters most is class size and the composition of classes and we would hope that schools would make some allowance for that. Our goal from JK to Grade 3 is 20 students or less. We believe that reduced class sizes, coupled with giving teachers flexibility in the curriculum, should make it possible to be successful in teaching students at their individual level. The class that is referenced above has two challenges: it is large and it is a split grade class. Smaller class sizes of split grades do not present the same challenges. We are looking at ways that we can support split grades if they become necessary in upper grades. The extra time that teachers have in smaller classes should be sufficient to make successes out of most class-size combinations at the lower level.
Q: I am a secondary school music teacher in York Region, and over the life of the new curriculum, I have seen the level of involvement in the arts diminish significantly.
Students, parents, and even our school's administration, feel it is important for students to complete their high school career in four years. However, this does not provide enough time for highly intelligent and talented students to explore their full abilities. We try to accommodate students, but by grade 10 or 11, students are opting out of the arts in order to take as many math and science courses as possible, even though this closes more doors than it opens.
I want to be able to encourage my students to take an additional year and explore the great opportunities that high school offers: arts, sciences, humanities, co-operative education. My administration tells me they are not permitted to advise students on taking extra time because of funding restrictions. At our school of 1,600 students, we are barely able to run senior-level music and drama classes because of this. What kind of future do the arts courses have in Ontario? What kind of solutions can we start working on now so that our students can succeed in all areas of their interest?
A: Since our first year, the government has encouraged schools and school boards to put increased emphasis on the arts in education. We have permitted boards to plan for 2,000 new specialist teachers - which alongside of physed will account for more music, drama and art teachers. We will be launching our arts education initiative in the next few months. It will allow for the broader arts education community to advise on how to best deliver arts education in school.
Q: This government is again making the school system responsible for failed parenting by adding this EXTRA 20 minutes of structured physical activity every day on top of the students' regular physical education period. How can we add this with all the other recommendations handed down for other curriculum-related subjects?
With my Grade 4 class, I have 300 minutes to instruct a day which would include a reading/writing block, science, math, French and then squeeze in this extra 20 minutes of exercise each day. Oh, and yes I do cross-curricular activities where possible.
A: We see the role of schools as supporting parents' intentions and efforts to activate their kids and help them be involved in physical activities. Our daily 20 of physical activity is appropriate. Parents, in their busy lives, will appreciate that the functions they expect to support their children are happening in schools. Daily physical activity will be incorporated with the regular curriculum and we will be providing teachers and schools with options for timetabling and scheduling.
Q: Will the 20 minutes of daily fitness apply to Grade 7/8 schools? Many schools do not have recess time and the timetable is full. Will there be flexibility or will programs have to be cut to implement this program? I see such schools being closer to a high school setting than elementary.
A: Yes. The requirement for 20 minutes of daily physical activity applies to all elementary school grades, including 7 and 8. For older students, we see 20 minutes as the minimum of physical activity and we believe it will contribute to their overall academic success. While it will take some time administratively to work into schedules, this is a requirement that we expect all schools to be successful at. We are also providing funding to hire 2,000 new specialist teachers - some of which will teach phys ed for 40-60 minute classes and will offset the time requirement of classroom teachers. We realize that it will take some time to implement, so it is being phased-in over the course of the school year. We are providing resources to train teachers and help them make physical activity a part of any class, from math to English to social studies. In addition, the province, with the help of experienced educators, is providing teachers and schools with options for scheduling the physical activity requirement.
Q: I have a child in Grade 6 who has been waiting for pyscho-educational testing for several years. She has consistently tested below average by 1-2 grades. She is receiving assistance with an IEP. This year we had supportive documentation recommending testing by two physicians one being a psychologist. We were told that there would be no guarantee that she would be tested even with the documentation. My question is this: Why does there not seem to be enough resources to test children to see if there is an underlying learning disability? I have been told that there are not enough resources to test everyone that needs it but yet who needs it more than a child that is testing 1-2 grades behind. I have subsequently found testing through a local hospital and am awaiting results.
And why is it that we have fewer educational assistants now than we did before we were told that Special Education was receiving more funding? If you are serious about helping the needy students then increasing the one-on-one interaction is required.
