Skip to main content

Full text of "For the love of learning : report of the Royal Commission on Learning"

See other formats 


6n^Ot\} 

2.1 

'  ms 

KJ 

LOll 

v.ii 

7«5    «>540 


For  the  „        , 

Love  oi  LeaifBins; 

Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Learning 


Making  It  Happen 


FOR  THE  LOVE  OF  LEARNING 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2010  with  funding  from 

The  Law  Foundation  of  Ontario  &  the  Ontario  Council  of  University  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/forloveoflearnin04onta 


For  the 

Love  of  Learning 

Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Learning 


Volume    IV 


Making  it  Happen 


e Quean*  Pnnw  for  Ontano.  1994 

O  document  est  aussi  disponible  en  fran^t 

Cenadtan  Catalacuii«  In  Publication  Data 

Onuno.  Royal  ConwnissKyi  on  Learning 
For  the  love  of  learning 

Co-cttMr:  Monique  B^n,  Gerald  L.  Caplan. 

Accomparued  by  a  publication  subtitled  A  short  version  and  a  CD-ROM. 

luued  also  in  FrerKh  urxler  title:  Pour  I'amour  d'apprendre. 

iTKiudes  tNbliographlcal  rafarences. 

Contents:  v.  I.  Marxlate.  corrtext,  issues  -  v.ll.  Learning:  our  vision  for  schools  - 

V.  III.  The  educators  -  v.  IV.  Making  It  happen. 

ISBN  0-7778-3577O 

1.  Educatiorv-Ontano.   2.  Educatior>-Aims  and  objectives.  I.  B^n.  Monique.   II.  Caplan.  Gerald  L,  1938- .   ill.  Title. 

LA418.05056   1994  370'.9713  C9S964004-5 


Copie*  of  this  report  are  available  for  a  charge  from: 

Publicadorts  Ontario 
880  Bay  Street 
Toronto.  Ontario 

Access  OntarK) 
RKleau  Centre 
50  Rideau  Street 
OttBtf.  Ontario 

Maiiordar  customers  may  contact: 
Pubiicalions  Ontarto 
SO  Grosvenor  Street 
Toronto.  Ontarto  M7A  1N3 
Teiechone  (416)  326-5300 
Ton-free  m  Ontano  1-80O468-9938 
F«i  (416)  3264317 

Anyone  «ial«ng  to  acc«M  the  sutynissiorts  and  record*  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Learning  should  contact  ttw  Raoonla 
Managamertt  Unit  or  the  Freedom  of  Information  arid  Privacy  Office  of  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training.  The  raoord*  wUI  be 
retained  there  for  three  years  and  then  permanently  atored  at  the  Archives  of  Ontano. 

^^  Pnmad  on  recycled  paper 


Royal  Commission 

Commission    royale  sur 
on  Learning    I'education 


Co-Chairs  /  Copresidents 

Monique  Begin  -  Gerald  L.  Caplan 

Commissioners  /  Membres  de  la  commission 

Manisha  Bharti  -  Avis  E.  Glaze  -  Dennis  J.  Murphy 


December  1994 


The  Honourable  Dave  Cooke 
Minister  of  Education  and  Training 

Dear  Mr.  Minister: 

It  is  with  a  sense  of  great  hope  for  the  future  of  the  young  people  of  Ontario  that 
we  respectfully  submit  to  you  the  Final  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on 
Learning. 

Very  sincerely  yours, 


Monique 
Co-chair 


Begin 


*/■ 


Gerald  Caplan 
Co-chair 


l^ia^l^ 


Manisha  Bhani 
Commissioner 


^^. 


Avis  Glaze 
Commissioner 


"^ 


U 


Dennis  Murphy 
Commissioner 


(lJ^:' 


RaiDi  Cecco 
Executive  Director 


101   Bloor  Street  West /  13th  Floor /  Toronto/ Ontario  MBS   1P7 

Telephone  (4  16)  325-2707  /  Fax  (4  16)  325-2956  /  TOLL-FREE   1-800-565-0861 

101, rue  Bloor  ouest/ 13' etage  /  Toronto  (Ontario)  M6S   1P7 

Telephone  (416)  325-2707  /  T^l^copieur  (416)  325-2956  /  Sans  frais   1-800-565-0861 


Volume  I 

Mandate,  Context,  Issues 


Introduction  to  the  Report   1 

A  climate  of  uncertainty    1 

Some  recent  history  of  educational 

change  and  reform    2 
Improving  Ontario's  schools    3 
News,  both  good  and  bad    4 
Our  way  Into  the  future    5 

tjriy  khiMhuuJ  cdui-jtiun   b 

Teacher  development  6 

Information  technology  6 

<ommunilv  education   7 
The  curriculum    7 
Making  change  happen    8 


("haptcr  1: 

The  Royal  Commission 
on  Learning   10 

Public  consultation   11 

Talking  to  people  1 1 

Media  coverage   1 1 

dutreach    12 
Experts  and  research    13 
Commissioners'  meetings   13 


Chapter  2: 

Education  and  Society  14 
Education  In  Ontario:  A  brief  history   15 

<  urriiiilum  jHil  tcuhing  mcthdiK    17 
Education  rights  of  the  French- language 

minority   17 
Questions  of  purpose   18 
More  recent  educational  history    18 

Hcmcntjrv  vhimls    i  < 
Secondary  schools  20 
Declining  enrolments  21 
.Ma)or  legislation  in  the  1980s  21 
Financing  education  23 
Ixgislative  reports  23 
Premier's  council  23 


Public  funding  to  private  schools  24 

Anti-racism  and  ethno-cullural 
equity  initiatives  24 

Ttu-  sii;nifii..iiKc  dI  n-ii-iit  policy  changes   24 
Reflecting  on  change   24 
Ontario:  Picture  of  the  province    25 
Ontario's  changing  economy    25 

Unemployment  25 

Poverty  26 

Are  education  ami  ecomxnic 
prospcTiIv  connected?   26 

Demographic  factors   27 

I  he  lainilv   27 

Emotional  well-being  28 

Fertility  rates  28 

Immigration  28 

Native  peoples  28 

Visible  minorities  28 

Koni.in  <  .iiholk  .ind  tr.incophone  families  29 
Values  and  knowledge   29 
Educational  statistics  for  Ontario    30 
Some  indicators  of  how  we  are  doing   32 
Costs  of  education    34 

Education  expenditures  35 

Cost  comparisons   35 

Salaries  36 

Pupil-educator  ratio  36 

language  programs  36 
A  national  and  international  context 

for  educational  reform    36 


Chapter  3: 

People's  Voices       44 

The  purposes  of  education  and 

curriculum  issues    45 
Teaching  and  teacher  education    47 
Assessment  and  accountability    47 
Organization  of  education 

(governance)    49 
Public  concerns  and  the 

Commission's  mandate    49 


For  the  Love  of  Learning 


Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Learning 


Chapter  4: 

Purposes  of  Education  52 

The  issues   53 
Sharpening  the  focus: 

A  set  of  purposes   54 
Schools  in  the  broader  community: 

A  frameworl<   55 
Primary  and  shared  responsibilities   56 
Linking  purposes  with  responsibilities   57 
The  hidden  curriculum   58 
Values   60 
Conclusion   62 

Chapter  5: 

What  Is  Learning?  64 

What  do  we  know  about  how 
learning  happens?   65 

Learning  occurs  from  cradle  to  grave  65 
Learning  occurs  with  and  without 

direct  instruction  66 
Learning  depends  on  practice  66 
Learning  is  a  social  process  67 
Learning  occurs  most  readily  when 

learners  want  to  learn  67 
Learners  have  to  know  how  to  go 

on  learning  68 
Learning  is  different  for  different  learners  68 
There  are  barriers  to  learning  69 
Learning  for  life:  The  importance 

of  early  learning   70 
Informal  to  formal  learning:  The 

transition  from  home  to  school   71 
Active  teaching  and  learning  72 
Exploiting  the  diversity  of  the  group  72 
Extending  the  boundaries  of  the 

learning  environment  72 
Creating  a  learning  community  that  works  73 


Chapter  6: 

What  Is  Teaching?  76 

Characteristics  of  good  teaching   77 

Teachers  care  about  and  are  committed 
to  students  and  their  learning  78 

Teachers  know  the  subjects  they  teach 

and  how  to  teach  the  material  to  students: 
In  other  words,  they  know  how  to  make 
knowledge  accessible  to  students  79 

Guided  by  clear  goals,  teachers  organize 
and  monitor  student  learning  80 

Teachers  do  not  always  work  in  isolation;  they 
learn  from  and  collaborate  with  others, 
including  students,  colleagues,  parents, 
and  the  community  81 

Teachers  critically  examine  their  own  practice, 
and  continue  to  learn  throughout  their 
careers  81 
Good  teachers  in  their  schools  82 
Conclusion  82 


Volume  II 

Learning:  Our  Vision 
for  Schools 


Introduction  to  Volume  II   1 
Key  Issues   2 

(  iirri>.ulum  quality  3 
Curriculum  focus  3 
FairncM  and  opcnnns  4 
Ffficicncv  S 
Strategies  tor  improvement:  A  learning 
system  that  focuses  on  the  learner 
and  on  literacies    7 
I  he  system    7 
The  learner  8 

A  curriculum  for  literacies  8 
The  literacies  across  the  curriculum   10 


(Thaptrr  7: 

The  learner  from  Birth  to  Age  6: 
Ihe  Transition  from  Home 
to  School   12 

The  learner  from  birth  to  age  3: 

The  literacies  curriculum  of  home 
and  care    13 

The  learner  from  age  3  to  6:  The  literacy 
curriculum  in  a  school  setting   15 


C:haptcr  8: 

The  learner  from  Age  6  to  1 5: 
Our  (Common  ( Curriculum  24 

The  transition  to  compulsory 

schooling    25 
The  foundation:  The  essential  elements 

of  the  elementary  curriculum  26 

Litcrji.y  Lommunicatums  sliills  2~ 

Numeracv/probiem-tolvmg  31 

Group  learning  and  inlerpertnnal  skills 
and  value*  32 

Sciratifk  literacy  36 

Computer  literacy  37 


Core  subjects   39 

I  he  .iris:  I  ),iiKc,  ilr.iind.  music,  visual  arts  40 

Career  education  41 

History  43 

Official  languages  and  mtcrndtinnal 
languages  43 

Physical  and  health  education   46 

Technology  ( broad-based i  I" 
Continuity  In  curriculum  and  learning. 

Grades  1-6    48 
The  transition  to  adolescence:  Special 

consideration  of  the  needs  of  learners 

from  age  12  to  15   49 

Kciationjj  needs  4V 
Planning  needs  51 

The  need  for  choice,  decision-making, 
and  control   S2 
The  curriculum  as  the  basis  of  a 

learning  system  through  Grade  9    54 

1  hi-  iikKisiom  oI  ( ii.iiii-  '■)    'v'l 

The  focus  on  learner  outc«)mes   55 

Curriculum  integration  60 

Inclusiveness  of  The  Common  Curnculum  61 


Ch.ipter  4: 

The  Learner  from  Age  1 3  to  1 8: 
Further  Education  and 
Specialization  Years  66 

The  current  context  of  secondary 

education  in  Ontario    68 
Suggestions  for  reorganizing  the 

secondary  school    74 

The  duration  74 

Curriculum  organization   76 

Flexibility  85 

("urriculum  content   87 

The  transition  to  v^ork  from  Khool 
(and  back  again)  93 

Summary  94 

Adult  education  96 


For  the  Love  of  Learning 


Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Learning 


Volume  III 

The  Educators 


Chapter  10: 

Supports  for  Learning: 
Special  Needs  and  Special 
Opportunities  100 

Supports  for  some  students   101 

Support  for  students  with  different 
language  backgrounds  and  different 
learning  needs  based  on  language   101 

Support  for  students  with  disabilities, 
and  for  slow  and  fast  learners   108 
Supports  for  learning  for  all 

students  119 

Career  education   120 

Social  and  personal  guidance  teaching 
and  counselling   123 


Chapter  11: 

Evaluating  Achievement  130 

Student  assessment:  What  people 

told  us   132 
The  recent  history  of  student  assessment 

in  Ontario  133 
Assessing  individual  students  136 
Assessing  for  individual  improvement: 

The  most  important  reason   137 
Accounting  for  student  assessment: 

Reporting  what  is  learned   140 
The  uses  of  information  technology  in 

improving  student  assessment   143 
Avoiding  bias  in  assessment:  Respecting 

differences,  recognizing  diversity   145 
Large-scale  assessment  of  student 
achievement  and  the  effectiveness 
of  school  programs  148 
Large-scale  assessment  of  student 

achievement   148 
The  effectiveness  of  school  programs: 

Program  and  examination  review   151 
Reporting  the  results  of  large-scale 

assessments   154 
Conclusion  156 

Conclusion:  What  We  Have  Said  about 

the  Learning  System   16 

Volume  II  Recommendations  168 


Chapter  12: 

The  Educators  1 

Section  A:  Professional  issues  1 

A  statistical  snapshot   1 

Why  they  become,  and  stay,  teachers  2 

The  culture  of  teaching  2 

The  teacher  and  time  4 

Reaching  into  the  community  5 

School-based  professional  development  6 

Concerns  of  teacher  federations  7 

Supportive  technology  7 

Teaching:  The  vision  and  the  reality  7 

Teacher  organizations  and  professionalism  7 

Collective  bargaining  rights  8 

A  college  of  teachers  9 
Section  B:  Teacher  education  11 

What  did  we  hear?   12 

Historical  context   12 

Current  context  for  reforming 
teacher  education   13 

Pre-service  teacher  preparation  in 
Ontario  today  14 

Teacher  education  for  the  future   17 

Professional  development  and 
lifelong  learning  29 

Teacher  education:  Summary  36 
Section  C:  Evaluating  performance  36 

What  are  the  issues?  36 

Purposes  of  performance  appraisal  38 
Section  D:  Leadership  40 

Principals  40 
Department  heads  46 
Supervisory  officers  (SOs)  47 
Conclusion   53 

Volume  III:  Recommendations  60 


Volume  IV 

Making  it  Happen 


Introduction  to  Volume  IV   1 


(  hjptcr  I  V 

Learning,  Teaching,  and 
Information  Technology  4 

A  new  environment    6 
Possibilities  and  concerns    10 
Information  technology's 

contribution  to  learning    12 
Making  It  happen    15 

Icachcr  rducation   13 

Hardware    P 

On-line:  Learning  it  on  the  grapevine  20 
Other  Instructional  technologies  21 
Realizing  the  potential  23 

rVOntjni./UChalnc  27 
Conclusion   27 


Chapter  14: 

Community  Education: 
Alliances  for  I  earning  33 

The  problem:  Expansion  of  the  role 

of  schools    33 
Our  response:  Creating  communities 

of  concern    35 
A  local  focus  for  community 

education    37 
Supporting  and  sustaining  a  diversity 

of  models    37 
Barriers  to  community  education: 

Recognizing  them  and  removing 

them  39 
Community  education: 

Making  It  happen  42 
in  »<.h<M>U    i. 

...  with  familin  43 

...  and  the  nrw  Khool-communiiy  councils  44 

...  tvtth  Khool  boards  45 

...  with  the  provincial  govcrnmrnt: 
A4lopting  an  agenda  for  redesigning 
lysiems  lo  support  community 

Setting  a  timeline  for  action    48 
Conclusion    49 


(Chapter  IS: 

Constitutional  Issues  52 

The  Roman  Catholic  education 

system    53 

A  brill  hiiiory  ol  Roman  Catholic  schools  54 

Issues  and  recommendations  56 
Learning  in  French:  Rights,  needs, 

and  barriers    60 

A  glimpse  of  history  61 

Who  are  the  Franco-Ontarians?  62 

Their  constitutional  rights  63 

The  recognition  of  constitutional  rights  66 

The  future  of  a  community  70 
Aboriginal  peoples   73 

\V  lu>  arc  the  aboriginal  peoples 
of  Ontario?  73 

History  of  Native  education  73 

What  we  heard  76 

Issues  and  recommendations  78 
Conclusion   83 


Chapter  16: 

Equity  Considerations  86 

Religious  minorities    88 
Language,  ethno-cultural,  and 

racial  minorities    90 
Conclusion    96 


('haplor  17: 

Organizing  Education:  Power  and 
Decision-Making  100 

Stakeholders  and  power   101 
The  players    101 
Allocating  and  exercising 

decltiorwnaking  powers   102 

SchooU  103 

School  boards   109 

The  MiniMry  of  Kducation  and  Training  117 

Ihi  pros  nil  ul  government    122 
Conclusion   123 


For  the  Love  of  Leamiiig 


Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Learning 


Chapter  18: 

Funding  126 

Historical  context  127 
Education  funding  in  Ontario   128 
Current  concerns  128 

Equity   128 
Adequacy   132 

Conclusion   133 


Chapter  19: 

The  Accountability  of 
the  System  136 

Accountability  in  education: 

What  does  it  involve?  137 
Who  is  accountable?   138 
indicators  of  quality   139 
Assessment  agency   140 
Accountability  and  consistency  141 
Reporting  142 
Conclusion   144 


Chapter  20: 

Implementing  the  Reforms  146 

Previous  reports   148 

The  change  process:  How  educational 

change  happens  148 
What  about  the  Commission?  What  do 

we  hope  our  work  will  achieve?  149 
Engines  or  levers  for  change  150 

Early  childhood  education   151 

Community-education  alliances   151 

Teacher  development  and 
professionalization   152 

Information  technology   152 
What  actions  are  needed?   153 
An  implementation  commission   154 
Other  support  for  implementation   154 
Provincial  actions  155 
Suggested  short-term  actions  for 

the  provincial  government  and 

for  the  Ministry:  1995-96   156 

The  framework  for  reform   1 56 

Curriculum   156 


Assessment  and  accountability  156 

Power,  influence,  and  equity  156 

Early  childhood  education   157 

Teacher  professionalization  and 
development   157 

Information  technology  157 

Community-education  alliances   157 
Actions  by  other  stakeholders  157 
Cost  issues   158 
A  call  to  action   159 

Inertia   159 

Power  issues   159 

Collective  bargaining  issues   160 

Overload   160 

Lack  of  resources   160 
implementation  responsibilities  161 
Appendix  1:  Action  Plan  for 

Government  163 
Appendix  2:  Action  Plan  for 

Education  Stakeholders  164 

For  the  Love  of  Learning 

Recommendations   166 

Appendices   182 

A:  Submitters  184 

B:  Youth  Outreach   217 

C:  Consultation  with  Groups  and 

Individuals   220 
D:  Public  Hearings  - 

Dates  and  Sites   222 
E:  Schools  Visited   224 
F:  Background  Papers  - 

Author  and  Title   225 
G:  Commissioners'  Biographies   226 

Monique  Begin 

Gerald  Caplan 

Manisha  Bharti 

Avis  E.  Glaze 

Dennis  J.  Murphy 


^  i"":]^^ 


\Ki'\¥*,'.  *,W  :    y 


Introduction  to 
Volume  IV 


iiifci^irsTiii 


liftTigsl 


function  of  how  actively  various  political  interests  ... 
solve  education  and  social  problems,  and  the 
degree  to  which  they  are  willing  to  orchestrate  their 
actions  around  a  common  agenda  that  takes  the 
conditions  of  teaching  and  learning  seriously. 

i Richard  Elmore,  Restructuring  Schools,  1990 


owxhat  we  have  outlined  our  vision  of  a  renewed 
education  system,  we  must  confront  the  challenge 
of  making  it  happen  -  of  moving  from  vision 
to  reality. 


In  Chapters  13  and  14,  we  introduce  and  discuss  our 
final  two  engines  or  levers  of  change  -  information  tech- 
nology and  community  education.  These  are  strategies 
powerful  enough  to  shift  the  status  quo  in  schools,  making 
significant  improvements  possible  in  student  learning.  They 
are,  in  our  view,  crucial  to  accomplishing  reform. 

Information  technology  can  change  the  process  of  learn- 
ing and  allow  students  to  move  beyond  dependence  on  their 
teachers.  Along  with  many  others  in  education,  we  are 
enthusiastic  about  the  potential  of  information  technology 
to  make  learning  more  relevant  to  young  people,  and  to 
foster  higher-order  thinking.  In  Chapter  13,  we  outline  the 
conditions  necessary  to  integrate  information  technology 
into  teaching  and  learning,  we  discuss  student  assessment 
and  technology,  and  we  propose  the  supports  needed  for 
effective  use  of  technology  in  schools. 

Chapter  14  introduces  the  crucial  but  often  difficult  strat- 
egy of  strengthening  the  ties  between  schools  and  communi- 
ties -  a  process  that  may  involve  building  a  new  sense  of 
community.  We  believe  that  unless  some  of  the  extraneous, 
non-academic  burdens  are  removed  from  teachers,  it  will  be 
increasingly  difficult  for  them  to  do  their  jobs  well.  It  is  only 
through  closer  links  (among  educators  and  other  service 
providers,  both  at  the  local  and  provincial  levels),  that 
schools  will  get  the  support  they  need  to  focus  effectively  on 
the  academic  needs  of  students. 

Throughout  the  report,  we  have  alluded  to  the  special 
constitutional  status  of  the  Roman  Catholic  and  franco- 
phone communities  in  Ontario,  as  well  as  aboriginal  groups. 
In  Chapter  15,  we  discuss  how  funding  and  governance 


structures  must  change  to  support  the  constitutional  rights 
of  these  groups. 

In  Chapter  16,  we  extend  the  discussion  to  other  commu- 
nities. Representatives  of  particular  religious,  racial,  and 
ethnic  groups  expressed  some  of  the  same  concerns  regard- 
ing funding,  organization,  curriculum,  and  student  learning 
as  do  those  communities  discussed  in  Chapter  15.  We  make 
recommendations  designed  to  overcome  some  of  the  prob- 
lems faced  by  these  communities  and  their  young  people. 

How  the  education  system  should  be  organized  has  been 
a  particularly  contentious  issue.  Our  recommendations  in 
Chapter  17  are  intended  to  strike  a  more  appropriate 
balance  among  the  various  groups  and  institutions  in  the 
education  system.  Some  readers  may  be  surprised  to  find 
that  we  do  not  support  some  of  the  changes,  such  as  drastic 
reductions  in  the  number  of  school  boards,  proposed  by 
various  individuals  and  groups.  Although  we  do  not  advo- 
cate radical  changes  in  governance,  we  do  make  several 
recommendations  that  should  result  in  significant  improve- 
ments in  the  future. 

The  thorny  issue  of  educational  funding  is  dealt  with  in 
Chapter  18,  with  recommendations  for  a  more  equitable 
funding  model  for  Ontario  schools,  minimizing  current 
disparities.  Funding  must  be  equitable.  We  propose,  as  have 
several  recent  inquiries  into  educational  finance,  that  for  all 
school  boards  in  Ontario,  the  main  source  of  funding  should 
be  provincial  rather  than  local.  Boards  would  be  allowed  to 
raise  only  a  small  amount  through  local  taxes. 

Chapter  19  examines  the  important  question  of  account- 
ability -  who  accounts  to  the  public  for  what  happens  in 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Introduction  to  Volume  IV 


whooU.  Two  types  of  accountability  arc  relevant:  fiscal  and 
program.  We  look  briefly  at  each,  and  then  discuss  what 
additional  measures  should  be  taken  to  satisfy  the  public 
that  the  educational  system  is  operating  as  it  should.  A 
publicly  funded  system  must  be  publicly  accountable. 

Finally,  we  address  the  crucial  challenge  of  implementa- 
tion -  how  to  transform  ideals  into  reality.  After  reviewing 
some  of  the  lessons  learned  about  management  and 

Mient  of  educational  change,  we  suggest  actions. 

..  ftxus  particularly  on  the  provincial  govern- 
ment and  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  wc  offer 
suggestions  for  those  at  the  heart  of  our  education  system  - 
teachers,  parents,  and  students.  They  all  can  and  should 
participate  in  the  process  of  reform.  We  are  convinced  that 
(.hange  is  necessary  and  that  it  can  be  carried  out 
successfully. 

Throughout  our  report,  this  Commission  has  stressed 
that,  above  all,  schools  are  for  learning.  The  value  of  our 

Ijtions  should  be  judged  accordingly  -  the  crite- 

.  CVS  IS  student  learning. 


Ftt  itw  LOM  o(  LMmmg 


vi-  ^^ 


~  Sfc^WF-?-^-/^! 


rning,  Teaching, 
and  Information 
clinology 


.  oorlymotivated  students,  of  whom  our  system 
has  more  than  its  fair  share,  are  poor  students. 
Information  technology  can  become  the  link 
between  the  school  and  the  real  world  of  Ontario's 
young  men  and  women  -  the  component  that 
makes  schools,  at  long  last,  seem  relevant  to  their 
lives,  and  that  provides  the  motivation  to  re-think 
their  attitudes  to  learning  and  the  education 
system. 


Technology  stands  out  in  our  classrooms  as  a  symbol  to 
teachers,  parents  and  students  that  schooling  can  and  will 
change,  that  classrooms  may  have  some  bearing  on  the  21st 
century  after  all.' 

When  this  Commission  began  its  wori<,  the  concept  of  an 
information  superhighway  was  famiHar  to  only  a  handful  of 
Canadians;  well  before  we  had  finished  our  work,  no-one 
could  escape  media  focus  on  it.  When  we  began,  CD-ROMs 
were  a  series  of  letters  decipherable  mainly  by  "techie"  insid- 
ers; now  CD-ROMs  are  barely  avoidable,  and  it  is  widely 
understood  that  we  have  only  begun  to  scratch  the  surface  of 
the  capabilities  of  interactive,  multimedia  technology.  Who 
knows?  One  might  even  have  Royal  Commission  reports  in 
the  form  of  CD-ROMs.  (In  a  recent  cartoon,  one  youngster 
announces  to  his  pal:  "I'm  only  attending  school  until  it 
becomes  available  on  CD-ROM.") 

When  we  started,  the  Toronto  Star  did  not  have  a  weekly 
section  devoted  to  the  world  of  technology.  Nor  was  it  possi- 
ble to  submit  a  letter  to  the  editor  of  the  Ottawa  Citizen 
through  the  National  Capital  Free-Net  (based  at  Carleton 
University)  or  the  world-wide  Internet,  nor  to  access  our 
entire  report,  at  no  cost,  on  a  brand  new  Toronto  Free-Net. 

In  fact,  at  the  beginning  of  our  work  some  members  of 
the  Commission,  like  many  Canadians,  did  not  have  the 
remotest  notion  of  how  information  technology  could  influ- 
ence the  education  system.  But  awareness  among  Canadians 
is  growing:  according  to  a  1994  Gallup  poll  (reported  in  the 
FreeNET  conference  on  TVOnline),  54.4  percent  of  Canadi- 
ans are  aware  of  the  information  highway  and,  among  the 
services  of  interest  to  them,  education  ranked  first. 


This  report,  like  much  of  our  work,  was  written  (and  it  is 
being  produced)  electronically.  We  received  e-mail  on  our 
computers,  whether  in  the  office  and  at  home  (although  we 
found  that  e-mailing  at  home  can  be  a  wondrous,  but  some- 
times frustrating,  endeavour). 

We  teamed  up  with  TVOntario  to  sponsor  a  computer- 
based,  on-going  conference  on  education  issues,  where  more 
than  two  thousand  messages  were  posted.  Each  of  us  had  a 
voice-mail  system,  and  we  checked  our  messages  fi-om  as  far 
away  as  North  Bay.  We  also  used  voice-mail  in  conjunction 
with  our  1  -800  number,  as  another  way  for  people  to  share 
their  views  with  us. 

We  received  submissions  on  audio  cassettes  and  videos, 
and  sponsored  both  a  tele-conference  when  we  were  in 
Timmins,  and  a  video-conference,  linking  groups  in  Ottawa 
and  Toronto. 

Like  a  rapidly  increasing  number  of  people  world-wide, 
we  recognize  that  the  revolution  launched  by  the  microchip 
is  permanent;  it  will  only  accelerate  from  here,  at  a  pace  that 
is  unimaginable  to  most  of  us. 

But,  while  technological  innovations  revolutionize  every 
aspect  of  life,  and  while  some  Ontario  schools  have  begun  to 
recognize  the  promise  information  technology  holds,  much 
of  our  education  system  remains  relatively  untouched  by  it. 
We  are  persuaded  that,  if  it  were  introduced  and  organized 
properly,  and  if  teachers  were  adequately  prepared,  informa- 
tion technology  would  have  a  wonderfully  positive  role  in 
education,  right  from  the  earliest  grades  of  elementary 
school. 

This  chapter  discusses  that  potential.  We  define  informa- 
tion technology  as  one  of  our  four  engines  (see  Volume  I: 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Learning,  Teaching,  and  Information  Technology 


I...1   II.CJM  «ir   J.c   >iif;^r-vviiif;  iiiai   ic>. 

•nunc  good  in  ihc  learning  procns. 


Intrixluction),  and  think  that  in  the  classroom  its  essentials 
comprise  a  computer,  printer,  CiD-ROM  player,  and  modem, 
although  it  docs  not  necessarily  follow  that  each  computer 
needs  all  that  equipment  at  all  times.  There  are,  of  course, 
expansion  components,  such  as  stereo  speakers  which 
enhance  sound  quality,  and  plotters  for  certain  kinds  of 
computer-generated  drawings. 

Certainly,  there  are  other  technologies  that  may  be  useful 
for  instruction,  such  as  the  relatively  new  videodisks  and 
that  old  standby,  the  overhead  projector;  as  well,  there  are 
technologies  used  for  other  school-related  purposes,  such  as 
voice- mail  to  allow  parents  to  verify  homework  assignments: 
and  there  are  specialized  software  programs  for  everything 
from  planning  the  Khool  bus  routes  to  controlling  energy 
use  in  the  school.  For  the  purposes  of  this  report,  we  refer  to 
these  broader  instruments  and  applications  as  instructional 
technologiei. 

We  begin  by  identifying  information  technology  in  the 
context  of  educational  reform,  based  on  what  we  heard  and 
read  about  the  way  technology  is  driving  world  changes  - 
though  less  in  education  than  in  other  areas.  We  note  the 
conditions  needed  to  integrate  information  technology 
tucceufuilv  into  teaching  and  learning,  and  then  consider 
mor>  Iters  help  students  learn,  teach- 

ers t(  >  k  with  each  other  and  with 

experts  on-line 

We  divcuM  siiiiiviii  .l^■K^^ment.  students  using  networks 
to  gather  information,  and  the  natural  affinity  students  seem 
to  h  )  '^  Wc  alvt  talk  ab<iut  the 

netw  together,  allowing  them  to 

learn  more  easily  from  each  other  and  to  share  lesson  plans 
and  teaching  strategies. 


\Si-  develop  a  plan  with  some  fundamental  elements: 
developing  teacher  knowledge  and  skills,  providing  appro- 
priate hardware  and  high-quality  software  that  has  Cianadian 
content  and  perspective,  and  linking  such  computers  to  local 
and  regional  networks.  We  look  at  other  instructional  tech- 
nologies, such  as  interactive  video,  and  note  the  importance 
of  lA'Ontario  in  this  field.  Finally,  we  group  our  recommen- 
dations to  emphasize  the  co-ordinating  role  we  would  like  to 
see  the  Ministry  play. 

Before  proceeding,  however,  we  want  to  emphasize  that 
we  are  talking  about  information  and  other  instructional 
technologies  as  tools  for  learning  and  teaching.  Almost  as  a 
by-product,  students  also  learn  ct>mputer  literacy,  how  to 
use  the  intimidating  box  that  sits  on  the  desks  of  too  many 
managers  unable  to  turn  it  on.  Our  children  will  learn  the 
skills  to  exploit  its  full  range  of  capabilities. 

In  (Chapter  8,  we  recommended  that  computer  literacy 
become  one  of  the  five  foundation  skills  in  the  common 
curriculum.  (New  Brun.swick  has  already  established  a 
computer  literacy  requirement  for  graduates  of  high  school 
and  community  college,  starting  in  1996.)  This  will  provide 
students  with  the  crucial  skills  needed  to  use  technology  in 
the  workplace  -  and,  increasingly,  in  the  home.  Moreover, 
"technology  education  is  more  than  computers,"'  which  is 
why  our  discussion  of  curriculum  includes  the  place  of 
broad-based  technology. 

A  new  environment 

While  we  are  concerned  that  information  technology  has 
barely  had  an  impact  on  Ontario  schools,  it  does  not  mean 
we  are  suggesting  that  technology  is  an  automatic  good  in 
the  learning  process.  As  Professor  Ursula  Franklin  reminded 
the  world  in  77ie  Real  World  of  Technology,  the  1989  CBC 
Massey  lectures: 

Many  technological  tyMcmt     .arc  hasically  anliproplc.  People  arc 
seen  at  Miurcrs  of  problcmt  while  technology  it  teen  at  a  tourcc  of 
toluliont  . . .  When  ttudenti  are  teen  a*  not  sufficiently  competent,  it 
It  likely  to  be  compuicrt  that  the  tchool  purchatct  rather  than  extra 
leachen'  time  and  extra  human  help.' 

We  acknowledge  that  machines  must  be  at  the  service  of 
humankind  -  not  the  reverse.  That  is  why  we  insist  so  vigor- 
ously that,  without  appropriate  teaching  strategies,  informa- 
tion technology  will  not  do  the  job  required. 


For  ttw  Lovw  of  LMmtnc 


To  realize  any  vision  of  smarter  schooling  by  using  technology,  [we| 
must  prepare  teachers  to  use  the  technology.  Apart  from  funding 
considerations,  adequate  teacher  preparation  is  probably  the  most 
important  determinant  of  success.' 

We  are  also  wary  of  the  excessive  claims  made  for  tech- 
nology's potential  contribution  to  learning.  We  were  told  of  a 
claim  made  in  the  United  States  that  "over  20  years  of 
research  shows  that  when  technology  is  used  to  enhance  the 
instructional  process,  teacher  productivity  doubles  and 
students  experience  at  least  30  percent  more  learning  in  40 
percent  less  time  at  30  percent  less  cost."'  Such  statements, 
with  their  precise  quantification  of  uncertain  qualitative 
processes,  do  little  to  add  credibility  to  the  genuine  case  that 
can  be  made  for  the  role  of  technology  in  education. 

Used  improperly,  a  computer  in  the  school  is  nothing 
more  than  a  wasted  resource.  As  one  brief  put  it,  "The 
educational  technology  road  of  the  last  two  decades  in  this 
province  is  littered  with  the  wrecks  of  unused  and  ineffec- 
tively used  equipment."" 

Clearly,  this  is  not  just  an  Ontario  phenomenon:  at  least 
one  American  educator  and  futurist  asserts  that  "many 
schools  are  barely  entering  the  Information  Age.  They  are 
using  computers  as  data  processing  devices.  Whenever  any 
technology  comes  into  education,  it's  generally  used  to  do 
the  old  job  better."'  We  saw  classes  in  which  inadequate 
teachers  were  using  computers  and  educational  television, 
but  still  teaching  inadequately. 

However,  the  new  information  technologies  do  offer  the 
first  qualitative  change  in  the  potential  for  learning  since 
Gutenberg,  whose  book-based  information  technology  struc- 
tured the  education  process  for  half  a  millennium. 

McLuhan's  global  village  has  finally  become  a  reality  in 
the  world  of  education:  learning  need  no  longer  be  bound  by 
time  and  place,  and  continuing  education  is  transformed 
from  rhetoric  to  reality. 

Something  new  is  happening,  with  profound  conse- 
quences for  our  schools;  the  only  question  is  whether  we 
harness  it,  or  it  overwhelms  us.  "In  the  space  age,  an 
improved  horse  and  buggy  remains  a  horse  and  buggy."' 

Understandably,  overloaded  teachers  may  view  informa- 
tion technology  as  just  the  latest  set  of  bells  and  whistles  that 
complicate  their  daily  lives.  They  may  recall  that  educational 
television,  which  does  offer  some  programs  teachers  can  use, 
was  once  over- zealously  promoted  as  the  classroom  of  the 


AA  Ht  is  time  that  educational  tedv 
Inoiogy  be  presented  to  teachers 
as  a  useful  tool  with  appropriate 
supporting  resources  rather  than 
an  additional  burden  for  the 
teacher  to  master." 

Association  for  Media  and  Technology  . 
in  Education  in  Canada 


^Uij^j 


future,  where  there  would  be  no  need  for  teachers.  Or  they 
may  remember  the  new  math,  and  open-concept  classrooms, 
both  of  which  came  and  went. 

The  fact  is  that  many  -  probably  most  -  schools  are  bare- 
ly in  a  position  to  make  a  serious  commitment  to  informa- 
tion technology.  As  a  study  for  UNESCO  points  out: 

[Information  technology]  can  also  be  a  source  of  frustration  within 
the  present  tight  and  rigid  organizational  structure  of  education. 
Work  pressure,  lack  of  (hardware  and  software)  facilities  and  the 
frequent  lack  of  proper  integration  within  the  syllabus  have  a  nega- 
tive effect.' 

That  is  why  the  Association  for  Media  and  Technology  in 
Education  in  Canada  (AMTEC)  is  so  persuasive  when  it 
stresses  that,  "it  is  time  that  educational  technology  be 
presented  to  teachers  as  a  useful  tool  with  appropriate 
supporting  resources  rather  than  an  additional  burden  for 
the  teacher  to  master."'"  We  agree  with  the  AMTEC  member 
who  insists  such  technology  is  "a  teaching  tool,  not  a 
teacher." 

But  if  many  schools  and  teachers  are  not  yet  ready  for  the 
brave  new  world  of  information  technology,  two  other  key 
players  in  our  society  demonstrably  are.  The  education 
system  has  become  a  major  target  of  the  gigantic  informa- 
tion technology  industry,  which  has  a  huge  stake  in  every 
kind  of  software  and  hardware,  and  is  taking  aim  at  schools 
across  the  continent  in  an  effort  to  expand  its  markets. 

While  the  Canadian  push  is  being  led  by  such  large  firms 
as  Rogers,  Southam,  Corel,  Unitel,  and  Stentor  (an  alliance 
of  Canadian  phone  companies),  the  international  drive  is 
being  conducted  by  some  of  the  most  powerful  corporations 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Learning,  Teaching,  and  Information  Technology 


in  the  world:  Time  Warner,  Paramount  C  Aimmunications, 
Microsoft,  the  computer  manufacturers,  as  well  as  the  domi- 
nant players  in  the  gargantuan  computer  and  video-games 
industries. 

Indeed,  some  of  the  biggest  Canadian  concerns  have 
formed  links  with  vastly  larger  American  corporations; 
AT&T,  in  concert  with  Rogers  and  CP,  owns  20  percent  of 
Unite),  while  Slentor  has  a  marketing  agreement  with  MCI 
Communications  (Corporation. 

There  is  a  second,  often -ignored  stakeholder  in  the  school 
"business"  who  is  more  than  ready  for  the  information  tech- 
nology culture:  the  "client"  -  the  student.  "It  is  not  entirely 
facetious,"  according  to  some  educators,  "to  say  that  Sega 
and  Nintendo  are  in  control  of  our  children's  educational 
future." 

There  is  a  portrait  of  today's  family  that  has  a  certain  ring 
of  truth:  the  child  can  set  the  VCR  and  play  video  games, 
while  parents,  however  many  university  degrees  they  may 
possess,  are  left  baffled. 

However.  n<»l  all  youngsters  have  expensive  Super  Ninten- 
do games  at  home,  and  certainly  not  all  have  home  comput 
ers.  with  or  without  CCD-ROMs;  it  is  estimated  that  about 
one  in  four  homes  now  has  a  computer,  and  that  as  many  as 
two  in  three  will  do  so  by  the  end  of  the  century.  Obviously, 
children  who  already  have  the  greatest  socio-economic 
advantages  will  be  the  most  likely  to  have  the  latest,  and  the 
best,  information  technology. 

But.  regardless  of  background,  children  know  about 
Gar  music  videos,  V'(,Rs,  video  cameras, 

Cl)s  i.crs.  and  the  like:  especially  among 

bayt,  rvm  in  poor  neighbourhoods,  arcades  open  to  them 


the  world  of  video  games  and  multi  function  remote 
controls. 