A: If a student is receiving an IEP - that's good news. Students should be getting assistance first without waiting or depending on an assessment. Further, the only assessments they should receive are the ones that tell us how to educate the child. Previously, many tests were conducted unnecessarily in order to become eligible for funding. We are working with boards now on an overall reform of special education that will require boards to do assessments at as early an age as possible. There are over 4,000 more education assistants than there were in 2002-03. As a result, there has been a large increase in individual student assistance. We are now ensuring that there are strategies are in place to produce results for those students as a result in the 65 per cent funding increase for high needs special education students over the last two years.
Q: I want to know what are the minister's thoughts on the Safe Schools Act? Given that the Ontario Human Rights Commission is looking into the matter because of its effect on minority students, is this something that is a priority for the minister?
A: The Safe Schools Act is a broad issue. We are looking at it in a couple of ways:
1. Are we doing enough to keep students safe in school?
2. Are the measures that are currently in place fair to all students?
Both of those questions are being subject to a complete review of the Safe Schools Act. The review will include public consultations and is underway this fall. We are committing ourselves in advance to taking action to what is found as a result of the review.
Q: Although the Education Act specifically states that no extra charges should be billed to parents for regular classes, parents are routinely asked to hand over money for everything from school trips to graph paper. In the Avon Maitland school district, schools tell parents it's not an option to refuse to pay, even you point out that this is against their own school board policy. As well, they break the law (Consumer's Act I believe) by forcing parents to purchase a "package deal" of student ID card, planner and yearbook, even if you only want the ID card.
The Avon Maitland school board meets on a regular basis to review and set policy on fees but what's the point? The policies are not enforced, there is no accountability, no policy of enforcing their own policies and there is apparently no mechanism in place for appeals, just a refusal from all parties to not pass the buck.
and ...
Q: My son's school is having a fall fair fundraising event. The letter sent home said this event is to raise money for things like "doors for the classrooms." I don't mind helping to raise money for extra-curricular and special projects, but certainly classroom doors are a necessity for safety. I support you as my MPP and applaud your recent education announcements, but I think this Board should have the funds to put doors on the classrooms. I'd appreciate your thoughts. Thank you.
A: We believe that the fundamentals for an excellent education should be paid for by the government. We are giving school boards some time to adjust to the new higher levels of financing that we are providing and our instruction has been to ensure that those dollars flow to the schools.
We are also considering provincial rules around fundraising and school fees but are first giving the boards an opportunity to correct this problem by making sure that no student is being excluded and that no untoward use of fundraising is taking place.
Fundraising should be done for the 'extras' - things that are not essential to acquiring an excellent education in publicly funded schools.
Q: I was under the impression that class size for elementary schools was to be capped at approximately 25. Why then, are there 33 students in my son's grade 6 class?
A: Capping class size is a significant priority for this government. We are capping class sizes at 20 students from JK to Grade 3 by 2007-08. At the same time, the government will ensure smaller class sizes in the early grades do not come at the expense of larger classes in Grades 4 to 8. In fact, there will be an eventual decrease in class sizes in those grades as a by-product of this policy.
Q: While I agree that smaller class sizes certainly cannot hurt, would someone please explain to me when 30 students became such a problem? I went to elementary and high school in the 70s and 80s and 30 students was about the average class size then.
A: We know more now about the benefit of early intervention than we did in the 70s, which is why we are targeting those formative early years. Diversity in the classroom also means that teachers need time to deal with special challenges and give every student the individual attention they need to acquire the essential reading, writing and math skills for future success.
Q: Minister, the top salary for teachers in most jurisdictions is now over $80,000 per year. When generous benefit and pension plans are included, the total salary is likely over $100,000. What is the government doing to control salary levels so that more resources could be diverted to improving the educational system through reduced class sizes, better investment in our crumbling schools, and greater investment in school textbooks?
A: Two out of three dollars invested by the McGuinty government are going to improving education. One-third is being allocated to help give fair increases, in line with inflation, to teacher and education worker compensations. The top salary for a teacher is approx. $78,000. The starting salary is approx. $36,000 and the average salary is approx. $62,000.
Teachers work hard and are fairly compensated for that work. Because teachers have agreed to four-year contracts, we are able to put most of the education investment where it needs to be - new textbooks, $2.8 billion to turn crumbling schools into good places to learn and capping class sizes in the early grades where it really matters.
Q: Can you tell me how the government allows or requires school boards to operate in a consistent or uniform manner? At our daughter's Grade 1 class in Ajax, one of her classmates transferred from the York Region board. The parent of this child was very disheartened to learn that the Durham board does not provide teachers assistants like the York board. This means that one teacher alone must meet the needs of over 25 children. This makes it very difficult to implement programs in literacy where one-to-one interaction is required.