Children  do  not  regard  these  as  marvellous  or  breath- 
taking, but  as  part  of  the  furniture  -  in  precisely  the  way 
their  parents  were  brought  up  to  regard  telephones.  Indeed, 
even  in  the  quintessential  low-paid,  dead-end  job.  the  Mcjob 
at  McDonald's  itself,  everything  depends  on  computeriza- 
tion. "This  technology,  in  their  minds,  is  and  always  has 
been."" 

This  goes  a  long  way,  as  the  UNESCO  report  notes,  "to 
explaining  why  teachers  armed  with  chalk  and  a  blackboard 
are  no  match  for  these  powerful  new  media.""  And  it  is  why 
York  University's  committee  on  technology  in  education 
organized  a  1994  conference,  "(Ihalkdusl  to  Chips." 

Nonetheless,  we  arc  aware  of  schools  in  Ontario  where 
students  at  the  senior  elementary  level  have  a  computer  class 
only  once  in  each  six-day  cycle,  with  two  youngsters  sharing 
a  single  machine  for  .^.S  minutes.  Furthermore,  if  the 
computer  classes  fall  on  a  holiday,  or  when  a  student  is 
absent,  the  opportunity  to  learn  computer  skills  can  occur 
perhaps  once  every  three  weeks. 

This  kind  of  scheduling  may  be  done  m  good  faith,  but  it 
is  a  bad  joke  for  students,  especially  because  of  the  strong 
affinity  this  generation  shows,  under  the  right  circum- 
stances, to  moving  from  games  to  the  most  sophisticated 
computer  applications  (e-mail,  world-wide  bulletin  boards, 
computer-animated  graphics,  electronic  file  transfers, 
computer-assisted  instruction,  etc.). 

While  it  may  be  difficult  to  credit  -  for  those  who  have 
never  had  an  opportunity  to  observe  school  children  work- 
ing with  computers  -  we  saw  many  remarkable  classes  and 
.some  schools  where  technology  is  real  and  is  having  an 
impact  on  both  leaching  and  learning. 

At  River  Oaks  in  Oakville,  an  experimental  elementary 
school  that  begins  at  the  junior  kindergarten  level,  we  were 
stunned  by  the  sheer  energy  and  enjoyment  we  ob.scrvcd.  We 
later  wondered  why  every  Ontario  school  should  not  gener- 
ate the  same  sense  of  excitement. 

This  seemed  an  especially  sensible  question  because  our 
personal  imprevsions  are  apparently  borne  out  by  academic 
evaluation.  Professor  Ron  Owston.  associate  dean  of  the 
Faculty  of  Fducation  at  York  I'niversity.  and  director  of  the 
university's  Ontrc  for  the  Study  of  Cx»mputers  in  Fxlucation, 
recently  completed  a  three-year  analysis  of  the  effect  of 


For  itrm  Um*  o(  L*«ming 


ISS 


computers  on  the  writing  skills  of  River  Oaks  students  from 
Grades  3  to  6.  Compared  to  a  control  group  who  wrote 
without  use  of  computer  technology,  Owston  found  that 
"computers  improved  the  structure  and  organization  of 
students'  work  both  in  narrative  and  personal  writing." 

By  Grade  6,  students  with  keyboarding  skills  were  writing 
3,000-word  stories  and  were  impressive  in  their  ability  to 
organize  these  very  long  tales.  Finally,  their  ability  to  access 
information  through  the  Internet  or  on  CD-ROMs  -  atlases, 
encyclopedias,  image  banks,  "conversations"  with  peers  in 
Japan  -  allowed  them  to  create  richer  works.  "Interestingly," 
Owston  says,  "while  the  quality  goes  up,  so  do  the  students' 
expectations."'* 

However,  it  is  crucial  to  note  that  River  Oaks  is  far  more 
than  a  high-tech  school:  it  is  a  highly  structured  operation 
based  on  a  cogent  philosophy  of  learning  that  is  shared  by 
all  its  staff.  As  principal  Gerry  Smith  writes: 

Technology  is  a  tool  to  help  realize  a  school  philosophy  that  is  quali- 
tatively different  from  most  schools  in  this  province.  Restructuring 
the  curriculum  has  been  the  major  focus  of  River  Oaks  since  its 
inception.  Curriculum  should  be  meaningful  and  relevant.  Curricu- 
lum should  focus  on  a  blending  of  theory  with  practice.  There 
should  be  provision  for  both  the  "old  basics"  and  the  "new  basics" 
such  as  accessing,  managing  and  processing  information,  collabora- 
tive and  co-operative  working  skills,  problem-solving  and  learning 
how  to  learn.  Learning  should  be  integrated.  Children  need  to  learn 
with  context. 

Associated  with  our  curriculum  restructuring  are  the  three  E's.  The 
curriculum  should  be  able  to  engage,  enable,  and  empower  students 
to  achieve  their  full  potential.  That's  why  we  can't  stress  too  forceful- 
ly our  conviction  that  computers  used  improperly  are  merely  anoth- 
er wasted  frill  and  a  poor  investment  in  a  time  of  relative  scarcity.'" 

At  the  Lambton  County  Roman  Catholic  Separate  School 
Board  in  Sarnia,  we  saw  a  board-wide  information  technolo- 
gy project  that  was  similarly  impressive,  and  we  looked  on  as 
students  at  Sir  Wilfrid  Laurier  High  School  in  suburban 
Ottawa  used  their  spare  periods  to  practise  high-level 
computer  graphics.  We  heard  descriptions  of  enviable 
programs  across  the  province,  from  Thunder  Bay  to  Lively  to 
Scarborough,  where  innovative  teachers  are  ensuring  that 
female  students  are  full  partners  in  technological  areas  that, 
traditionally,  were  assumed  to  be  masculine  enclaves. 


•  children  who  already  have 
the  greatest  socio-economic 
advantages  will  be  the  most 

likely  to  have  the  latest, 

and  the  best,  information 

technology. 

•  teachers  armed  with  chalk 

and  a  blackboard  are  no 

match  for  these  powerful 

new  media. 

•  the  education  system  has 

become  a  major  target  of 

the  gigantic  information 

technology  industry. 


We've  seen  highly  cost-effective  experiments,  such  as  the 
one  at  the  Wellington  Separate  School  Board's  Holy  Family 
Centre:  timetables  at  three  area  schools  are  co-ordinated, 
and  school  buses  provide  transportation  so  that  students, 
including  some  younger  students,  can  use  the  centre's 
computer  classroom. 

We  had  compelling  briefs  detailing  how  computer-based 
technology  could  be  used,  for  example,  to  individualize  a 
child's  education  from  age  4,  based  on  special  needs  and 
aptitudes.  In  Cochrane,  a  Grade  1 1  drop-out  who  is  now 
involved  in  computer  training  for  adult  learners,  told  us  how 
her  three-and-a-half-year-old  grandson  uses  a  computer  to 
do  word  recognition  exercises. 

Of  course,  computers  are  used  for  distance  education.  We 
were  told  that  the  Ontario  Institute  for  Studies  in  Education 
has  experimented  with  a  course  taught  exclusively  on  a 
computer  network.  With  disks  and  CD-ROMs,  courses  can 
be  distributed  to  students  who  have  access  to  computers. 
Where  correspondence  courses  used  to  consist  of  books  and, 
more  recently,  audio  and  video  tapes,  the  1990s  calls  for  files 
and  data  to  be  downloaded  from  networks. 

We  studied  reports  of  a  large  number  of  information 
technology  projects  and  experiments  in  American  schools, 
which  those  involved  describe  as  transforming  the  nature  of 
learning  for  kids  and  teaching  for  teachers."* 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Learning,  Teaching,  and  Information  Technology 


All  tn«  cttanfM  m  mnow*- 

.    -vcnoots  acrou  Ontano 
ono  fH««wAef«  are  the 
(««uR  o(n«w  approachM 
•■arninc  and  teacAin(. 
vk    tated  by  V«e  muoduc 
Uonot  mformaiion 
lactvtoioey 


Po»*lbilltl««  and  concerns 

At  ihii  ^!ui:u.  It  li  u.MtuI  tu  Mtcp  back  in  order  to  indicate  our 
concerns  about  the  entire  area  of  information  technology 
and  education.  There  arc.  of  course,  some  limitations  related 
to  the  current  state  of  the  art  of  computers  -  limits  over 
which  we  have  no  control  and  which  will  shrink  constantly 
as  science  and  technology  progress.  But  we  are  looking  at 
those  caused  by  the  system  and,  therefore,  within  our  ability 
to  affect. 

First,  most  of  the  success  stories  we  have  described 
involve  specific  projects,  carefully  prepared  and  operated  by 
intensely  committed  and  often  knowledgeable  individuals; 
the  projects  have  usually  received  special  funding.  Therefore, 
It  requires  quite  a  leap  of  faith  to  extrapolate  from  their 
findings  to  a  system  of  mass  learning.  And  there  arc  many 
other  conditions  that  will  need  to  be  met  before  we  can 
reasonably  expect  all  classrooms  to  reflect  the  successes  of 
the  few  experimental  ones. 

"Technology  is  not  likely  to  have  a  qualitative  impact 
unless  it  u  deeply  integrated  into  classroom  purposes  and 
activities."''  In  other  words,  information  technology  by  itself 
does  not  lead  to  change:  the  determinants  are  the  ways  it  is 
used  and  integrated  into  all  learning  and  teaching,  the  quali- 
ty and  appropriateness  of  the  software  that  is  chosen,  and 
the  abilities  and  interests  of  teachers. 

Higher-order  learning  skills,  for  example,  are  not  devel- 
oped unleu  the  right  software  is  being  used  in  the  right  way. 
Similarly,  traditional  didactic  approaches  are  left  behind 
only  if  there  i*  -  ipment  and  if  the  particular 

teacher  using  if>  ,:v  feels  comfortable  with  the 

changes  imrolvrd." 


In  sum,  all  the  changes  in  innovative  schools  across 
Ontario  and  elsewhere  arc  the  result  of  new  approaches  to 
learning  and  teaching,  fiuihlatfil  by  the  introduction  of 
information  technology. 

Second,  we  want  tt>  emphasize  that,  in  the  end,  computers 
and  the  related  technology  arc  nothing  more  than  machines 
-  even  if  their  ability  to  process  information  still  dazzles  the 
human  imagination.  In  fact,  wc  doubt  they  will  ever  replace 
the  joy  of  reading  a  great  book  as  a  form  of  continuing 
education. 

Paradoxically,  however,  technology's  very  dynamics,  and 
the  furious  pace  at  which  it  is  being  pushed,  leads  to  a  fear 
that  the  ability  to  control  its  evolution  is  already  beyond  our 
control.  Is  technology  in  the  saddle,  riding  humankind? 
Perhaps  not  yet,  but  unless  we  attempt  consciously  to 
harness  it  for  socially  useful  purposes,  we  may  soon  be  over- 
whelmed. 

Third,  major  questions  remain  unanswered  about 
decision-making  on  the  information  highway.  Indeed,  the 
fascinating  issue,  given  our  mandate,  is  whether  we  are  talk- 
ing about  an  information  highway,  where  the  public  interest 
prevails,  or  about  an  information  mall,  where  commercial 
concerns  dominate.  Who  will  decide  whether  the  interests  of 
the  public  and  the  community  or  of  the  private  sector  will 
be  paramount? 

There  arc  also  very  important  equity  issues  related  to  the 
educational  use  of  information  technology,  which  must  be 
subject  to  the  same  high  levels  of  equity  wc  expect  in  all 
areas  of  education. 

Wc  are  concerned  that,  unless  it  is  handled  sensitively,  the 
introduction  of  information  technology  may  well  reinforce, 
not  minimize,  artificial  barriers  to  learning. 

Common  sense  tells  us  that  financial  constraints  deter- 
mine students'  access  to  technology;  obviously,  children 
from  poorer  families  arc  less  likely  to  have  computers  at 
home  than  those  who  are  more  privileged.  Statistics  Canada 
reports  that  23.3  percent  of  Canadian  households  have 
computers,  excluding  those  used  only  for  games  or  business, 
but  that  this  figure  doubles  in  households  with  incomes  of 
more  than  S60,000."  In  that  sense,  schools  equipped  with 
information  technology  may  give  poorer  students  far  greater 
equality  of  opportunity  than  they  have  now. 

Wc  believe  that  all  schools  need  adequate  numbers  of  up- 
to-date  computers  and  that  all  schools  must  be  part  of  a  net. 


For  t^e  Lova  of  I.Mminc 


The  only  disparity  that  might  exist  between  and  within 
boards  should  favour  communities  where  fewer  homes  have 
computers. 

Unless  we  find  a  way  for  poorer  children  to  have  access, 
outside  the  school,  to  information  technology  equipment 
(linked  to  a  network),  it  is  quite  likely  they  will  eventually 
fall  behind.  The  possibility  of  creating  a  new  class  of  techno- 
logical literates,  with  disproportionate  privileges,  is  only  too 
real.  And,  of  course,  this  new  class  comes  disproportionately 
from  the  more  affluent  sections  of  society.  That  is  why 
schools  must  offer  all  students  the  opportunity  to  master 
this  literacy.  Indeed,  whether  high  school  students  choose 
the  more  applied  or  the  more  academic  focus  (as  we 
describe  the  new  options),  it  is  certain  that  almost  every 
conceivable  future  work  possibility  -  even  at  McDonald's  - 
will  require  knowledge  of  technology  and  its  uses. 

In  developing  and  using  software,  we  must  ensure  that 
negative  stereotypes  are  not  reinforced.  If  software  were 
assessed  centrally,  using  the  skills  of  professional  educators 
across  Ontario,  it  could  eliminate  the  need  for  every  school 
board  or  school  to  carry  out  such  assessments.  This  would 
probably  ensure  that  all  software  in  Ontario  classrooms, 
whether  distributed  directly  by  the  Ministry,  the  Ontario 
Software  Acquisition  Program,  or  simply  recommended  as  a 
resource,  was  of  high  quality  and  was  balanced.  It  is  impor- 
tant that  the  effects  of  information  technology  on  various 
social  groups  be  monitored. 

There  is  some  concern  that  boys  may  grasp  much  of  the 
new  technology  more  eagerly  than  girls,  presumably  for  the 
same  socially  conditioned  reasons  that  girls  are  less  comfort- 
able with  science  and  math.'"  The  introduction  of  informa- 
tion technology  to  all  school  children  when  they  are  very 
young,  as  a  routine  and  integral  part  of  their  lives  in  school, 
should  go  a  long  way  to  making  technology  gender  neutral; 
if  necessary,  particular  interventions  should  be  considered  to 
accomplish  this.  In  positioning  computers  as  centres  of 
learning,  we  must  take  care  that  girls  are  not  relegated  to  the 
periphery,  or  to  mastering  only  the  superficial  aspects. 

Astonishing  work  has  been  done  in  developing  software 
specifically  for  students  with  learning  disabilities.''  But  it  can 
hardly  work  if  these  youngsters  lack  access  to  the  proper 
tools.  Therefore,  teachers  in  information  technology 
programs  geared  to  individualized  instruction  can  guide  all 
students  who  have  special  education  needs.  Gifted  children 


A  Special  Education 
Teclinology  Team 
and  Centre 

Providing  computer  technol- 
ogy to  students  with 
disabilities  is  not  enough: 
decisions  have  to  be  made 
on  the  appropriate  selec- 
tion of  hardware  to  meet 
individual  needs.  Further- 
more, teachers  must  be 
taught  to  use  hardware  and 
software,  and  their  use 
must  be  monitored. 

The  York  Region  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School 
Board  formed  a  special 
education  technology  team 
to  do  just  that.  Including  a 
speech  and  language 
pathologist,  a  vision 
teacher,  a  consultant  for 


the  developmentally 
delayed,  a  physiotherapist, 
and  a  computer  technician, 
the  team  developed  a 
system  to  review  requests 
and  to  make  recommenda- 
tions on  hardware  and  soft- 
ware. The  team  also  took 
charge  of  teacher  in- 
service  in  the  area,  and 
established  the  Special 
Education  Technology 
Centre.  The  success  of  the 
team  and  of  the  centre  has 
led  other  boards  to  consid- 
er similar  initiatives;  the 
former  superintendent  (now 
a  director  in  a  different 
school  board)  who  initiated 
this  project  suggests  that 
they  be  developed  at  the 
provincial  level. 


can  move  ahead  at  their  own  pace,  and  can  even  become 
mentors  to  their  peers  -  perhaps  even  to  their  teachers. 

Another  concern  is  a  vital  component  of  schooling,  its 
social  aspect.  Our  aim  is  not  to  have  students  retreat  into 
themselves,  talking  only  to  the  computer.  We  were  pleased  to 
see  many  situations  in  which  students  work  in  teams,  teach- 
ing each  other  on  the  computer.  This  is  important.  It  is  also 
important  that  they  have  the  opportunity  to  learn  the  impli- 
cations of  computer  technology:  how  is  society  dealing  with 
automation  in  the  workplace?  in  leisure?  in  learning? 
Students  should  be  exposed  to  the  ethical  dilemmas  of  all 
technologies.  "A  technologically  literate  person  must  ... 
understand  the  relationship  between  technology  and  social 
change.""  And  we  emphasize  again  how  much  we  want 
students  to  read  books,  not  just  computer  screens:  books 
have  a  different  smell  and  feel  that  must  not  be  lost,  no 
matter  how  attractive  technology  may  be. 

Infusing  our  schools  with  information  technology  equi- 
tably and  using  its  impact  to  re-create  schools,  curriculum, 
and  teaching  will  not  occur  overnight.  There  are  costs  to 
consider,  the  need  to  develop  skills  and  knowledge  among 
educators,  and  the  development  and  acquisition  of  software. 
And,  of  course,  we  want  to  create  a  network  (or  "net")  to 
link  schools  together,  so  that  they  can  learn  and  share  as  a 
global  community. 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Learning,  Teaching,  and  Information  Teclinology 


ion 


''Nothing  motivates  student 

to  higher  performances  more 

than  a  sense  that  what  they 

are  studying  is  of  real 

relevance  and  importance  to 

themselves,  their  lives  and 

personal  aspirations  ...  the 

key  to  a  door  to  rewarding 

work  or  exciting  opportunity 

...  (a|  link  to  the  real  world 

of  students." 

GrilMm  Orpwood.  Faculty  of  Educatton.  York  university 


The  next  part  of  this  chapter  deals  with  the  elements  ot  a 
successful  transformation  of  the  school  system,  driven  by  the 
engme  of  information  technology.  We  note  the  need  for  co- 
ordination, so  that  networks  can  speak  to  each  other,  so  that 
software  is  evaluated  only  once.  We  discuss  the  kinds  of  soft- 
ware needed  in  our  schools,  emphasizing  that  -  like  books 
and  other  teaching  materials  -  there  must  be  a  strong  Cana- 
dian presence  in  information  technology;  and,  of  course,  we 
discuss  the  need  for  more  and  better  hardware  in  our 
schools.  But  first  we  bring  this  and  another  engine  -  teacher 
development  -  together,  because  teachers  have  a  key  role  in 
Snneint;  computers  to  life  in  our  schools. 

Information  technolo^'s  contribution  to  learning 

Information  technology  makes  a  number  of  singular  contri- 
butions to  the  world  of  learning.  First,  as  is  abundantly  clear 
from  all  the  examples  we  have  described,  it  makes  schools 
feel  relevant  m  a  way  that  nothing  else  has  or  can.  Student 
after  student  appeared  before  us  complainmg  persuasively 
about  the  irrelevance  of  schooling  to  their  lives.  "Nothing 
mot  ints  to  higher  performances,"  writes  Professor 

Gr.ii  '<Ki,  of  the  Faculty  of  Education  of  York 

Univenity.  "more  than  a  tense  that  what  they  are  studying  is 
of  real  relevance  and  importance  to  themselves,  their  lives 
and  personal  aspirations  ...  the  key  to  a  door  to  rewarding 
%rork  or  exciting  opportunity  ...  |a|  link  to  the  real  world  of 
students.''' 