A: We require boards to have similar outcomes. Boards can have different approaches to being successful, so long as they are successful. We have changed the funding formula so that it is tailored to meet the needs of individual students. Boards with the same composition of students (low income, ESL etc) will get the same additional funding to meet those needs. Boards still have the flexibility and the choice on how to deliver good results for students. One board may choose to use educational assistants, another may choose a different technique to get the same result. That is the guarantee we give to parents - no matter what school they send their child to in publicly funded education - they will get a good outcome.
Q: It seems that many retired teachers are taking an early pension and returning to teach again. Is anything being done about encouraging the hire of new graduates?
A: New graduates have been enhanced in their future by the hiring of some 4,000 new teaching positions on the part of the province. As well, I believe boards should be giving opportunities to new teachers if they have short-term positions - which are the only positions that retired teachers are eligible for. Retired teachers are not eligible for full-time permanent teaching positions and they have limited eligibility for substitute teaching. We hope that boards are giving preference to new teachers for those positions to help bring them along to become good full-time teachers.
We have recently launched a new program to retain and help develop new teachers in their first years of teaching. You can learn more about the New Teacher Induction Program by visiting our website.
Q: Why does the province fund the religious education of one group only, Roman Catholics, to the exclusion of all other religious groups?
A: The province does not fund religious education. The province funds publicly funded education of schools that are required to meet high standards. Publicly funded schools must follow the Ministry of Education curriculum, all teachers are certified by the Ontario College of Teachers, and schools accept students, particularly at the high school level, from any faith. This is the type of publicly funded education that has evolved in this province and we have received no other proposal to make it more encompassing.
The private school tax credit was cancelled fairly as a result of the last election. That is the only proposal that has been brought to debate. Our priority remains making publicly funded education, the best education.
Dear Mr. Kennedy,
I would like to know what is being done to foster greater diversity in the educational programs available to students in Ontario? Despite federal and provincial support for diversity and Toronto's title as one of the most diverse city in the world, the education system in Ontario sadly lacks the diversity it claims to support.
The educational offering in Ontario has changed little in the last twenty years despite significant changes to the demographics, needs and interests of its students. The “one size fits all” educational system in Ontario provides minimal opportunities for students to select a specialized school or curricular program and instead produces cookie cutter students, that while competent, lack the diversity of skills needed to compete in the global economy.
School districts in Edmonton and many American cities have demonstrated that creating a diverse academic offering not only fosters education innovation, it also allows students to flourish in an environment that readily addresses their needs, interests and talents. To the contrary, school districts in Ontario appear to lack the capacity and will to stimulate reform and create change.
This lack of educational innovation will not only hamper the growth and development of individual students, but also greatly limit the future growth and development of the economy in Ontario.
Posted by: Camille Rutherford | October 15, 2005 at 12:47 PM
Minister Kennedy employed a sleazy "Fiberal" trick by avoiding the issue on education funding for minority religious communities.
In fact the 1999 UN Human Rights Tribunal found Ontario guilty of discrimination in Waldman vs. Canada when our province brought forth this specious, circular argument.
Secondly he lied and said there has been no other proposal brought forth. There have been several. He just chooses to ignore them.
He so easily denies the reality of religious school funding discrimination in Ontario today that I shudder to imagine what that minister would say about our multi-cultural society. Perhaps this doesn’t exist either.
Posted by: Bruce Gilboord | October 14, 2005 at 01:09 PM
Minister Kennedy, the issue over making daily physical activity manditory in all levels of our provincial education system is extremely important. The effects of physical inactivity and obesity on the incidence of chronic disease has been the topic of scientific research for years. Just last week a spokesperson for the OMA came out in the Star with a statement that should rock government and parents; "we fear that children are going to die before their parents." When will the provincial and federal governments finally come to the realization that unless something is done immediately (and with more than just lip service and a couple of million dollars for show) our children face a horrific future with chronic diseases coupled with a health care system that will never be able to cope. By not helping our children to change their lifestyle habits today we doom their future and the future of this great province and country. We don't need manditory Phys Ed classes in schools, we need manditory daily physical activity and lifestyle change courses in all schools across the country. I urge you and your provincial colleagues to act today on this extremely important issue.