Poorly  motivated  students,  of  whom  our  system  has  more 
than  its  fair  share,  are  poor  students.  Information  technolo- 
gy can  become  the  link  between  the  school  and  the  real 
world  of  t)ntario's  young  men  and  women  -  the  ct>mponent 
that  makes  schools,  at  long  last,  seem  relevant  to  their  lives, 
and  that  provides  the  motivation  to  re-thitik  ihc-ir  attitudes 
to  learning  and  to  the  education  system. 

American  educators  use  almost  identical  language  to 
describe  the  consequences  of  strategically  introducing  infor- 
mation technology  into  schools  where  they  teach,  supervise, 
or  have  studied.  "Teachers  reported  and  were  observed  to 
interact  differently  with  students  -  more  as  guides  or 
mentors  and  less  like  lecturers,"  one  writes  about  high 
school.  "At  times,  students  led  classes,  became  tutors,  and 
spontaneously  organized  collaborative  work  groups." 

After  several  years,  "significant  change"  was  observed  in 
the  way  students  thought  and  worked.  In  fact,  the  greatest 
difference  between  students  in  a  carefully  planned  and  struc- 
tured information  technology  program  and  those  in  conven- 
tional schools  is  "the  manner  in  which  they  organized  for 
and  accomplished  their  work.  Routinely  they  employed 
inquiry,  collaborative,  technological  and  problem  solving 
skills  uncommon  to  the  graduates  of  traditional  high  school 
programs." 

At  the  same  time,  teachers,  "began  teaming,  working 
across  disciplines,  and  modifying  school  schedules  to  accom- 
modate ambitious  class  proiects,"  while,  in  elementary 
schools,  "traditional  recitation  and  scat  work  have  been 
gradually  balanced  with  inter-disciplinary,  projcct-ba.scd 
instruction  that  integrates  the  same  advanced  technologies 
in  use  in  high  school." 

No  wonder  the  writer  concludes  that  "the  catalytic  impact 
of  technology  in  these  environments  cannot  be  under- 
estimated. We  have  watched  technology  profoundly  disturb 
the  inertia  of  traditional  classrooms.  For  example,  technology: 

•  encourages  fundamentally  different  forms  of  interaction 
among  students  and  between  students  and  teachers; 

•  engages  students  systematically  in  higher-order  cognitive 
tasks;  and 

•  prompts  teachers  to  question  old  assumptions  about 
instruction  and  learning."  ' 

While  the  C<»mmission  largely  avoids  the  cliche  "para- 
digm shift,"  it  is  surely  appropriate  in  this  context.  Ortainly, 


fufi  th«  Lov*  of  L*am«n| 


Students  who  get  into  the  habit  of  checking  their  ov 
learning  and  understanding  are  self-assessing,  an 
important  skill  at  a  time  when,  increasingly,  people  are, 
required  to  consider  how  well  prepared  they  are  for 
jobs  and  a  society  that  changes  rapidly  around  us. 


such  changes  in  a  school  environment,  if  real,  constitute 
nothing  less  than  a  transformation  of  the  learning  culture  for 
those  involved.  Education  is  being  re-invented  for  them. 

Other  researchers  make  equally  irresistible  claims.  The 
heads  of  the  Institute  for  the  Reinvention  of  Education  at 
Pennsylvania  State  University  insist  that  new  technology  can 
help  students  learn  and  develop  at  different  rates;  make  them 
proficient  at  accessing,  evaluating,  and  communicating  infor- 
mation; foster  an  increase  in  the  quantity  and  quality  of 
students'  thinking  and  writing;  help  them  learn  to  solve 
complex  problems;  make  them  globally  aware  and  able  to  use 
resources  that  exist  outside  the  school;  create  opportunities 
for  them  to  do  meaningful  work;  and  even  nurture  artistic 
expression." 

In  an  earlier  chapter,  we  pointed  out  that  computers  have 
a  role  in  giving  students  immediate  feedback  on  their 
progress.  Computer-mediated  assessment  can  allow  students 
to  test  themselves,  checking  to  see  if  they  have  mastered  a 
new  skill  or  have  the  knowledge  required  to  move  on  to 
other  work.  There  is  evidence  such  techniques  teach  students 
that  they  have  the  capacity  to  improve,  while  immediate 
feedback  has  been  shown  to  motivate  students  who  might 
otherwise  have  very  little  interest  in  school. 

Students  who  get  into  the  habit  of  checking  their  own 
learning  and  understanding  are  self-assessing,  an  important 
skill  at  a  time  when,  increasingly,  people  are  required  to 
consider  how  well  prepared  they  are  for  jobs  and  a  society 
that  changes  rapidly  around  us.  As  students  take  greater 
responsibility  for  assessing  themselves,  the  pace  of  learning 
changes  and  becomes  more  individualized.  All  of  this  may 
unavoidably  alter  the  way  schools  and  learning  are  organized. 
We  believe  it  is  vital  for  schools  to  manage  this  process  rather 
than  simply  being  bystanders  to  it. 

However,  our  discussion  would  be  only  half  complete  if 
we  were  to  focus  solely  on  how  students  make  use  of 
computers  to  learn  more,  better,  and  faster.  The  other  half  of 
learning  in  school  is  teaching;  teachers  have  shown  that  they 
can  make  innovative  uses  of  information  technology  to 
change  the  way  they  teach,  responding  to  more  student 
needs,  and  facilitating  the  better  learning  we  have  been 
discussing. 

Of  course,  it  is  probable  that  good  teachers  always  want  to 
use  direct  instruction,  as  needed,  to  convey  certain  lessons. 
Nevertheless,  we  are  satisfied  that  information  technology 


can  be  beneficial  in  fostering  the  diverse  techniques  of  teach- 
ing/learning that  the  best  teachers  employ. 

No  doubt  it  is  true  that  neither  all  teachers  nor  all  parents 
will  welcome  the  greater  role  for  student  initiative  and  inde- 
pendent learning  that  is  virtually  the  guaranteed  result  of 
using  any  good  software  program.  They,  after  all,  allow  the 
user  to  navigate  through  the  material  independently,  explor- 
ing directions  and  pathways  well  beyond  any  teacher's  possi- 
ble control  or  planning.  We  welcome  this  new  capacity,  and 
are  confident  that  the  overwhelming  number  of  children  in 
our  schools,  if  directed  by  well-versed  teachers,  will  be  able 
to  use  it  productively  and  constructively. 

With  these  tools,  we  can  "move  classrooms  away  from 
conventional  didactic  instructional  approaches,  in  which 
teachers  do  most  of  the  talking  and  students  listen  and 
complete  short  exercises  on  well-defined,  subject-area- 
specific  material.  Instead,  students  are  challenged  with 
complex,  authentic  tasks,  and  reformers  are  pushing  for 
lengthy  multidisciplinary  projects,  co-operative  learning 
groups,  flexible  scheduling,  and  authentic  assessments." 

In  this  kind  of  reformed  classroom,  "authentic  tasks  are 
completed  for  reasons  beyond  a  grade.  Students  also  see  the 
activity  as  worthwhile  in  its  own  right."  This  attitude  is 
greatly  facilitated  because  students  "take  great  pride  in  using 
the  same  tools  as  practising  professionals,"  not  to  mention 
producing  work  that  often  resembles  that  of  a  professional." 

In  the  longer  term,  the  increasing  independence  of  most 
students  should  provide  teachers  with  some  relief  from  time 
pressures,  time  they  might  then  dedicate  to  students  having 
difficulty. 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Learning,  Teaching,  and  Information  Technology 


Vicki  Hancock  and  Frank  Rctts  of  the  Education  and 
Technology  Resources  Centre  of  the  Association  for  Supervi- 
sion and  Curriculum  Development  stress  that,  in  informa- 
tion technology  programs,  teachers  "expect  far  more  of  their 
students  and  present  more  complex  material.  The  range  of 
learnmg  experiences  extends  far  beyond  those  offered  in 
traditional  classrooms."'  At  the  same  time,  more  individual 
attention  by  the  teacher  is  possible,  allowing  different  learn- 
ing styles  to  be  accommodated. 

Teacher -cent  red  cUuroonu  lend  to  evolve  inio  ttudenl-LcnIred 
ones.  The  lescher  acts  more  as  a  coach  than  an  information 
dupcTuer.  More  collaboration  and  imall-group  work  occurs. 

Another  computer  speciali.st,  this  one  in  Maine,  tells  of  a 
school  that  cancelled  the  computer  classes  in  its  lah  and 
integrated  computers  into  its  curriculum,  so  that  students 
would  not  just  learn  to  use  computers  but  would  learn  ideas. 
The  exciting  results:  'Students  have  become  even  more 
actively  involved  in  their  work  ...  [and]  'average'  students 
grew  as  involved  and  interested  as  gifted'  students."" 

Similarly,  an  Knglish  and  iournalism  teacher  in  San  Diego 
reports  that  the  use  of  technology  in  her  classes  has  led  "all 
students,  from  gifted  to  special  education,  to  take  control  of 
their  learning."  In  a  community  with  high  drop-out  rates, 
she  found  students  fully  engaged,  and  notes  that  "co-opera- 
tive learning  is  encouraged."  enabling  her  to  spend  "more  of 
my  time  as  a  facilitator  of  learning  rather  than  .m  .ill 
knowing  expert."" 

These  findings  are  entirely  consistent  with  our  miprcs 
sions  of  Ontario  schools  we  visited,  as  well  as  with  what 
both  teachers  and  students  throughout  the  province  say 
about  their  own  reactions." 


From  their  experience,  educators  in  the  Netherlands  add 
that  while  "the  computer  will  never  replace  the  teacher  ...  it 
will  change  the  role  of  the  teacher  to  increase  the  time  and 
attention  that  can  be  spent  on  groups  of  pupils  who  are 
often  neglected  at  present  -  exceptionally  j-ifted  children  and 
pupils  who  lag  behind."" 

In  its  brief  to  us,  the  Association  for  Media  and  lechnol- 
ogy  in  Education  in  Canada  (AMTEC)  described  studies 
that  concluded: 

Educational  technology  can  create  nevk'  avenues  tor  sonal  exchange 
and  co-operative  learning.  Fear*  that  computers  will  result  in 
students  working  in  isolation  removed  from  all  forms  of  human 
interaction  can  be  dispelled  by  watching  students  m  classrooms 
organized  to  promote  peer  interaction.  Students  solve  problems 
collaboratively,  often  with  their  teachers  as  partners.'' 

They  also  discuss  a  1990  project  of  the  University  of 
British  Columbia  and  the  Educational  Technology  Centre  of 
British  c;t)lumbia,  to  integrate  computer-related  technologies 
in  12  schools.  The  result  was  that  teachers  found  the 
computers  had  a  positive  impact,  not  only  on  children's 
learning  but  also  on  their  social  and  emotional  growth. 
"There  was  a  feeling,"  according  to  the  report  of  the  project, 
"that  the  motivational  aspect  of  the  computer  encouraged 
the  students  to  spend  more  time  at  the  computer,  which  led 
to  developing  skills  in  critical  thinking,  creative  thinking  and 
problem -solving." 

Moreover,  when  multimedia  programs  were  used,  "teach- 
ers commented  that  children  put  more  effort  into  their 
learning  and  reached  high  success  levels."  Those  who  have 
seen  a  group  of  Grade  8  boys  at  River  Oaks  -  hormone- 
hoppers,  as  they  are  quaintly  known  -  ignore  the  lunch-hour 
bell  so  that  they  can  continue  working  on  a  collective  project 
will  recogni/c  this  rare  school  syndrome. 

The  British  Columbia  project  also  concluded  that 
computers  positively  enhanced  students'  attitudes  toward 
learning  in  general,  and  belief  in  themselves  as  learners: 

There  was  some  speculation  that  the  intriguing  mechanical/technical 
aspect  of  computers  was  a  factor  in  motivatmg  children,  but  more 
often  teachers  felt  that  the  contribution  computers  could  make  to 
building  telfesteem.  empowering  and  enabling  the  learner,  and 
building  confidence  and  feelings  of  success  were  tvhat  really 
sustained  the  high  interest  and  use. 


For  \h»  Lov«  of  L«amin( 


With  the  tools  of  technology,  students  can  dramatically  raise  knowl- 
edge levels,  learn  problem-solving  techniques,  develop  the  skills 
required  to  manage  massive  amounts  of  information,  analyze 
concepts  from  several  different  perspectives,  and  develop  the  hard- 
to-quantify  higher-order  analytic  and  critical  thinking  skills  that  are 
required  in  the  global  marketplace." 

We  know  that  individuals  learn  at  different  rates,  and, 
while  Howard  Gardner's  theory  -  that  each  of  us  has  many 
different  kinds  of  intelligence"  -  has  gained  widespread 
acceptance,  in  the  real  world  of  a  large  classroom,  it  is 
extremely  difficult  for  a  teacher  to  act  on  this  knowledge. 
Information  technology  begins  to  make  it  feasible  to  order 
learning  to  fit  the  individual  child's  characteristics. 

Further  along  the  continuum,  a  digital  electronics 
program  at  Humber  College  in  Etobicoke  has  resulted  in  a 
computerized  learning  infrastructure  that  made  it  possible 
to  offer  individualized  instruction,  continuous  intake  of 
students  throughout  the  year,  and  computer-managed  learn- 
ing (CML).  According  to  the  creator  of  this  program, 
"perhaps  the  most  important  advantage  of  individualized 
instruction  is  the  fact  that  students  are  forced  to  learn  how 
to  learn  on  their  own  . . .  Most  become  confident  learners 
and  are  very  pleased  with  themselves." 

Under  CML,  each  student  progresses  through  his  or  her 
courses.  The  program 

delivers  homework  assignments,  supervises  examinations,  checks 
answers  to  assignments  and  examinations,  provides  students  with 
reports  on  test  achievement,  allows  entry  of  grades  from  faculty 
graded  projects  such  as  labs,  checks  data  gathered  from  lab  measure- 
ments, and  provides  comprehensive  statistics  of  the  student's  grades, 
classes,  objectives,  and  test-question  success." 

In  addition  to  enhancing  student  learning,  information 
technology  offers  teachers  ample  opportunities  for  using 
computers  (and  the  communications  networks  they  access) 
to  share  ideas,  learn  from  each  other,  and  form  collaborative 
networks  of  professional  educators. 

The  Commission  learned  a  great  deal  from  the  Culture  of 
Change  Electronic  Village,  a  province-wide  network  of  the 
Ontario  Teachers'  Federation,  which  allows  teachers  to  link 
to  each  other.  OTF  has  structured  the  network  so  that,  in 
many  Ontario  communities,  it  is  only  a  local  call;  the  system 
features  "conferences"  of  all  types,  where  teachers  can 
discuss  issues,  share  lesson  plans,  and  pose  questions. 


"Some  things  only  teachers 

can  do.  Teachers  can  build 

strong,  productive 

relationships  with  students. 

Technologies  can't.  Teachers 

can  motivate  students  to  love 

learning.  Technologies  can't. 

Teachers  can  identify  and 

meet  students'  emotional 

needs.  Technologies  can't. 

Technology-based  solutions 

can,  and  must,  free  the 

teacher  to  do  the  important 

work  that  requires  human 

interaction,  continuous 

evaluation,  and  improvement 

of  the  learning  environment." 

Kyle  Peck  and  Demise  Dorricot. 
in  "Why  Use  Technology?" 


According  to  Globe  and  Mail  education  writer  Jennifer 
Lewington,  who  solicited  comments  from  participants,  the 
results  are  encouraging."'  Said  one  teacher,  "It  is  one  of  the 
best  sources  of  professional  development  that  I  have  come 
across  and  made  use  of  in  the  past  18  years."  An  external 
evaluator  commented  that  the  network  "is  one  of  the  most 
powerful  tools  for  policy  feedback." 

We  envision  this  network  growing,  increasing  the  number 
of  teachers  involved  and  expanding  the  topics  for  discussion. 
We  also  foresee  the  possibility  of  school  boards,  education 
faculties,  and  others  using  the  net  to  send  educational 
research,  the  material  for  an  in-service  course,  or  new 
Ministry  curriculum  guidelines.  The  possibilities  are  exciting. 

Making  it  happen 

Teacher  education 

Almost  all  reports  of  successful  projects  in  information 
technology  describe  its  profound  transformative  effect  on 
the  role  of  the  teacher.  In  the  long  term,  UNESCO  reports, 
the  teacher  goes  from  "know-all  to  guide,  from  soloist  to 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Learning,  Teaching,  and  Information  Technology 


(A  MmWI  M»dl«  Cwrtr*) 

■  ••'s  ifi  ir>e  Mel/opol^ 
ronio  Separate 
I  Board  hM«  a  mutti^ 
:  J  re«ource  centre 
)  they  can  learn  about 
t  tectmotoctes;  K 
I  computers,  elec- 
iheytwards.  matert- 
^mt,  ana  resources  used  to 
provide  irvservtce  tvorfc 


shops  to  teachers  in  (our 
schools.  The  vKorKshops 
are  organued  dunng  arKl 
after  school  hours: 
students  also  txam  access 
to  the  centre  NetworVing 
among  the  teachers  has 
already  led  to  development 
of  integrated  theme  units 
irKorporating  the  arts  and 
technology. 


accompanist."''  He  or  she  tends  to  become  more  of  "a  facili- 
tator someone  who  creates  the  conditions  for  learning  and 
organizes  the  learning  processes."" 

What  gives  these  many  diverse  reports  credibility  in  our 
eyes  is  the  sensitivity  they  shovk'  tovk'ards  the  teacher's  place 
in  the  new  world  of  information  technology.  \'irtually  all  the 
researchers  believe  that  information  technology  can  work 
only  if  teachers  are  intimately  involved.  Some  wax  almost 
poetic: 

Som<  things  only  icjchen  can  do.  Teachers  can  build  strong, 
productive  rciatioiuhipi  with  students.  Technologies  can't.  Teachers 
can  motWaic  students  to  love  learning.  Technologies  can't.  Teachers 
can  identify  and  meet  students'  emotional  needs.  Technologies  can't. 
Tcchnology-baied  solutions  can,  and  must,  free  the  teacher  to  do  the 
important  work  that  re<)uires  human  interaction,  continuous  evalu- 
ation, and  improvement  of  the  learning  environment." 

But  no-one,  however  excited  or  knowledgeable  about 
tech:  '(.ves  that  teachers  can  play  their  new  roles 

witt;  ,>>nal  doelopment.  "Our  teachers  need  train- 

ing." the  lx>uncil  of  Directors  of  Education  of  Ontario  (old 
the  Commission.  "We  are  asking  professionals,  educated  in  a 
paradigm  of  the  teacher  as  information  dispenser,  to  be 
cogi  '  '  piiwers  and  potentials  of  the  |new|  tech- 

no!' .  It  funding  and  support,  teachers  will  not 

likely  be  able  to  equip  themselves  with  the  tools  necessary  to 
be  an  educator  in  the  1990s  and  beyond."" 

Teacherv  says  an  American  educator,  must  be  given  the 
opportunity  "for  not  only  learning  how  to  use  the  technolo- 
gy but  also  learning  strategics  for  using  technology  with 
students."' 


The  first  step  is  to  make  current  teachers  comfortable 
with  information  technology  -  using  it  themselves,  teaching 
with  it,  and  selecting  the  software  that  will  best  fit  their 
courses.  In  fact,  a  number  of  teachers  arc  already  familiar 
with  the  world  uf  educational  technology.  But  the  majority, 
quite  naturally,  are  probably  as  intimidated  by  the  new  tech- 
nology as  people  elsewhere  -  including  those  on  this 
Commission. 

We  do  not  expect  tens  of  thousands  of  Ontario  teachers 
suddenly  to  be  transformed  from  techno- peasants  to  techno- 
pedagogucs,  able  to  turn  traditional  schools  into  cyber- 
centres  where  teachers  and  students  surf  the  tcchno-wavcs. 

But  there  is  no  reason  why  all  teachers  cannot  learn  to  be 
modestly  at  home  in  the  world  of  information  technology,  as 
long  as  appropriate  time  and  resources  are  made  available  to 
prepare  them  properly.  Nonetheless,  we  have  been  told  that 
the  commitment  to  teacher  in-service  is  woefully  inadequate 
in  most  school  boards  across  the  province.  While  some  are 
taking  necessary  action,  it  appears  that  most  boards,  already 
resource  challenged,  do  not  provide  anything  like  sufficient 
resources  for  technological  development.' 

The  other  step  is  to  provide  more  and  better  technologi- 
cal education  to  all  those  entering  the  teaching  profession. 
We  can  surely  take  for  granted  that  most  of  them  will 
already  have  some  considerable  knowledge  of  the  world  of 
information  technology:  at  the  minimum,  all  are  likely  to 
have  prepared  their  university  essays  on  word  processors, 
and  each  new  year's  crop  can  be  counted  on  to  take  the  latest 
technology  more  for  granted.  But,  as  they  undergo  the  long 
process  of  becoming  really  accomplished  teachers,  it  is 
crucial  that  they  know  about  technology  and  especially  how 
to  teach  with  technology.  That  is  true  whether  they  intend  to 
teach  in  elementary  or  secondary  schools,  or  whether  they 
become  calculus  or  literature  teachers. 

In  earlier  chapters  on  teacher  selection,  initial  prepara- 
tion, and  on-going  development,  we  recommended  that 
students'  prerequisites  for  entry  to  a  faculty  of  education 
include  a  demonstration  of  a  basic  familiarity  with  informa- 
tion technology.  The  definition  of  a  basic  familiarity  will 
change  as  more  and  more  applicants  see  computers  as  just 
another  tool;  however,  we  would  suggest  that  all  applicants 
should  be  able  to  use  a  word  processor  (and  use  it  regularly 
to  do  papers),  know  how  to  use  other  types  of  software,  such 
as  databases  and  drawing  or  painting  programs. 


For  the  Love  of  Learning 


There  is  no  reason  why  virtually  all  teachers 
cannot  learn  to  be  modestly  at  home  in  the  world 
of  information  technology,  as  long  as  appropriate 
time  and  resources  are  made  available  to  prepare 
them  properly. 


Given  our  emphasis  on  computer-based  communications 
networks,  all  applicants  should  have  used  communications 
software  to  link  to  an  electronic  bulletin  board.  Happily, 
there  are  hundreds  in  this  country,  including  many  that  are 
school  based,  school-board  based,  or  public. 

With  student  teachers  who  are  equipped  with  this  back- 
ground, the  task  in  initially  preparing  them  for  their  profes- 
sion is  to  give  them  knowledge  and  skills  in  applying  infor- 
mation technology  in  the  classroom.  This  means  knowing 
how  to  integrate  computers  in  all  areas  of  the  curriculum. 

While  we  are  not  suggesting  that  teachers  know  a  given 
educational  software  program,  we  do  argue  that  they  need  to 
know  how  to  select  high-quality  software,  appropriate  to  the 
age  of  the  students  and  their  current  tasks,  which  might  be 
available  in  a  school  or  board  resource  centre.  Teachers,  with 
the  assistance  of  their  school  boards,  the  Ministry,  teacher 
federations,  and  education  faculties,  must  develop  a  level  of 
comfort  with  information  technology. 

We  emphasize  that  this  is  a  joint  effort:  teachers  must  see 
the  value  of  information  technology  in  their  work  and  in 
their  daily  lives,  while  school  boards  must  see  the  impor- 
tance of  computers  in  the  classroom.  We  suggest  that  teach- 
ers take  advantage  of  the  educational  discounts  for  computer 
hardware  and  software  available  to  them,  as  well  as  to  train- 
ing courses  provided  by  school  boards  and  others.  Each 
person  must  take  responsibility  for  achieving  a  level  of  tech- 
nological comfort  and  expertiise  necessary  for  being  a 
teacher  in  Ontario's  modern  school  system. 

But  we  also  suggest  that  the  range  of  courses  be  enhanced 
to  give  practising  teachers  the  knowledge  and  skills  to  use 
computers  in  the  classroom  successfully.  Aside  from  schools 
in  which  there  is  a  shortage  of  computer  equipment,  all 
teachers  not  now  using  computers  in  the  classroom  should 
be  expected  to  modify  their  teaching  strategies  and  to 
become  involved. 

There  is  nothing  irrational  about  teachers  being  afraid  of  looking 
stupid  in  front  of  students  who  know  more  about  computers  than 
they  do;  similarly,  the  difficulties  of  integrating  computers  into  daily 
classroom  practice  with  no  system  support  are  not  imaginary." 

Teachers  who  regularly  use  computers  in  their  regular 
classroom  work,  should  have  opportunities  for  advanced 
study.  Universities,  school  boards,  federations,  and  the 
Ministry  must  work  together  to  ensure  that  both  types  of 
professional  development  are  available. 


Throughout  this  report,  we  have  attempted  to  demon- 
strate how  the  four  engines  assist  each  other  synergistically; 
in  this  instance,  the  relationship  between  technology  and 
teacher  preparation  must  be  organic. 

At  the  same  time,  if  we  are  correct  in  believing  that  early 
childhood  education  predisposes  children  to  learning, 
schools  that  offer  the  kind  of  motivation  provided  by  strate- 
gically directed  technology  are  building  welcoming  institu- 
tions. And  as  more  and  more  homes  computerize,  the  possi- 
bility of  families  working  together  on  technology-related 
projects  becomes  increasingly  likely;  this  makes  the  availabil- 
ity of  computers  especially  important  for  students  from 
poorer  families  who,  while  they  may  not  have  computers  at 
home,  will  at  least  be  systematically  introduced  to  informa- 
tion technology  at  school. 

Hardware 

Common  to  much  of  what  we  heard  and  read  is  the  matter 
of  access.  Unless  both  the  software  and  hardware  become 
widely  available  throughout  Ontario  schools,  the  bright 
promise  of  technology  will  remain  a  dead  letter  for  the  great 
majority  of  Ontario  students,  ft  appears  that,  in  the  past,  the 
government  saw  meeting  this  need  as  a  high  priority.  Paul 
Ryan,  a  Windsor  teacher  and  president  of  the  Educational 
Computing  Organization  of  Ontario,  told  us  that 

There  was  a  time  when  the  province  of  Ontario,  through  the 
Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  provided  vision,  and  leader- 
ship, and  the  funds  to  make  things  happen.  The  development  of  the 
Icon  computer;  a  comprehensive  computer  science  curriculum;  the 
initiation  of  the  GEMs  [grant-eligible  micro-computers,  those  that 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Learning,  Teaching,  and  Information  Teclinology 


C— pii>«n  Acre** 


,ilt  SL  JoacfMm  School  m 
ffie  OuffefifvP«e<  Roman 

-    lie  Scftool  Board. 
^      ixjtert  are  not  just  tAe 
JpMin  o(  students  arxl 
-^Iwctisis  m  regular  class 
rooms.  The  school,  nvhich 
has  tteen  entirelyMred 
using  ICON  computers,  has 


placed  computers  in  the 
dasarooms  used  t>y  the 
chUd/youth  worVer.  ESL, 
artd  special  educatKxi  and 
resource  teachers.  In  addh 
tton.  there  are  workshops 
that  involve  parents  and 
the  sclKX>i  IS  using  comput 
ers  to  communicate  with 
students  in  KentucKy.  New 
Orleans,  arxl  Maryland. 


mei  ihe  .Minutry*  trilcru  and  were,  ihcrctorc.  lointly  linjnccd  by 
lh<  kHooI  board  and  the  Miniur>'|  (o  allow  whooU  to  purchase 
hardware  and  softttrarc,  the  cncoura((ement  of  the  development  of 
Ontario  toflware  for  Ontario  schooU  by  Ontario  companies;  [and| 
the  estabiuhment  o(  a  Ministry  department  to  facilitate  technology 
use  acrms  the  curriculum  helped  us  leap  ahead  of  other  provinces 
and  slates.  The  result  was  not  only  a  significant  improvement  in  the 
classroom  experience  for  both  students  and  teachers,  but  a  burgeon- 
mg  of  Ontario's  high-tech  industries. 

Over  the  last  few  years,  though,  the  vision  has  clouded,  the  drive  has 
been  kwt.  and  the  funds  are  drying  up.  Schools  are  hard  pressed  to 
continue  existing  programs,  and  Ministry  policies  created  through 
hard  work  and  consultation  with  educators  and  industry  are  down- 
graded to  'tuggestiofu*   . .  The  recent  decision  to  cut  the  existing 
GEM  grants  by  V)  percent  was  not  a  positive  move." 

Of  course,  funds  arc  drying  up  for  all  manner  of  worth- 
while programs,  and  it  is  hardly  surpri.sing  that  the  comput- 
erization program  suffered  its  share.  As  aware  a.s  we  are  of 
the  financial  realities,  wc  strongly  urge  the  Ministry  to  give 
pri<"  iHilicies  and  program.s  for 

aciji.  V.  as  well  as  for  the  develop- 

ment ot  networks  in  classrooms,  and  that  it  maintain  a  sepa- 
rate budget  line  in  thu  regard. 

But  we  are  all  perfectly  aware  that  financial  constraints 
will  'Ic  future,  the  provin- 

cial .  expected  to  comput- 

erize the  province's  education  system  on  its  own.  In  fact,  it  is 
not  possible  to  equip  schrmis  for  the  technology  revolution 
without  the  full  participation  of  the  wider  Ontario  commu- 
nity. As  i>  't ion  of  Canada 
said  in  it^  1994: 


All  levels  of  government,  industry  and  the  academic  community 
must  work  to  equip  Clanadian  classrooms  with  ihe  necessary  tools 
(modern  computers,  communication  capabilities,  qualified  educa- 
tors and  a  learning  infrastructure)  to  make  IT  (information 
technology)  a  serious  learning  tool." 

Given  that  everyone  knows  government  alone  cannot 
afford  to  cover  these  costs,  we  see  this  as  a  direct  challenge 
above  all  to  the  business  community,  which  has  the  opportu- 
nity to  use  its  resources  to  back  its  often-stated  educational 
concerns.  Business  demands  that  schools  produce  graduates 
who  are  creative,  thoughtful,  and  problem -solvers.  Because 
so  many  business  spokespersons  believe  that  future  Canadi- 
an prosperity  depends  on  the  ability  to  exploit  high-tech's 
new  tools,  we  assume  they  will  want  to  help  schools  techno- 
logically enter  the  21st  century.  Otherwise,  it  is  almost 
impossible  to  see  that  happening. 

In  fact,  while  we  were  very  impressed  with  the  computer 
environment  at  River  Oaks,  we  could  hardly  fail  to  realize 
that  it  is  very  much  an  experiment,  apparently  made  possible 
only  through  donations  from  the  private  sector.  The  Holy 
Family  program  -  a  pilot  project  whose  concept  can  be 
adapted  to  families  of  schools,  school  and  public  libraries, 
and  school  boards  serving  the  same  geographical  area  -  was 
also  able  to  acquire  hardware  at  special  prices. 

Lambton  County,  whose  information  technology  project 
impressed  us  so  greatly,  sacrificed  its  music  program  in 
order  to  move  toward  the  information  superhighway  -  a 
Hobson's  choice  in  a  world  that  already  has  far  too  few  good 
music  programs.  Education  partners  in  this  province  must 
find  ways  to  provide  all  students  with  cost-effective,  technol- 
ogy-based learning,  without  having  to  sacrifice  other  valu- 
able learning  experiences. 

There  is  a  need  for  more,  and  more  up-to-date,  comput- 
ers. We  have  seen  the  way  computers  arc  distributed  in 
Ontario's  schools,  and  wc  arc  less  than  convinced  that 
computers  dating  back  to  the  early  1980s  arc  going  to  help 
us  move  into  the  next  millennium.  Many  very  creative  teach- 
ers arc  successfully  using  the  20,0(X)  (Commodore  64s  and 
Pets  (including  SuperPets  and  128s)  that,  according  to 
Ministry  data,  were  in  schools  in  1993. 

While  it  is  better  for  students  to  have  some  familiarity 
with  computers  than  none  at  all.  these  old  machines  even 
lack  hard  drives,  let  alone  have  the  capability  of  running 
today's  software  or  connecting  to  C^P-ROM  players  and 


Forth*  Low  of  Leammg 


Education  partners  in  this  province  must  find  ways  to 
provide  all  students  with  cost-effective,  technology- 
based  learning,  without  having  to  sacrifice  other 
valuable  learning  experiences. 


modems.  A  Commodore  64  built  in  1983  has  the  same  rela- 
tionship to  today's  basic  desk-top  that  a  horse  and  buggy  has 
to  a  jet  plane;  it  becomes  increasingly  difficult  for  these 
primitive  machines  to  play  the  role  we  believe  is  potentially 
possible  in  transforming  the  very  nature  of  learning. 

In  1993,  the  federal  Department  of  Industry,  Science  and 
Technology  announced  it  would  redirect  surplus  govern- 
ment computers  and  processing  software  to  school  systems 
across  Canada.  As  of  September  1994,  some  two  hundred 
computers  had  been  delivered  to  those  Ontario  school 
boards  designated  by  the  national  advisory  board  that  had 
been  established  to  oversee  the  allocation  process.  (A  survey 
carried  out  for  the  program  showed  that  more  than  100,000 
computers  were  requested  nationally.) 

Although  we  have  some  concerns  that  equipment  consid- 
ered obsolete  by  industry  is  not  going  to  help  schools  stay  on 
the  leading  edge,  we  think  it  a  worthwhile  project  for  the 
Ontario  government  and  the  business  community,  many  of 
whose  members  regularly  discard  large  numbers  of  used 
computers.  As  it  happens,  computers  donated  to  schools 
may  be  considered  a  charitable  donation  for  the  purposes  of 
federal  tax. 

Of  course,  the  private  sector  can  do  more  than  simply 
contribute  computers  it  no  longer  needs.  Just  as  they  come 
together  in  the  Learning  Partnership  (formerly  the  Metro 
Toronto  Learning  Partnership),  computer  companies  and 
others  can  help  to  ease  computers  into  schools.  While 
competition  may  drive  the  economy,  it  is  not  always  the  best 
way  to  support  schools.  Companies  that  refuse  to  work 
together,  for  example,  which  leads  to  different  and  incom- 
patible operating  systems,  do  not  help  schools.  We  are 
encouraged,  however,  that  computer  companies  are  part  of 
the  Learning  Partnership. 

It  also  seems  to  us  that  students  who  have  access  to 
computers  after  school,  on  weekends,  and  in  the  summer 
have  access,  in  effect,  to  the  school.  They  can  continue  their 
learning  as  if  they  had  never  left  the  building,  while  those 
without  access  may  be  left  behind.  Therefore,  we  are  heart- 
ened by  such  examples  as  the  North  York  Public  Library's 
Children's  Computer  Centre,  which  consists  of  nine  comput- 
ers in  three  branches,  used  by  children  during  library  hours. 
While  some  25,000  did  so  in  1993,  the  centre  is  not  linked  to 
a  net,  and  a  library  is  not  the  same  as  having  access  at  home. 


In  the  meantime,  we  believe  that  as  part  of  a  communi- 
ty's support  system,  such  facilities  and  services  as  communi- 
ty recreation  centres  and  public  libraries  should  have 
computing  centres  where  families  can  learn  about  and 
through  computers.  While  we  have  been  told  that  such  a 
program  existed  some  years  ago,  we  are  not  certain  that  it 
was  given  the  resources  and  priority  required  to  establish  it 
for  the  long  term.  Such  centres  might  well  be  located  in 
schools  but,  wherever  they  are,  they  must  be  accessible  for 
extended  hours. 

The  best  hardware  is  just  a  great  paperweight  unless  it 
can  run  excellent  software:  the  instructions  that  tell  comput- 
ers how  to  compute,  that  make  up  the  programs  which  tell 
them  what  function  to  carry  out,  and  that  are  necessary  for 
communicating  with  other  computers. 

There  are  two  types  of  software  for  schools:  first,  the 
many  programs  that  have  been  developed  especially  for 
schools  and  that  revolve  around  some  particular  part  of  the 
curriculum  (geography  or  problem-solving,  for  example), 
and  second,  the  kinds  of  programs  that  are  widely  used  at 
home  or  in  the  workplace:  word  processing,  databases, 
CADD,  communications,  graphics,  and  machine  control,  for 
example.  Both  are  needed  in  our  schools;  relying  on  only 
one  is  not  in  the  best  interests  of  students.  Educational  soft- 
ware can  become  outdated  and  boring  very  quickly,  while 
business  or  personal  software  can  help  students  learn  or 
practise  certain  skills,  but  is  not  directly  linked  to  the 
curriculum. 

We  are  concerned  about  the  quality  of  software,  educa- 
tional software  in  particular,  and  about  who  creates  that 
software.  The  Ministry  has  taken  a  very  positive  step  by 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Learning.  Teaching,  and  Information  Technology 


Mump4«  Um« 
•f  T*C*HM>tOC> 

'■*ary  s  Sscondary 
bt '  ocH.  m  WW  PetsftXK- 

I.  vtctona.  NorttHjmb«f 
and  NmcasM  Roman 
Cathode  SctKMX  Board, 
mcorporates  technoto^  m 
■  wrtde  van«ty  of  learning 
•nvtrorvnenis.  In  one 
■Uarx).  students  experv 
tnoe  a  wtde  vanety  of  the 
type*  of  software  used 
commof^  m  todustry 

Of  course,  the  sctKKM 
canrwl  have  all  the  soft- 
ware that  IS  available,  but 


It  strrves  for  a  reasonable 
cross-section  a«>d  develope 
skills  readily  trartsferable 
to  other  computerued 
processes  St.  Mary's 
currently  has  a  PC-dnven 
LEGO  robotics  kit. 
computerassisled  design 
(CAO).  multimedia 
development  artd  scannlr\g 
capability,  colour  pnnting, 
computer  photo  retouching. 
computer-tMsed  silk 
screening,  video  editing, 
computer  graphics, 
desktop  publishing, 
animation,  and  interactive 
multimedia  software. 


making  CorelDraw  and  ClarisVVorks  available  in  every 
school,  but  much  more  needs  to  be  done.  It  appears,  for 
example,  that  software  is  not  reviewed  for  quality,  appropri- 
ateness, and  bias  in  the  way  books  arc  in  the  Circular  14 
process. 

Software  is  shared  haphazardly,  and  teachers  do  not  have 
effective  ways  of  sharing  their  evaluations  of  software  with 
each  other.  We  know  that  individual  boards  are  dedicating 
scarce  resources  to  writing  software  and  selling  it  to  other 
boards,  when  joint  projects  or  provincial  initiatives  might  be 
more  appropriate. 

It  seems  to  us  that  if  a  piece  of  software  is  effective,  there 
is  no  justification  for  it  being  used  only  by  boards  that  can 
afford  it;  there  is  a  need  for  far  more  cost  sharing  and  co- 
ordination in  this  area. 

Above  all,  a  wide  range  of  high-quality  C'anadian  software 
is  needed:  using  American-oriented  software  is  no  more 
acceptable  in  Ontario  schools  than  using  American-oriented 
textbooks.  VNlien  Microsoft  ('orporation  and  Sega  decided  to 
produce  educational  software,  as  they  have  done  aggressively 
in  the  past  year,  we  can  be  confident  that  the  Canadian 
perspective  will  not  be  among  their  priorities. 

For  that  reason,  we  agreed  with  the  suggestion  of  the 
Minister  of  Culture,  Tourism  and  Recreation  that  Circular 
14,  the  list  of  texts  approved  for  Ontario  schools,  be  broad- 
ened to  include  other  learning  materials,  such  as  videotapes 
and  software,  and  that  it  focus  more  on  Canadian  materi- 
ali.- 

\:  IS  been  made.  For  example, 

the  '  I  Program  (OSAP)  exists  to 

obtain  educational  discounts  on  selected  software  and  to 


distribute  a  catalogue  of  these  titles  to  school  boards.  Its 
advisory  committee  includes  teachers  from  across  the 
province  who  recommend  exemplary  software  t»i  the 
Ministry,  based  on  suggestions  from  school  boards.  OSAP 
also  arranges  for  discounts;  individual  school  boards  are  free 
to  buy  the  software  they  deem  most  worthwhile  at  the 
discounted  price. 

Through  its  role  in  distributing  master  copies  of  the  soft- 
ware, TV'Ontario  is  a  partner  is  this  process.  We  believe  this 
model  has  a  good  deal  of  merit,  and  we  hope  it  can  be  the 
main  vehicle  for  software  acquisition  in  Ontario. 