As for having just anyone teach physical activity and lifestyle courses; this is absurd. The province and the federal government spend billions in tax dollars each year to train people in our Colleges and Universities in the exercise sciences. These people are the experts on helping others with positive lifestyle changes. Why don't we just use these individuals in our schools?
Posted by: P. Douglas Lafreniere | October 12, 2005 at 09:23 AM
Dear Mr. Kennedy,
If the Education Act states under Reg. 298 "(8) There shall be a morning recess and an afternoon recess, each of which shall be not less than ten minutes and not more than fifteen minutes in length, for pupils in the primary and junior divisions. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 298, s. 3 (8)." then why is the Balance School Day allowed to continue when one "Nutritional/Break" is 40 minutes long and the second break is considered the "go home" break. There is no morning recess of 10-15 minutes nor is there an afternoon recess. Instead of taking up more class time for daily physical activity, why don't we just give the kids back their recess! Why doesn't the Ministry of Education enforce the ED. Act?
Posted by: Cari Thurlow | October 12, 2005 at 07:44 AM
Minister Kennedy's statement that Ontario does not fund religious education is clearly incorrect. Catholic schools teach religion and are fully funded by the government.
In fact, 93% of faith based schools in Ontario are already fully funded, but only Catholics are eligible. Why should the other 7% made up of non-Catholic religious minorities continue to be excluded? Over a century of funding for Ontario’s Catholic schools has proven that it can be done without threatening Ontario’s social fabric. How much longer will these minorities be treated likesecond-class citizens, in open violation of international law?
Posted by: Michael Orr | October 11, 2005 at 10:35 PM
The Minister's response to the question "Why does the province fund the religious education of one group only, Roman Catholics, to the exclusion of all other religious groups?" reveals that the Minister's education, wherever received, has completely failed him.
Unless, he is intentionally playing dumb.
Posted by: Zevi | October 11, 2005 at 10:11 PM
In his answer to the question about the funding of religious schools, the minister states unequivocally: "The province does not fund religious education." This is, of course, a blatant lie -- There is a publically funded separate school system in Ontario for Roman Catholics, as everyone knows, and thereby, the province does indeed fund the religious schools of one religion.
Posted by: Jerrold Landau | October 11, 2005 at 09:48 PM
Regarding the 20 minutes of physical activity for students, Mr Kennedy states, "Daily physical activity will be incorporated with the regular curriculum." Is it possible for a teacher to evaluate outcomes related to the curriculum expectations for Math, Science, Language etc. while leading a group of students in physical activities? Elementary teachers are under extreme pressure to address, evaluate and report on the literally hundreds of curriculum expectations for a number of different disciplines. If you take 100 minutes away from instructional time each week, you need to inform teachers which expectations, they usually would have addressed in those 100 minutes, they no longer have to be concernerd with.
In other words, a teacher is evaluated on how well he/she can address, evaluate and report on how well students have mastered the curriculum expectation goals for their grade. If the 20 minutes interferes with a teacher's ability to do this, it simply won't happen.
Suggestion: Make the physical activity the responsibility of the students/parents just as the 4o hours community service is the responsibility of high school students. Have a physical activity booklet that students must complete and be signed by adults. It must indicate time location and activity for a minimum 20 minutes each day (outside of the school day). The completion of the booklet would represent 30% of their phys ed mark.
The young teachers, my wife and I talk to, can't see themselves lasting in this profession. Mr. Kennedy you really need to start working with boards to reduce the workload. Don't get me wrong, teaching is a very rewarding career for those of us who are old enough to be pre-Mike Harris. The ever-increasing role of standardized testing, the reduction in support for students with special needs, the increase in the frequency and leangth of afterschool meetings, the still too large grade 4 to 8 classes, the increase in expectations requiring evaluation and reporting, the exhaustive TPA which, by the way, consumes far too much of the principals time as well, etc., etc., etc., is too much for new teachers to handle and frustrating for the experienced.
Posted by: Rob Davidson | October 11, 2005 at 09:22 PM
Here is a section taken from R.R.O. 1990, REGULATION 298:
"Section 31: The maximum enrolment in a special education class shall depend upon the extent of the exceptionalities of the pupils in the class and the special education services that are available to the teacher, but in no case shall the enrollment in a self-contained class exceed,
a) in a class for pupils who are emotionally disturbed or socially maladjusted, for pupils who have severe learning disabilities, or for pupils who are younger than compulsory school age and have impaired hearing, eight pupils;
b) in a class for pupils who are blind, for pupils who are deaf, for pupils who have developmental disabilities, or for pupils with speech and language disorders, ten pupils;
c) in a class for pupils who are hard of hearing, for pupils with limited vision, or for pupils with orthopaedic or other physical handicaps, twelve pupils;
d) in a class for pupils who have mild intellectual disabilities, twelve pupils in the primary division and sixteen pupils in the junior and intermediate divisions;
e) in an elementary school class for pupils who are gifted, twenty-five pupils;
f) in a class for aphasic or autistic pupils, or for pupils with multiple handicaps for whom no one handicap is dominant, six pupils; and
g) on and after the 1st day of September, 1982, in a class for exceptional pupils consisting of pupils with different exceptionalities, sixteen pupils. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 298, s. 31; O. Reg. 191/04, s. 10."
As you can see, item e) is the one of interest to me.
What I would like to know is how can the school be allowed to have 33 students in one class if these students are officially enrolled in the gifted program? Is there some other statute that supercedes this one? When we tried to get Chris a spot at Finch West during grade 4, we were told that the class was full. How can Cummer Valley accept so many students? According to the regulations, there is a limit of 25. I know that there were only 25 students at Finch West in the grade 5 program last year.
Where do I go from here? If this statute is indeed correct, then what should happen? What are the schools obligations to the existing students in the class?
Laurie
Posted by: Laurie | October 11, 2005 at 08:53 PM
I still don't see how gender issues are shown in the courses. I have taken a Canadian and World Studies course and we hardly learnt about any women what so ever. And the stuff that kids should be learning these days about gender and where it comes from isn't being taught at all in my school and I don't know how many others don't have it. I'm not happy with the curriculum and I think that there should be more courses that teach students the importance of gender. Take it from a current student in grade 11. You aren't providing us with the stuff that we need when we get out of high school. Yes. Maybe you're teaching us math, and science, but what about abuse? what about the differences between men and women (and I'm not talking about sex ed). I think that we deserve to know all this before we get out of high school so that some of this may stop. Even stereotyping. It's happening all around us and I think that we could get rid of some of it if we had the choice to take a gender studies course.
Posted by: Krysta | October 11, 2005 at 04:34 PM
Minister Kennedy: your response to the question posted on this forum is yet another example of your abilitites to play politics instead of really dealing with the issue. Everybody knows that there is a separate school system AND a public system.
Your attempt to dance around the issue is frankly insulting to our intelligence.
I am certain the school boards of other faiths would be only too happy to conform to your requirements as stated.
By your reply, are you extending an offer of full funding equivalent to that afforded Catholic schools for other faith-based schools if they comply with your requirements?
In Ontario, if you are Catholic and want to send your child to Catholic school - the government will pay 100% of the cost. However, if you are a (less fortunate) member of ANY other faith (i.e. Non-catholic Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, etc...) and want to send your child to a faith based school, you alone must bear the cost. With annual tuitions most often in excess of $10,000 per child, the cost is simply out of reach for most families.
It is understandable that governments of a homogenous religious society could fund faith-based education of one faith to the exclusion of all others. However, in 2005 in what is supposedly one of the most forward thinking, multi-cultural societies in the modern world, why you would permit the legislation of such blatant discrimination against those who are not of the Catholic faith?
Only several decades ago, a deplorable racial discrimination was first permitted and then grew to become an ugly way of life. Thankfully, that is no longer acceptable in our society. In a cultural mosaic such as Canada, what is the difference between racial discrimination versus religious discrimination? The lines become blurred when a government exclusively provides publicly-funded services for one group to the exclusion of all others.
When is your government going to stop hiding behind archaic discriminatory faith-based education legislation?
Premiere McGuinty's recent public response to this question with arguments that "those were the ground rules that were here when we all came to this country and i am not about to change that" is offensive. It displays a lack of both sensitivity and tolerance unbefitting any member of our society, much less the leader of its government.
The public learns from their leaders. Although the Premiere pays lip service to creating a society of tolerance, by ardently advocating for such a myopic position on this issue, Mr. McGuinty and his Minister of Education instead teach intolerance and exclusivity which ultimately breed hate. That is simply unacceptable in our society. It is interesting to note that Premiere McGuinty's children attended Catholic school at the expense of the public purse.