While  we  do  not  want  to  prohibit  the  use  of  software 
from  other  jurisdictions,  we  do  want  to  ensure  that  students 
have  access  to  software  with  Canadian  content  and  a  clear 
reflection  of  the  Canadian  perspective.  There  is  a  strong 
federal  regulatory  process  for  the  electronic  media,  which 
ensures  minimum  levels  of  Canadian  content.  We  believe 
that  nothing  less  should  be  acceptable  for  educational  soft- 
ware. We  considered  two  routes:  either  to  provide  incentives 
for  software  development  in  Ontario  or  Canada,  or  to 
contract  with  Ontario  or  Canadian  software  companies  to 
develop  software  that  meets  the  curricular  needs  of  schools. 
Given  our  earlier  recommendation  that  the  Ministry  take 
direct  responsibility  for  developing  a  provincial  curriculum, 
we  are  drawn  to  the  latter  option. 

On-line:  Learning  it  on  the  grapevine 

At  ihc  beginning  ol  ihc  icnliirv.  the  utile  red  st.h<>ol  housc 
contained  more  Icnowlrdgc  than  the  surrounding  community;  today 
the  opposite  is  true.  Schools  leading  in  this  area  are  creating  links 
using  the  technology  to  these  information  resources  using  modems 
and  networks.'' 

The  potential  educational  value  of  such  networking 
should  not  be  underestimated.  It  opens  up  a  way  of  expo- 
nentially expanding  the  physical  limits  of  the  school.  Some 
students  and  teachers  already  have  access  to  other  students, 
teachers,  experts,  and  resources,  including  the  Internet. 
Although  such  networks  as  the  OTF  C^ulture  of  (Change  F.lec- 
tronic  Village  (to  be  further  developed  into  the  Educational 
Network  of  Ontario),  TVOntario's  TVOnlinc,  the  Learnl.ink 
Network,  and  SchoolNel  exist,  and  the  Ontario  Education 
Highway  is  "under  construction."  most  schools  and  students 
are  not  on-line. 


For  tfw  Ijom  of  Loamlitg 


We  believe  that,  while  every  school  should  probably  have 
its  own  net,  every  school  -  every  classroom,  in  fact  -  should 
have  access  to  at  least  one  net  beyond  the  school,  one  that 
has  a  link  to  the  Internet. 

Another  wonderful  example  is  the  writers  in  electronic 
residence  program  (WIER).  Begun  in  1987  by  Trevor  Owen, 
then  a  high  school  teacher  but  now  teaching  at  York  Univer- 
sity's Faculty  of  Education,  it  began  with  two  schools  and 
was  originally  networked  through  Simon  Eraser  University. 
Today,  the  program  has  links  with  70  schools,  where  2,500 
students  from  as  far  away  as  Baffin  Island  and  the  Northwest 
Territories  can  ask  any  one  of  seven  distant  poets  and  novel- 
ists to  critique  their  efforts.  Owen  calls  it  an  electronic  liter- 
ary salon."* 

One  of  the  exciting  implications  of  such  a  program  is 
that  it  is  genuinely  equitable.  As  anybody  on  the  Internet 
knows,  social  leveling  is  intrinsic  to  information  technology; 
Trevor  Owen  calls  it  "on-line  equity."  Suddenly,  students  are 
not  judged  on  where  they  live,  what  they  look  like,  what 
gender  or  race  they  are,  or  on  anything  other  than  the  quali- 
ty of  their  communications.  However  unintended,  this  is 
potentially  an  enormously  gratifying  consequence  of  infor- 
mation technology. 

It  is  worth  noting  that,  aside  from  other  benefits, 
networking  schools  and  school  boards  can  produce  signifi- 
cant cost  savings.  By  making  documents  such  as  curriculum 
materials,  policy  documents,  and  news  releases  available  on- 
line, the  Ministry  could  reduce  expensive  printing  and 
distribution  charges  -  a  good  example  of  working  smarter. 

The  investment  in  the  creation  of  a  province-wide  "electronic 
highway"  would  guarantee  small  schools  in  remote  parts  of  the 
province  or  schools  with  limited  library  budgets  the  same  access 
to  the  information  source  as  large  schools  in  affluent,  major, 
urban  areas." 

The  Ministry's  announcement,  in  mid- 1994,  that  it  would 
be  providing  $5  million  to  link  existing  computer  networks 
in  the  education  community  is  a  positive  first  step  to 
strengthen  existing  alliances  among  education  partners.  But 
it  is  only  a  first  step. 

The  private  sector  has  been  active  in  this  area.  Rogers 
Cable  Systems  is  testing  the  use  of  cable  (in  place  of  tele- 
phone lines)  in  delivering  access  to  information  networks  in 
schools  in  North  York,  Ottawa,  London,  and  Woodstock. 


School  Net  in  London 

Both  Princess  Anne  Public 
School  and  H.B.  Seal 
Secondary  School  in  the 
London  Board  of  Education 
are  participating  in  School- 
Net,  a  pilot  project  connect- 
ing schools  across  Canada 
to  networks.  In  addition  to 
providing  access  to 
libraries  and  databases, 
experts  and  others,  individ- 
ual students  find  that 
SchoolNet  offers  more 


personal  opportunities.  For 
example,  one  Princess 
Anne  student  is  playing 
chess  with  a  rated  player  in 
Saskatoon.  Others  are 
sharing  poetry  and  letters 
with  students  in  the  United 
States,  Denmark,  Hong 
Kong,  and  Russia.  One  of 
the  authors  of  a  Grade  8 
textbook  has  offered  to 
answer  any  math  questions 
via  e-mail. 


Their  competitor.  Bell  Canada,  is  working  in  communities 
around  Sault  Ste.  Marie  to  enhance  their  ability  to  access 
networks. 

School  and  public  libraries  must  be  one  of  the  major 
resources  for  storing  and  transmitting  electronic  informa- 
tion. Some  of  the  most  valuable  software  is  expensive,  and 
cannot  and  need  not  be  duplicated  in  each  classroom. 

In  either  case,  students  and  teachers  should  have  access  to 
such  information,  and  both  school  and  public  libraries 
should  be  developed  as  public  access  points.  It  may  also  be 
possible  for  software  to  be  located  physically  in  one  building 
but  be  accessible  by  modem  to  a  family  of  schools. 

We  have  already  recommended  that  the  provincial 
government  support  the  establishment  and  operations  of 
community  computer  centres.  If  these  are  to  achieve  their 
full  potential,  they  will  have  to  have  access  to  national  and 
international  networks  at  rates  they  can  afford.  The  public 
libraries  of  Ontario  have  already  signalled  their  interest  in 
developing  and  participating  in  networks  to  provide  every 
Ontarian  with  access  to  information.^" 

Other  instructional  teciinoiogies 

As  we  said  at  the  beginning  of  this  chapter,  we  focus  on 
information  technology  as  one  of  the  four  engines  for 
change,  recognizing  the  power  of  the  computer,  especially 
when  it  is  linked  to  computer  networks  beyond  the  school. 

However,  there  are  other  technologies  that  are  potentially 
useful.  Most  students  and  teachers  are  already  familiar  with 
overhead  projectors,  film  projectors,  video  cassette  recorders, 
tape  recorders,  and  calculators.  There  are,  in  addition,  other 
technologies  that  are,  or  should  be,  used  in  classrooms. 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Learning,  Teaching,  and  Information  Teclinology 


r 


a  ^Ptie  investment  in  the  creation  of 
I  a  province-wide  'electronic  high- 
way' would  guarantee  small  schools 
in  remote  parts  of  the  province  or 
schools  with  limited  library  budgets 
the  same  access  to  the  information 
•ourc«  as  large  schools  in  affluent^ 
mafor,  urlMMi  areas." 

Sax    <nd  f-     Ls'-  ten. 


Wc  arc  particularly  excited  by  the  potential  contribution 
interactive  telephone  and  video-conferencing  can  make  to 
learning.  Where  there  are  too  few  students  in  one  school  to 
warrant  a  course  in  a  specialized  field  of  enquiry,  interactive 
conferencing  offers  a  solution.  If  schools  are  equipped  writh  a 
conferencing  facility,  one  teacher  might  be  able  to  teach 
students  in  a  number  of  schools,  thus  givmg  them  the 
opportunity  to  take  the  course  v^ithout  incurring  the  high 
cost  of  human  resources. 

Naturally,  there  is  an  advantage  if  students  can  both  see 
and  hear  each  other,  rather  than  just  hearing  their  peers.  We 
believe  there  is  room  for  the  development  of  an  interactive 
video-conference  facility,  perhaps  in  every  secondary  school 
in  the  province,  starting  with  those  that  are  small  or  isolated. 

A  more  mundane  use  of  technology  involves  the  tele- 
phone. We  have  all  faced  the  sometimes-daunting  task  of 
climbing  through  a  voice-mail  tree,  trying  to  reach  the  right 
person.  However,  we  believe  that,  despite  sometimes  negative 
experiences,  voice- mail  can  be  a  very  useful  tool  for  schools. 
It  might,  for  example,  provide  a  menu  of  recorded  messages 
for  parents  with  such  information  as  a  schedule  of  report 
cards  and  parent-teacher  interviews,  plans  for  an  open 
house,  or  other  events.  Or  the  system  might  be  structured  tn 
allow  parents  and  students  to  verify  the  evening's  homework. 

Another  device,  now  being  used  by  s<jme  schfKils,  is  record- 
ed me^vigcs  on  public  libraries'  telephone  lines.  Thi.s.  too. 
might  be  used  to  give  parents  important  information. 

Here  is  a  role  for  the  private  sector  -  the  phone  companies 
in  particular  -  if  these  technologies  are  to  become  a  reality  in 
the  education  system.  Schools  can  be  given  special  rates,  for 
example  -  also  an  important  element  in  achieving  the 
nctwDrkmtf  of  Ontario's  schmtis  that  wc  described  earlier 


There  arc  other  tcchnt)logics  that  arc  familiar  today  or 
will  become  so  in  the  future,  including  videodisks,  which  are 
superior  to  videotapes.  (As  we  note  later,  TVOntario  is 
working  with  vidcodisk  technology.)  Computers  equipped 
with  software  and  hardware  that  convert  text  to  speech  are 
useful  for  students  with  disabilities.  There  are  other  innova- 
tions, such  as  pen-based  computers,  computers  that  recog- 
nize speech  commands,  and  others.  Each  may  have  a  role  to 
play  in  enhancing  learning. 

Wc  cannot  overlook  the  usefulness  of  technology  in  the 
business  side  of  schooling  -  administration,  human  resource 
management,  busing,  property  management,  etc.  Already, 
the  Ministry  has  taken  a  leadership  role  in  this  area,  working 
through  the  Educational  (iomputing  Network  of  Ontario 
(ECNO),  a  partnership  with  Ontario  school  boards,  which 
can  use  the  software  ECNO  develops.  We  laud  this  initiative, 
and  encourage  the  Ministry  to  extend  it,  in  order  to  elimi- 
nate any  existing  duplication  in  the  development  and 
purchase  of  software  that  could  be  centrally  developed  and 
distributed. 

Because  they  reach  beyond  local  communities,  conferenc- 
ing facilities  arc  an  important  component  of  distance  educa- 
tion, which  is  an  area  where  others  around  the  globe  share 
our  concerns.  UNESCO,  for  example,  is  very  interested  in 
the  uses  of  technology,  including  communication  technology 
such  as  video-conferencing,  in  promoting  adult  education 
and  distance  education.  It  is  encouraging  governments  to 
"I  enable  I  large  groups  to  take  part  in  education  irrespective 
of  time  and  location." 

Contact  North  is  an  interesting  example  of  what  is  possi- 
ble. It  is  a  tele-conferencing  (auditory)  network  in  Northern 
Ontario  used  by  secondary  schools,  community  colleges,  and 
universities  to  offer  courses  and  other  instruction  to  a 
student  population  that  is  sparsely  distributed  across  a  vast 
region. 

Moreover,  interactive  conferencing  facilities  can  make  a 
major  contribution  to  the  professional  development  of 
teachers.  Imagine  a  consultant  or  professor  of  education 
offering  a  course  in  acquiring  a  second  language  (or  even  in 
the  use  of  computers  in  history  classes)  from  one  central 
location,  and  teachers  "plugging  into"  it  in  the  local  high 
school's  conferencing  facility. 

Like  the  collaborative  networks  being  created  on  the 
(  ulture  of  Change  computer  network,  a  network  of  confer- 


For  0w  LOM  or  Laamlng 


encing  facilities  has  the  potential  for  sharing  and  joint  learn- 
ing. It  might  even  allow  the  board  director  or  the  Minister  to 
address  the  profession  directly  when  announcing  major 
changes  to  the  system.  (It  remains  to  be  seen  whether  this 
would  alleviate  the  sense  many  teachers  have  that  innova- 
tions do  not  always  reflect  their  concerns  or  needs.) 

The  New  York  Times  reports  that  North  Carolina  is  push- 
ing ahead  to  make  the  best  use  of  interactive  video  technolo- 
gy in  schools.  From  a  base  of  16  schools  in  a  pilot  project, 
recent  legislature-approved  funding  will  extend  the  network 
to  more  than  one  hundred  high  schools  and  community 
colleges  across  the  state,  where  it  will  be  used  for  teaching 
and  for  planning  among  teachers.  The  pilot  project  included 
the  teaching  of  Japanese,  Latin,  and  marine  oceanography.^' 

Among  Canadian  provinces.  New  Brunswick  appears  to 
be  taking  the  lead,  with  TeleEducation  courses  offered  in  50 
sites  by  interactive  video."  We  are  also  aware  that  the 
University  of  Ottawa  is  using  an  interactive  video  network, 
and  that  other  universities  are  probably  doing  so  now  or  are 
on  the  verge  of  using  this  technology. 

We  believe  that  it  is  important  to  move  ahead  to  support 
a  network  of  interactive  video-conferencing  facilities.  At  the 
same  time,  the  opportunity  also  exists  to  build  on  the  equip- 
ment base  already  present  in  many  high  schools  offering 
communication  technology,  funded  through  the  Ministry's 
Technological  Education  Program  and  the  Equipment 
Renewal  Fund. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  means  by  which  the  great  poten- 
tial of  information  technology  for  learning,  teaching, 
communicating,  and  evaluation  can  be  made  real. 

Realizing  tiie  potential 

Frequently  in  this  report,  we  call  for  the  Ministry  of  Educa- 
tion and  Training  to  take  a  leading  role  in  reforming 
Ontario's  education  system.  This  is  particularly  true  in  the 
area  of  information  technology.  We  want  to  avoid  the  folly 
of  establishing  networks  that  do  not  allow  students  and 
teachers  to  talk  across  school  or  school  board  lines.  (We 
discovered  that  individual  ministries  of  the  provincial 
government  developed  their  own  networks  and  some  still 
cannot  send  electronic  mail  to  others.) 

We  want  to  avoid  duplication  while,  at  the  same  time, 
ensuring  that  all  students  have  access  to  more  and  better 
computers  and  software  that  speaks  of  Canadian  life  and 


This  is  an  excerpt  of  a  note 
sent  by  a  teaclier  in 
London,  Ontario,  to  TVOn- 
tario's  program,  "Inside 
Education": 

"Our  latest  project  is  'A 
Day  in  the  Life  of  a  Teenag- 
er.' March  2  was  the  target 
day  my  three  Grade  8 
classes  used  to  log  every- 


thing they  did  that  day. 
There  are  104  schools 
from  the  U.S.,  Canada, 
Russia,  England,  and 
Finland  participating.  So  faij 
I've  received  over  50 
responses  from  schools  all  \ 
across  the  U.S.,  Canada, 
Israel,  Finland,  England, 
Australia,  and  Russia. 


Canadian  perspectives.  And  we  want  to  cut  costs.  For 
example,  by  bulk  buying  of  software  and  purchasing  the 
rights  for  all  schools  to  use  programs,  we  can  effect 
economies  of  scale. 

Our  recommendations  for  the  use  of  information  tech- 
nology in  schools  are  directed,  for  the  most  part,  to  the 
Ministry  because  of  the  central  role  it  must  play  in  co-ordi- 
nation and  implementation,  if  we  are  to  achieve  significant 
progress  before  the  turn  of  the  century. 

The  Ministry  must  ensure  that  school  boards  move  swift- 
ly to  get  computers,  loaded  with  high-quality  software,  into 
classrooms  supervised  by  well-prepared  teachers.  It  must 
help  to  guarantee  that  there  are  networks  through  which 
students  and  teachers  can  communicate,  to  seek  information 
and  work  together. 

The  first  priority,  then,  is  clearly  for  overall  co-ordination 
of  all  these  many  aspects.  This,  it  seems  to  us,  is  the  natural 
responsibility  of  the  Ministry.  It  should  set  up  a  co-ordinat- 
ing body  to  bring  boards  and  community  partners  together 
to  equip  schools  with  necessary  software  and  hardware,  and 
to  create  much-needed  networks.  It  would  also  ensure  a  co- 
ordinated approach  to  software  development,  assessment, 
and  distribution,  and  could  significantly  help  with  the 
continuing  education  of  teachers  in  these  matters.  (We 
believe  TVO/La  Chaine  has  an  important  role  to  play  in 
distributing  software  and  contributing  to  the  on-going 
professional  development  of  teachers.) 

The  co-ordinating  function  would  also  include  bringing 
together  all  the  public-  and  private-sector  partners  to  plan, 
implement,  and  monitor  introduction  and  on-going  use  of 
information  technology  in  schools. 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Learning,  Teaching,  and  Information  Technology 


TN-  efforts  of  tfie  pnnctpal 

■dff  of  Don  Mills 
vv>ait*a(e  in  North  Ytorh  m 
partrwrships  wiO\ 
ana  Alias  soflwarv 
co-operauve  educa- 
ptacemefits  for 
s  arxJ  irvs«rvK« 
for  teachers 


Other  kjTKte  or  a^raefnents 
delivered  by  private- sector 
comparwes  should  be 
identifked  to  inspire  ottwr 
schools  to  make  arrarige- 
merrts  best  suited  to  their 
circumstarKes. 


Co  ordination.  Irom  our  point  of  view,  needs  to  go 
beyond  the  plans  school  boards  are  now  required  to  develop 
and  submit  annually  to  the  Ministry;  it  must  actually  lead  to 
real  change  in  the  use  of  computers  by  teachers  and 
students.  Therefore,  accountability  must  include  setting 
measurable  outcomes  that  allow  progress  to  be  evaluated 
effectively.  In  other  words,  success  is  not  to  be  measured  by 
the  number  of  available  computers,  or  even  the  amount  of 
work  students  produce  on  them.  It  is  the  quality  of  the  work 
that  seems  to  us  the  key  measure  of  whether  the  new  tech- 
nology is  being  used  according  to  its  potential. 

Recommendation  93 

•kVe  recommend  that  the  Ministry  be  responsible  for  over- 
seeing the  increased  and  effective  use  of  information  tech- 
nology in  the  province's  schools,  and  that  its  role  include 

a)  determining  the  extent  and  nature  of  the  computer- 
related  resources  rww  in  use  in  schools  across  Ontario: 

b)  functioning  as  an  information  clearing  house  for  these 
resources,  ensuring  that  all  tyoards  are  privy  to  such  infor- 
mation, artd  preventing  unnecessary  duplication  of  effort: 

c)  facilitating  alliarKes  among  the  Ministry,  school  tmards, 
hanSware  and  software  firms,  and  the  private  sector: 

d)  developirtg  common  standards  jointly  with  system 
partners,  for  producing  and  acquiring  technology: 

el  developing  license  protocols  that  support  multiple 
remote  users  accessing  centrally  held  software  in  a  local 
area  network  (LAN)  or  wide  area  network  (WAN)  structure: 
and 


f)  co-ordinating  efforts,  including  research  and  special 
projects,  to  refine  effective  educational  assessment 
programs. 

We  stress  that  we  see  the  Ministry  as  having  a  role  in 
co-ordinating  various  aspects  of  information  technology 
related  to  education.  But  we  are  not  suggesting  that  it  focus 
on  a  single  model  -  even  River  Oaks,  for  example  -  and 
impose  it  on  all  boards  in  Ontario.  First,  the  province's  very 
diversity  makes  this  unthinkable:  what  works  in  Oakville 
may  not  be  appropriate  on  Manitoulin  Island.  Second,  one 
of  technology's  great  strengths  is  that  it  encourages  creativity 
because  it  can  encompass  variety,  rather  than  requiring  a 
lock-step  approach  to  education. 