Although the arguments that it is already written in the constitution and that the Ministers' approach is to 'strengethen public education' are both factually true, they serve to reflect the fact that the legislation needs to be brought current. Hiding behind such weak arguments brings disgrace to our people, reminiscent of times when women were not allowed to vote and members of certain races were not afforded equal rights.
Both Minister Kennedy and Premiere McGuinty have an historic opportunity to right this wrong. Why are they not doing so immediately?
Posted by: Laurie | October 11, 2005 at 04:32 PM
I fail to understand how a government which boasts "one law for all" re the Sharia Law, can so explicitely reject the funding of faith-based schools when Catholic schools receive funding? This discrimination is a stain on the Liberal government and their failure to remedy this will only energize the faith-based schools to consider all of their options in order to move the government towards a recognition of this injustice. Desperate schools and parents (on the brink of financial collapse) call for desperate measures.
Posted by: Ira | October 11, 2005 at 03:28 PM
Q. on maths and particularly the way equations are being taught, omitting the brackets we all grew up with.
I'm a grandfather and yesterday my son gave me the following to answer from my grandson's homework.
4 + 2 x 6 - 1 x 4. I'd say 140 BUT had this been asked as 4+(2x6)-(1x4) I'd come up with a lot different response. The first way of teaching maths doesn't remotely relate to computer language never mind adult human language. Why?
Posted by: Graham | October 11, 2005 at 03:27 PM
Why are you dumping more on the teachers?????????????????ie:classroom teachers should provide 20 minutes of strenuous exercise every day. Enough is enough! Have you looked at the T.P.A. that each teacher has to do every three years! Maybe your staff should each of them undergo one while teaching a class of 28 6 year olds. Don't forget to add in some behavourial,ESL,special needs kids, and maybe a PPD or Autistic child. Oh yes and don't forget to force your staffers to attend various and sundry committees, and of course put on various entertainments for the community, while trying to stuff into many children's heads, concepts that they are just not developmentally ready to comprehend. You are not helping me and my collegues do our jobs, you are making it more difficult. You haven't got the numbers down yet and you haven't got rid of Harris's paperwork crap that he dumped on us. Do that before you start adding to our work load. People have lives that they would like to live. You wonder why one third of new teachers leave the profession and the older ones can't wait to leave? Ask real teaching in the school teachers not the ones that know it all at OISE. Ask any recently retired teacher and you will be told it's not the teaching, it's all the other stuff.
Posted by: Gail | October 11, 2005 at 03:26 PM
My child's kindergarten class in Markham, Ontario has 23 children in it. Although her teacher is very capable, I believe that is too many children of such a young age (3-5 year olds) for one person to give proper attention too. Is there not a way for the class sizes for these young children to be reduced? I wouldn't mind a reasonable income tax increase if I knew it was going specifically to reduce class sizes. I believe this would make such a big difference in helping children and teachers have a good educational experience. Maybe less of our children would fall through the cracks.
Posted by: Dana | October 11, 2005 at 03:24 PM
Why do kids at the younger age seemed to be protected from various form of losses? (ie. competition, grades, discipline?) No one appears to want to brand a child a winner or a loser when this seems to contradict life's powerful message - work hard or there will be consequences.
Certainly a healthy competitive spirit can be nurtured in a positive way in the public school system. It is my belief that success in ones life is directly related to the ability to overcome “less than favourable” outcomes. Let’s help kids deal with failure as well, otherwise we will create a generation of spoiled cry-babies.
Posted by: Andrew | October 11, 2005 at 03:22 PM
Dear Mr. Kennedy,
In answer to the appeal in the Toronto Star of October 9.2005, I submit my thoughts on this subject.
The classic idea of education comes from the Latin "educare" literally to draw out. For this to happen in the classroom, children have to understand that there are values to be upheld in life.
Children should be taught to think without which no education is possible. In order to think there should be silence in the classroom.
Furthermore, for the thinking process to be developed:
1) encourage memorisation in all disciplines eg- no calculators to be used in math.
2) encourage reading - and test comprehension.
3) expose children to T.V. programs in science, environment etc. -set follow up lessons on subjects.
If it is possible some arrangement could be made to introduce chess in the classroom. There is no other better tool to enhance the thinking process.
The modern day student is prevented from using his brain because of T.V. which stifles his/her imagination.
All of the above is only possible if and when there is positive input from the parents. I believe education starts in the home where intrinsic values should be taught.
Posted by: Joe | October 11, 2005 at 01:50 PM