We  need  to  learn  what  works  best."  We  believe  that  the 
way  to  make  significant  changes  is  to  proceed  as  quickly  as  is 
prudently  possible  to  establish  centres  of  innovation  in  what 
we  hope  would  be  a  trans-Canada  partnership.  Only  then 
can  Ontario,  and  indeed  all  Canadian  schools,  benefit  from 
the  broadest  possible  range  of  experiences  in  funding, 
structuring,  and  implementing  information  technology.  (We 
know  there  already  exists  a  number  of  projects  on  which 
such  a  network  can  build.)  To  be  effective,  of  course,  the 
work  on  best  practices  must  be  made  known  to  rank-and- 
file  teachers. 

Recommendations  94.  95 

'We  recommend  that  school  boards  in  co-operation  with  the 
Ministry,  the  private  sector,  universities,  and  colleges,  initiate 
a  number  of  high-profile  and  diverse  projects  on  school 
computers  and  learning,  to  include  a  major  infusion  of 
computer  hardware  and  software.  These  projects  should 
reflect  the  province's  diversity,  include  a  distinct  and  compre- 
hensive evaluation  component,  and  be  used  for  professional 
development,  software  design,  and  policy 
analysis. 

'In  addition,  we  recommend  that  the  Minister  approach 
colleagues  in  other  provinces,  through  the  Council  of  Minis- 
ters of  Education  of  Canada,  to  establish  a  national  nefwort* 
of  projects  on  computers  and  learning,  which  can  inform 
leaching  and  learning  from  sea  to  sea. 

Our  next  recommendation  focuses  on  teachers  bccau.se. 
as  we  have  stressed,  computers  aren't  teachers,  they  arc 
teachers'  aids.  Hut  it  would  be  unreasonable  to  assume  that 


For  (he  Uwe  of  laamtng 


most  teachers  can  use  them  effectively  today.  On  the  other 
hand,  already  a  heartening  number  of  Ontario  teachers  have 
become  leaders  and  resources  for  information  technology  in 
their  schools  and  on  their  boards,  and  we  are  confident  that, 
given  proper  preparation,  many  others  will  emerge  to  play 
innovative  leadership  roles. 

Recommendations  96,  97 

*We  recommend  that  the  proposed  College  of  Teachers 
require  faculties  of  education  to  make  knowledge  and  skills 
in  the  educational  use  of  information  technology  an  integral 
part  of  the  curriculum  for  all  new  teachers. 

*We  further  recommend  that  teachers  be  provided  with,  and 
participate  in,  professional  development  that  will  equip  them 
with  the  knowledge  and  skills  they  need  to  make  appropriate 
use  of  Information  technology  in  the  classroom,  and  that 
acquisition  of  such  knowledge  become  a  condition  of 
re-certification. 

We  then  focus  on  the  use  of  computers  in  schools.  There 
is  an  urgent  need  for  many  more  modern  computers,  stand- 
alone or  linked  in  a  LAN,  loaded  with  excellent  and  balanced 
software  that  has  strong  Canadian  content  and  perspective, 
tied  together  in  local,  regional,  and  international  networks. 
We  have  been  told  that  a  wealth  of  computers  of  good  quali- 
ty, regularly  being  replaced  by  the  private  sector,  could  be 
available  for  use  in  Ontario  schools.  Business  representatives 
told  us  repeatedly  of  the  need  for  schools  to  develop  in  their 
students  the  most  up-to-date  skills;  here  is  a  practical  way 
business  could  help  schools  achieve  that  goal,  and  receive  a 
tax  benefit  at  the  same  time. 

We  have  also  emphasized  the  social  danger:  information 
technology  can  easily  become  yet  another  tool  by  which 
more  affluent  students  can  further  enhance  their  learning 
advantages  over  poorer  students.  For  that  reason,  since  we 
understand  that  not  every  school  can  be  fully  computerized 
immediately,  we  believe  the  Ministry  must  assure  that 
schools  with  students  who  are  less  likely  to  have  computers 
in  their  homes  receive  priority  in  the  allocation  of  new  tech- 
nology. 

Recommendation  98 

*We  recommend  that  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training 
and  the  Ministry  of  Economic  Development  and  Trade,  work- 
ing through  learning  consortiums  and  existing  federal  govern- 
ment programs,  co-ordinate  efforts  with  the  Ontario  business 


We  have  emphasized  the  social  danger:  information 
technology  can  easily  become  yet  another  tool  by 
which  more  affluent  students  can  further  enhance  their 
learning  advantages  over  poorer  students.  For  that 
reason,  since  we  understand  that  not  every  school  can 
be  fully  computerized  immediately,  we  believe  the 
Ministry  must  assure  that  schools  with  students  who 
are  less  likely  to  have  computers  in  their  homes  receive! 
priority  in  the  allocation  of  new  technology. 


community  to  distribute  surplus  computers  through  Ontario 
school  boards,  and  that,  as  more  computers  are  introduced 
into  the  school  system,  priority  be  given  to  equipping  schools 
serving  low-Income  and  Franco-Ontarian  communities. 

For  the  potential  of  information  technology  to  be  real- 
ized, it  is  important  to  ensure  that  there  is  sufficient  high- 
quality  educational  software,  that  it  be  Canadian  in  content 
and  perspective  where  that  is  appropriate,  and  that  it  be  fair 
and  unbiased  in  its  approach  to  subject  matter. 

Recommendations  99,  100,  101,  102 

*We  recommend  that  the  Ministry  increase  the  budget 

allocated  for  purchasing  software  on  behalf  of  school  boards 

in  Ontario,  and  that  it  increase  boards '  flexibility  in  using 

funds  to  permit  leasing  or  other  cost-sharing  arrangements, 

in  addition  to  purchasing,  in  acquiring  information  technology 

equipment. 

*Computer  software  and  all  other  electronic  resources  used 
in  education  should  be  treated  as  teaching  materials  for  the 
purpose  of  Circular  14  assessment  (for  quality,  balance, 
bias,  etc.). 

*The  Ministry,  with  the  advice  of  educators  in  the  field, 
should  identify  priority  areas  in  which  Canadian  content  and 
perspective  is  now  lacking. 

*ln  addition,  we  recommend  that  the  Ministry  exercise 
leadership  with  the  Council  of  Ministers  of  Education  of 
Canada  to  initiate  a  program  promoting  production  of 
high-quality  Canadian  educational  software  by  Canadian 
companies  and  other  appropriate  bodies,  such  as  school 
boards,  universities,  and  colleges. 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Learning.  Teaching,  and  Information  Technology 


i!ompuJer»  must  reach  beyond  the  walU  of  particular 
'I  buddings  -  into  other  schools,  libraries,  data- 
La:.*^-  They  must  connect  students  with  each  other, 
with  teachers  and  with  experts  in  various  fields.  We 
tu    .  >c  It  crucial  that  every  classroom  in  every  Khool 
'.'<  .  .u(  ol'  the  information  highway. 


Finally,  computers  must  reach  beyond  the  walls  of  partic- 
ular school  buildings  -  into  other  schools,  libraries,  and 
databanks.  They  must  connect  students  with  each  other, 
with  teachers  and  with  experts  in  various  fields.  VVc  believe  it 
is  crucial  that  every  classroom  in  every  school  be  part  of  the 
information  highway. 

Recommendation  103 

•kVe  recommend  that  the  Government  of  Ontario,  working 
¥fith  school  t)oards  and  other  appropnate  agencies,  commit 
itself  to  ensuring  that  every  classroom  in  every  publicly  fund- 
ed school  in  Ontario  is  connected  to  at  least  one  local 
computer  network  and  that,  m  turn,  this  network  be  connect 
ed  to  a  provincial  network,  a  national  network,  and  to  the 
Internet. 

Having  developed  the  necessary  components  of  a 
computer-use  strategy  in  schools,  we  turn  our  attention  to 
computer  access  after  school  hours,  on  weekends,  and 
during  vacations  and  holidays.  Since  children  who  have 
computers  at  home  have  a  distinct  advantage  over  those  who 
do  not.  access  to  computers  at  school  for  the  latter  becomes 
a  matter  of  utmost  priority.  But  wc  remain  concerned  about 
the  increased  likelihood  that  access  to  networks  and  to  the 
Internet  will  be  commercialized;  in  fact,  companies  are 
already  charging  for  access,  and  wc  are  troubled  by  the 
prospect  of  access  being  limited  by  economics. 

Recommendations  104.  105.  106 
•We  recommend  that  school  t)oards,  in  cooperation  with 
government  ministnes  and  appropriate  agencies,  establish  in 
rteighbourhooda  where  personal  computer  access  is  less  like- 
ly to  be  prevalent,  community  computing  centres,  possibly  in 


school  buildings  or  in  public  libraries,  and  provide  on-going 
funding  for  hardware,  software,  and  staffing. 

*We  also  recommend  that  the  Ministry  support  boards  in 
pilot  projects  that  extend  the  opportunity  for  learners  to 
access  funded  programs  and  equipment  outside  the  defined 
school  day. 

'Furthermore,  we  recommend  that  the  Government  of 
Ontario  advocate  that  public  facilities,  such  as  public  libraries 
and  schools,  and  such  non-profit  groups  as  'freenets. '  be 
given  guaranteed  access  to  the  facilities  of  the  electronic 
highway  at  an  affordable  cost  (preferably  free  for  users  of 
these  facilities). 

Wc  should  also  say  that  while  most  parents  arc  enthusias- 
tic about  the  use  of  computers  in  schools,  by  no  means  all  of 
them  arc  personally  comfortable  with  computer  technology. 
These  parents  -  and  it  is  no  mystery  from  which  socio- 
economic background  most  of  them  come  -  feel  helpless  to 
provide  their  children  with  support  as  they  move  into  infor- 
mation technology  in  schools.  Accordingly,  we  encourage 
school  boards  and  other  bodies  to  provide  opportunities  for 
parents  to  develop  that  comfort  with  computers.  TVOntario, 
the  proposed  community  computing  centres,  "freenets," 
community  colleges,  public  libraries,  and  others  have  a  role 
to  play  in  this  area. 

We  discussed  earlier  the  education  potential  of  interactive 
conferencing  facilities,  and  referred  specifically  to  the  exam- 
ple of  Contact  North.  Our  view  is  that  Contact  North  needs 
to  be  upgraded  to  an  interactive  video-conference  network, 
as  well  as  being  available  to  all  potential  users,  particularly 
small  aboriginal  communities,  and  meeting  their  demands 
for  secondary  school,  college,  and  university  courses,  and  for 
professional  development  of  teachers.  This  upgrade  would 
strengthen  the  link  between  students  and  instructors, 
substantially  enhancing  student  learning. 

Recommendation  107 

•We  recommend  that  the  Ministry  proceed  to  upgrade 

Contact  North  from  an  audio  to  an  interactive  video  network. 

TVOntario/La  Chatne 

We  could  not  complete  our  discussion  of  technology  with- 
out mentioning  TVOntario/I.a  ("hainc.  which  has  been 
providing  television  services  for  teachers  and  students  since 
1970,  and  continues  to  play  an  important  role  in  this  area.  In 


Forttw  I^MVOfLMmmc 


ISSU 


fact,  those  outside  the  school  system  might  not  know  of  the 
abundance  of  materials  produced  by  TVO  for  schools  that 
are  never  shown  on-air. 

Its  most  recent  annual  report  identifies  a  number  of 
programs  for  children  at  school  in  its  children's  and  youth 
programming  department.  In  addition  to  series  on  televi- 
sion, these  include  material  on  videodisks,  audio  cassettes, 
and  posters.  It  also  provides  distance  education  for  adults, 
often  in  partnership  with  colleges  and  universities.  It  has 
joined  with  the  Federation  of  Women  Teachers'  Associations 
of  Ontario  and  the  North  York  Board  of  Education,  among 
others,  to  distribute  teacher  development  programs. 

Our  only  TVO-related  recommendation  is  that  it  contin- 
ue to  do  what  it  does  well.  We  hope  that  a  common  provin- 
cial curriculum  will  make  it  easier  for  TVO  to  develop 
programs,  computer  software,  and  such  initiatives  as  TVOn- 
line  and  videodisks,  which  support  the  learning  objectives  of 
the  curriculum.  It  remains  important  for  Ontario's  educa- 
tion system  that  TVO  continue  its  contributions  to  the 
learning  goals  of  our  schools,  and  in  assisting  students  in 
reaching  those  goals. 

Conclusion 

On  the  basis  of  considerable  and  rapidly  accumulating 
evidence  that  information  technology  is  profoundly  chang- 
ing the  nature  of  learning  for  children  and  must  become 
incorporated  into  our  teaching  strategies,  the  Commission  is 
convinced  that  information  technology  is  one  of  the  engines 
needed  to  drive  the  necessary  transformation  of  the  educa- 
tion system. 

The  point  is  that  new  technologies  have  already  changed 
our  lives  in  ways  that  would  have  been  unimaginable  only  a 
few  short  years  ago.  Here  is  where  an  old  cliche  is  unusually 
appropriate:  the  only  certainty  is  change.  We  can  count  on 
today's  leading-edge  concept  being  outmoded  tomorrow. 

We  acknowledge  -  and,  in  some  cases,  share  -  techno- 
logy-related concerns,  but  some  simply  do  not  lend  them- 
selves to  ready  solutions.  Will  computers  lead  to  increased 
isolation  among  young  people,  or  fail  to  recognize  their 
emotional  and  spiritual  needs?  The  evidence  so  far  is  reas- 
suring, but  we  must  pay  attention.  Will  computers  that 
respond  to  voice  commands  -  and  these  already  exist  - 
undermine  any  motivation  students  have  for  learning  to 
write  and  spell  properly?  Strategies  -  including  computer- 


Will  computers  lead  to 
increased  isolation 
among  young  people,  or 
fail  to  recognize  their 
emotional  and 
spiritual  needs? 
Will  computers  under- 
mine any  motivation 
students  have  for 
learning  to  write  and 
spell  properly? 


ized  techniques  -  must  be  developed  to  prevent  this  unac- 
ceptable outcome. 

Will  schools  as  we  have  known  them  for  the  past  century 
and  a  half  finally  become  obsolete?  If  the  virtual  office  is 
already  becoming  a  reality  -  businesses  whose  employees 
work  at  home  and  communicate  through  information  tech- 
nology -  why  not  virtual  schools?  But  then  where  will  the 
children  of  tomorrow  learn  all  the  many  non-academic  skills 
that  schools  teach  along  the  way,  such  as  dealing  with  other 
people  in  a  constructive  way?  Will  there  someday  be  a  school 
cheer  rooting  on  good  old  Virtual  High?^^  Here  is  one  vision 
of  the  education  system  of  the  early  21st  century: 

Gone  will  be  the  days  when  students  were  lumped  into  grades 
according  to  age,  when  learning  took  place  solely  in  a  classroom, 
and  when  school  was  out  for  the  summer.  Older  students  will  be 
packing  pocket  computers  instead  of  notepads,  and  the  only  apple 
on  the  teacher's  desk  will  be  a  high-tech  piece  of  equipment 
designed  to  communicate  with  youngsters  at  home,  in  the  work- 
place, and  abroad.  Learning,  widely  accepted  as  a  lifelong  process, 
will  take  place  much  more  outside  the  school  as  our  youth  experi- 
ence the  real  reality  -  life  in  the  community." 

It  is  a  vision  both  exhilarating  in  its  possibilities  and 
daunting  in  its  uncertainty  -  terrifying  in  the  sense  that 
much  of  it  is  being  driven,  not  by  human  needs  but  by  the 
imperatives  of  technology  or  commerce.  But  if  society  at  least 
acknowledges  the  phenomenon,  it  can  attempt  to  shape  it. 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Learning,  Teaching,  and  Information  Technology 


'ow's  sdwois  wtM  not 
^udpgR  Wie  those  of  today  - 
''  "^Mnks.  >n  the  mam.  to 
■  nf  technology. 

At  the  very  least,  we  can 
no*  »ay  that  cotnputer 

1-  y  has  become  one  of 
■j.~    ew  t>asics. 

ttw  bfoadest  sense,  the 
Of  our  schools  IS  to 
ensure  that  children  are 
computer  irterate,  arx)  rt  is 
a  job  that  must  t>e  done 


well  Adding  new  machines 
to  classrooms  does  not 
txry  instant  learning.  But 
learning  to  use  those 
machines  well  can  help 
prepare  our  children  for  a 
new  world  that  is  already 
here.  Perhaps  this  is  the 
way  to  guarantee  that  our 
schools  remain  relevant  to 
our  lives,  to  the  lives  of  our 
children.  ar>d  to  our 
communities. 


In  fact,  no-onc  has  the  remotest  idea  of  what  tomorrow's 
schools  will  look  like;  we  can  confidently  assert  only  that 
they  will  not  look  like  those  of  today  -  thanks,  in  the  main, 
to  evolving  technology.  Indeed,  we  can  predict  with  equal 
certainty  that  the  report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  the 
crisis  in  education  of  2020  will  find  this  entire  discussion  of 
today's  state-of-the-art  technology  wonderfully  quaint  and 
nostalgic. 

At  the  very  least,  we  can  now  say  that  computer  literacy 
has  become  one  of  the  new  basics,  and  that  an  inability  to 
use  a  computer  well  is  becoming  as  great  a  handicap  as  the 
inability  to  read. 

In  the  broadest  sense,  the  job  of  our  schools  is  to  ensure 
that  children  are  computer  literate,  and  it  is  a  job  that  must 
be  done  well.  Adding  new  machines  to  classrooms  does  not 
buy  instant  learning.  But  learning  to  use  those  machines  well 
can  help  prepare  our  children  for  a  new  world  that  is  already 
here.  Perhaps  this  is  the  way  to  guarantee  that  our  schools 
remain  relevant  to  our  lives  t..  iFn-  In.-,  ol  our  iliiKlnn.  .md 
to  our  communities. 


For  ttie  Love  of  Laammg 


Endnotes 


1  David  Dwyer,  "Apple  Classrooms  of  Tomorrow:  What  We've 
Learned,"  Educational  Leadership  51,  no.  7  (1994):  9. 

2  As  G.R.  Cooke  entitled  his  1994  submission  to  the  Commis- 
sion, in  critiquing  the  1993  submission  from  the  Council  of 
Ontario  Directors  of  Education. 

3  Ursula  Franklin,  The  Real  World  of  Technology  (Concord, 
ON:  House  of  Anansi  Press,  1992),  p.  76.  The  Massey 
Lectures,  CBC,  1989. 

4  Vicki  Hancock  and  Frank  Betts,  "From  the  Lagging  to  the 
Leading  Edge,"  Educational  Leadership  51,  no.  7  (1994):  29. 

5  Association  for  Media  and  Technology  in  Education  in  Cana- 
da (AMTEC),  brief  to  the  Ontario  Royal  Commission  on 
Learning,  1994,  p.  8,  9. 

6  AMTEC  brief,  p.  2. 

7  Frank  Betts,  "On  the  Birth  of  the  Communication  Age:  A 
Conversation  with  David  Thornburg,"  Educational  Leader- 
ship 5\,  no.  7  (1994):  20. 

8  George  Leonard,  "The  Great  School  Reform  Hoax:  What's 
Really  Needed  to  Improve  Public  Education,"  Esquire  101, 
no.  4,  quoted  in  Kyle  L.  Peck  and  Denise  Dorricott,  "Why 
Use  Technology?"  Educational  Leadership  51,  no.  7  (1994): 
14. 

9  General  Union  of  Educational  Personnel  (GULP)  and  the 
National  Institute  for  Curriculum  Development,  "Teaching 
in  the  Information  Age:  Problems  and  New  Perspectives,"  p. 
4.  Contribution  to  the  International  Commission  on  Educa- 
tion for  the  21st  Century,  1994. 

10  AMTEC  brief,  p.  8. 

1 1  Hancock  and  Betts,  "From  the  Lagging  to  the  Leading  Edge," 

p.  27. 

12  AMTEC  brief,  p.  2. 

13  GUEP,  "Teaching  in  the  Information  Age,"  p.  19. 

14  Quoted  in  Michael  Todd,  "Chips,  Not  Chalk,"  Profiles,  the 
York  University  Magazine  for  Alumni  and  Friends  (May  1994): 
11. 

15  Gerry  Smith,  "Restructuring  Education  at  River  Oaks  P.S.:  A 
Vision  for  the  Future."  Draft  report  for  the  Halton  Board  of 
Education,  1993. 

16  Many  of  these  projects  are  described  in  22  articles  in  Educa- 
tional Leadership  51,  no.  7  ( 1994).  The  theme  of  this  issue  of 
the  journal  of  the  American  Association  for  Supervision  and 
Curriculum  Development  was  "Realizing  the  Promise  of 
Technology." 


17  Karen  Sheingold,  "Restructuring  for  Learning  with  Technolo- 
gy: The  Potential  for  Synergy,"  in  Restructuring  for  Learning 
with  Technology,  ed.  Karen  Sheingold  and  Marc  S.  Tucker 
(New  York:  Center  for  Technology  in  Education,  Bank  Street 
College  of  Education  and  National  Center  on  Education  and 
the  Economy,  1990),  p.  14. 

18  Probably  because  their  school  lacked  computers,  only  35 
percent  of  Lillian  Elementary  School  teachers  agreed  that 
they  had  changed  their  teaching  styles.  This  pilot  project  in 
the  North  York  Board  of  Education  acknowledged  from  the 
start  that  the  school  board  did  not  have  the  resources  to 
allow  Lillian  to  match  River  Oaks'  level  of  computer 
resources.  See  Sandra  Sangster,  "Implementation  of  Comput- 
er Technology  Across  the  Curriculum:  Lillian  Elementary 
School,  1991-92,"  a  research  project  for  the  North  York 
Board  of  Education. 

19  Jennifer  Lewington,  "Plugging  in  Without  Plugging  Out," 
Globe  and  Mail,  19  August  1994. 

20  Ronald  Anderson,  University  of  Minnesota  sociologist  and 
co-author  of  "Computers  in  American  Schools,"  quoted  in 
Newsweek,  16  May  1994,  p.  51,  and  Duncan  Mckie,  VP  of 
Decima  Research,  in  study  by  Times  Mirror  Centre  for 
People  and  the  Press  in  the  United  States,  quoted  in  Chris 
Cobb,  "Affluent  Males  Benefit  Most  from  Computers," 
Ottawa  Citizen,  4  June  1994;  also  noted  by  Terry  Woronov, 
"Six  Myths  (and  Five  Promising  Truths)  about  the  Uses  of 
Educational  Technology,"  Harvard  Education  Letter  10,  no.  5 
(1994):  2. 

The  following  papers,  given  at  the  Gender  and  Science  and 
Technology  7  International  Conference  (Montreal,  1993), 
give  examples  of  particular  interventions:  Jo  Sanders,  "A 
Large  American  Project  That  Got  Thousands  of  Girls  into 
Mathematics,  Science  and  Technology,"  p.  1 10-17;  Val  Clarke, 
"The  Rationale,  Development  and  Evaluation  of  a  Video  to 
Encourage  Girls  to  Study  Computing,"  p.  47-55;  G.  Joy 
Teague,  Valerie  A.  Clarke,  and  Marion  L.  Lyne,  "A  Computer 
Holiday  Program  for  Year  10  Girls,"  p.  159-67;  Sharon  Frantz 
and  Catharine  Warren,  "A  Kid's  Computer  Camp  as  a  Social 
Microcosm  for  the  Study  of  Female  Avoidance  of  Technolog- 
ical Training,"  p.  236-43;  and  Sandra  Acker  and  Keith  Oatley, 
"Gender  Equity  and  Computers  in  Context,"  p.  309-17. 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Learning,  Teaching,  and  Information  Tecrinology 


2 1  ludith  Zorfau,  Patricia  Corley,  and  Arlc nc  Rem/,  "Helping 
Students  with  Disdbilitm  Become  Writers,"  Eiluiaiionul 
UaJerihtp  51.  no.  7  ( 1994):  62-«6;  Terry  Woronov,  "Six 
Myths  (and  Five  Promising  Truths)  about  the  Uses  of  Educa- 
tional Technology.'  Harvard  EJucaiwn  Ltttrr  10.  no.  5 
(1994). 

22  Reg  Fleming,  "Literacy  for  a  Technological  Age,"  Science 
Education  73.  no.  4  ( 1989):  398. 

23  Graham  Orpwood,  "Scientific  Literacy  for  All."  p.  16.  Back- 
ground paper  written  for  the  Ontario  Royal  Commission  on 
Learning.  1994. 

24  Dwyer.  'Apple  Classrooms  of  Tomorrow."  p.  4- 1 0. 

25  Peck  and  Dorricott.  "Why  Use  Technology?"  p.  II  - 1 4. 

26  Barbara  Means  and  Kerry  Olson.  "The  Link  Between  Tech- 
nology and  Authentic  l.earning."  Educational  Leadenhtp  SI, 
no.  7  (1994):  15-18. 

27  Hancock  and  Belts,  'From  the  Lagging  to  the  Leading  Edge," 
p.  28.  29. 

28  Mike  Muir,  "Putting  Computer  Projects  at  the  Heart  of  the 
Curriculum."  Educational  Leadership  51,  no.  7  (1994):  30. 

29  Linda  Taggart,  "Student  Autobiographies  with  a  Twist  of 
Technology."  Educational  Leadership  5\,  no.  7  ( 1994):  34-35. 

30  See,  for  example:  "Learning  Through  Play,"  re  Henry  Street 
High  School,  Whitby,  Othawa  Times.  20  May  1994;  "Today's 
Classrooms  Going  High  Tech,"  re  Hammarskjold  High 
School,  Thunder  Bay.  Welland-Port  Colhorne  Tribune,  5  May 
1994;  "Shop  Class  Has  Changed."  re  Lively  District  Secondary 
School.  Sudbury  Star.  5  May  1994;  and  Eric  Dempster, 
teacher  at  R.H.  King  High  School,  Scarborough, 'Vision  for 
Future,"  submission  to  the  Ontario  Royal  Commission  on 
Learning,  1994.  received  via  TVOnline. 

3 1  GUEP.  'Teaching  in  the  Information  Age."  p.  5. 

32  A.MTEC  bncf,  p.  5-7. 

33  lulia  Slapleton.  Educational  Technology  in  Sew  fertey:  A  Plan 
for  Actum  (New  ]eney  Stale  Department  of  Education, 
1992).  p.  I. 

34  Howard  Gardner,  The  Unschooled  Mind:  How  Children  Think 
and  How  Sthoob  Should  Teach  (New  York:  Basic  Books. 
1991). 

35  Humber  College,  brief  to  the  Ontario  Royal  Commission  on 
Ixaming.  1993.  p  5 

36  lennifer  Lewington,  'A  Computer  Network  for  Teachers," 
Globe  and  Mail.  19  August  1994. 


37  GUEP,  "Teaching  in  the  Information  Age,"  p.  3. 

38  GUEP,  "Teaching  in  the  Information  Age."  p.  18. 

39  Peck  and  Dorricott.  "Why  Use  Technology?"  p.  13-14. 

40  Council  of  Ontario  Directors  of  Education,  brief  to  the 
Ontario  Royal  Commission  on  Learning.  1993.  p.  14. 

4 1  Betts.  "On  the  Birth  of  the  Communication  Age."  p.  23. 

42  Educational  Computing  Organization  of  Ontario,  brief  to 
the  Ontario  Royal  Commission  on  Learning,  1994. 

43  Woronov,  "Six  Myths  (and  Five  Promising  Truths)  about  the 
Uses  of  Educational  Technology,"  p.  1,2. 

44  Educational  Computing  Organization  of  Ontario,  brief. 

45  Information  Technology  Association  of  Canada,  "Education 
Statement."  1994.  p.  6. 

46  Letter  from  Anne  Swarbrick.  Minister  of  Culture,  iourism 
and  Recreation,  to  Dave  Cooke,  Minister  of  Education  and 
Training.  2  )une  1994. 

47  Memo  from  Ken  Stief.  superintendent.  Curriculum  and 
Instructional  Services.  North  York  Board  of  Education,  to 
Commi.ssioner  Avis  Glaze.  22  September  1994. 

48  Todd,  "Chips,  Not  Chalk,"  p.  1 1 . 

49  Paul  Swan  and  Bill  Utham,  school  librarians,  Middlesex 
County  Board  of  Education,  brief  to  the  Ontario  Ro>'al 
Commission  on  Learning,  1994. 

50  Ontario  Public  Library  Strategic  Planning  Group,  "One  Place 
to  Look:  The  Ontario  Public  Library  Strategic  Plan"  (Toron- 
to: Ontario  Ministry  of  Culture  and  Communications  and 
Ontario  Library  AsstKiation,  1990). 

51  Michael  Winerip,  "Classrooms  on  the  Information  Highway," 
New  York  Times.  20  July  1994. 

52  Robert  Brehl,  "Info-age  Gold  Rush  I  urcs  Business  to  N.B.," 
Toronto  Star,  14  May  1994. 

53  See  Sheingold,  "Restructuring  for  Learning  with  Technology," 
for  a  discussion  of  high-technology  schools  in  the  United 
States. 

54  The  (".ouncil  of  Ontario  Directors  of  Fxlucatinn  coined  this 
phrase  in  referring  to  British  (>»lumbia's  high  tech 
Wondertree  school  in  their  1993  submission  to  the  Ontario 
Royal  Cximmission  on  Learning,  p.  1 1. 

55  "F>ducalion:  The  City  Becomes  a  Ixarning  Laboratory,"  in 
"Our  City/Our  Future,"  supplement  to  Toronto  Star. 

I  May  1994. 


For  ttw  Um*  of  U«m«n( 


%. 


?«^A^-:i  •• 


Community  Education: 
Aiiiances  for  Learning 


"It  takes  a  whole  village  to  raise  a  child." 


African  Proverb 


Second  only  to  exhortations  about  competitiveness, 
the  proverb  above  was  probably  repeated  most 
frequently  during  our  public  hearings.  Teachers, 
school  board  administrators  and  trustees, 
community  services,  and  others  said  time  after 
time:  "Schools  cannot  do  it  alone."  Despite  their 
heroic  efforts,  schools  are  encountering  growing 
difficulty  in  responding  to  the  Increasing  needs  of 
children.  Indeed,  these  efforts  have  diverted  the 
energy  of  teachers  and  administrators  from 
meeting  their  primary  education  objectives,  and 
have  caused  them  to  focus  on  providing  ancillary 
services  for  which  they  don't  have  the  training, 
the  time,  or  resources. 


The  responsibilities  pushed  on  schools  and  teachers  in 
recent  years  have  become  unrealistic  and  onerous. 
Under  these  circumstances,  serious  reform  of  school- 
ing will  be  difficult  indeed.  Those  responsibilities  simply 
must  be  shared,  the  burdens  reduced,  if  schools  and  teachers 
are  to  do  the  jobs  we  need  them  to  do.  It  was  this  thinking 
that  led  us  to  name  community  education  as  one  of  the  four 
key  engines  needed  to  drive  the  educational  reform  that  this 
report  advocates. 

Schools  must  foster  the  healthy  development  of  all 
students  by  harnessing  the  various  resources  of  the  commu- 
nities they  are  a  part  of  Bringing  these  resources  together  in 
a  new  structure  should  make  it  possible  to  launch  a  series  of 
local  initiatives  and  programs,  based  in  or  around  each 
school  and  designed  to  meet  its  particular  needs.  Teachers 
would  be  released  to  do  the  academic  work  that  is  their 
primary  responsibility.  Not  surprisingly,  this  long-term 
strategy  calls  for  a  fundamental  questioning  not  only  of 
existing  roles  and  organizational  models,  and  especially  the 
very  way  we  think  of  schools  and  community.  Our  ambition 
should  be  to  find  new  ways  of  supporting  the  raising  of  chil- 
dren, and  in  doing  so  to  weave  a  new  a  sense  of  community. 

Community  building  must  become  the  heart  of  any  school  improve- 
ment effort.  Whatever  else  is  involved  -  improving  teaching,  devel- 
oping sensible  curriculum,  creating  nevs^  forms  of  governance, 
providing  more  authentic  assessment,  empowering  teachers  and 
parents,  increasing  professionalism  -  it  must  rest  on  a  foundation  of 
community  building.' 

In  this  chapter,  after  an  analysis  of  the  problem  and  its 
causes,  we  outline  our  proposals  for  helping  schools  cope 


with  expanded  pressures.  We  also  address  ways  to  successfully 
translate  into  action  our  ideas  about  community  education. 

The  problem:  The  expansion  of  the  role  of  schools 

Our  public  consultations  throughout  the  province  and  the 
submissions  we  studied  underline  that  everywhere  teachers, 
principals,  and  school  boards  have  stretched  their  mandate 
for  schooling  today's  children  into  various  supports  well 
beyond  their  traditional  educational  domain.  Their  reasons 
for  expanding  their  role  are  understandable.  We  frequently 
heard  that  changing  social  conditions  for  families  have 
compelled  schools  to  develop  more  extensive  support 
services  for  their  students.  The  Ontario  we  discovered 
through  our  consultations  is  almost  unrecognizable  from  the 
Ontario  of  three  or  four  decades  ago. 

Since  the  1960s,  societal  changes  of  all  kinds  have  placed 
great  stress  on  families  as  an  institution  and  on  parenting  as 
a  function.  Once  we  could  count  on  children  walking  home 
at  lunch  hour  from  the  nearby  school  for  a  hot  meal  or  on  a 
parent  helping  the  children  with  homework.  Now,  both 
parents  work,  even  if  they  live  together;  they  have  less  time 
for  their  children,  unless  they  are  unemployed.  The  discus- 
sions they  should  be  having  with  their  children  about  rela- 
tionships and  sobriety,  highly  awkward  between  generations 
at  the  simplest  of  times,  have  become  infinitely  more  diffi- 
cult lectures  about  sex,  AIDS,  drugs,  and  violence.  It  is 
evident  that  meeting  all  of  the  challenges  of  the  1990s  is 
beyond  the  capacity  of  an  increasing  number  of  parents. 

If  changing  socio-economic  conditions  of  families  have 
affected  children,  so  have  other  socio-cultural  factors  such  as 
the  youth  consumers'  culture  (and  economy),  or  the  anony- 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Community  Education 


mous  urban  life  that  has  often  replaced  traditional  commu- 
nities' cohesion  and  support.  Cutting  across  all  social  classes 
and  cultures  are  the  many  barriers  to  learning  created  by 
emotional  problems  resulting  from  family  breakdown,  isola- 
tion, and  loneliness,  inter-generational  confrontation, 
conflicting  values,  family  violence,  sexual  abuse,  sexism,  and 
racism.  These  barriers  may  affect  children  and  youth  in  any 
kHooI,  anywhere,  any  time.  Most  alarming  are  the  increasing 
rates  of  pre-teen  and  teen  suicides  found  in  all  segments  of 
society.  For  example, 

•  the  suicide  death  rate  for  teenage  men  has  increased  four-fold 
from  5.3  to  23.0  per  100.000  between  I960  and  1991: 

•  the  tuicide  rate  for  young  women  also  increased  from  0.9  to  4  per 
100.000  between  I960  and  1991; 

•  in  1989-90  the  second  leading  cause  of  hospitalization  for  young 
women  aged  IS  to  19  is  attempted  suicide: 

•  girts  10  to  14  years  of  age  are  hospitalized  for  attempted  suicide  at 
a  rale  five  limes  that  of  boyv 

•  ihc  suKide  rate  among  Indian  youth  was  five  times  that  of  the 
(^nadun  population: 

•  Urge  proportions  of  aboriginal  people  identified 
unemplormeni.  alcohol,  drug  use.  family  violence,  sexual  abuse  and 
suKide  as  significant  social  problems  in  their  communities.' 

Ai  well,  for  loo  many  families  and  neighbourhoods, 
additional  barriers  are  created  or  compounded  by  poor 
socio-economic  conditions:  poverty,  unemployment,  malnu- 
trition, chronic  health  conditions,  substandard  housing,  and 
lack  of  recreational  facilities/services. 

Indeed,  our  consultations  confirm  the  conclusion  of 
other  reports  -  Canadian  families  "are  not  the  idealized 


haven  we  wish  they  could  be,  not  the  private  places  in  which 
we  retreat  from  society,  but  an  integral  part  of  society,  and 
thus,  intertwined  with  social  changes  in  the  wider  world."' 

What  is  more,  as  studies  show,  the  structure  of  the  family 
is  changing,  many  more  marriages  arc  breaking  up,  and  the 
number  of  single-parent  families  is  increasing.  More  of  these 
and  other  families  now  live  in  poverty  than  in  past  decades. 
According  to  Statistics  Canada,  4.5  million  people  live  in 
poverty  -  people  who  spend  at  least  56  percent  of  their 
income  on  food,  shelter,  and  clothing.'  One  recent  Ontario 
study  found  that  "one  in  every  six  children  is  in  a  family 
receiving  social  assistance.  About  three-quarters  of  them  are 
children  of  single-parent  families,  a  majority  of  these  parents 
being  female.  Child  poverty  in  Ontario  is  on  the  rise,  stand- 
ing at  15.3  percent  in  1990."' 

Social  policy  analysts  believe  that  the  impact  on  families 
of  economic  restructuring  caused  by  automation  in  the 
manufacturing  sector  has  been  significant  and  is  escalating 
at  a  rapid  rate.  The  greatest  victims  in  the  slide  toward  low- 
paying  and  temporary  jobs  arc  young  families  -  those  with 
parents  under  25,  who  have  seen  their  incomes  drop  from 
the  1980s  by  nearly  20  percent.  Our  conclusions  have  been 
influenced  by  the  growing  number  of  studies  warning  of  the 
impact  of  these  conditions  on  an  increasingly  impoverished 
generation. 

Our  consultations  suggest  that  more  than  any  other  social 
institution,  schools  have  felt  compelled  to  address  these 
problems  in  increasingly  direct  ways:  by  providing  meals, 
family  counselling,  and  mental  health  services.  \Mierc  fami- 
lies are  unable,  or  unwilling,  to  teach  their  children  about 
human  sexuality  and  human  relations  or  about  protecting 
themselves  from  the  dangers  of  illegal  drug  use  or  sexually 
transmitted  diseases,  schools  have  stepped  in  and  included 
these  subjects  in  the  curriculum  of  the  classroom.  Schools 
now  carry  most  of  the  responsibility  for  orienting  new 
young  immigrants  to  Canada,  teaching  them  English,  and 
providing  support  for  their  culture  shock.  Many  schools  now 
provide  a  safe  haven  in  the  morning  and  late  into  the  day  for 
children  whose  parents  work  early  and  late.  Some  provide 
breakfast  programs,  and  counsel  children  in  single-parent 
families,  and  blended,  re-combined,  and  same-sex  families. 

Schools  have  increasingly  assumed  responsibility  for 
satisfying  all  but  the  most  severe  social  needs  of  children  and 
youth.  However,  these  efforts  have  the  potential  to  weaken 


For  Vt»  lov«  of  Laammg 


the  ability  of  schools  to  fulfil  their  primary  educational 
objectives.  The  efforts  of  schools  must  be  redirected  to  their 
intended  focus  on  education. 

These  expanded  services,  which  schools  have  adopted  by 
default,  have  not  always  been  of  the  highest  level  and  quality. 
Despite  their  best  efforts,  schools  face  significant  limitations 
in  their  ability  to  provide  a  full  range  of  services.  Educators 
do  not  have  the  specialized  training  required  to  develop  and 
implement  many  social-service-type  programs.  School 
boards  often  lack  properly  trained  professionals  to  supervise 
the  development  and  implementation  of  these  programs. 
Moreover,  the  use  of  school  funding  to  provide  expensive 
ancillary  services  may  be  a  drain  on  program  resources. 

Despite  positive  intentions,  the  best  efforts  of  schools  to 
provide  a  broadened  range  of  social  services  are  often  inef- 
fective and  inefficient.  More  often,  the  result  is  that  the 
general  social  needs  of  all  children,  and  the  special  needs  of 
some  children,  are  unmet.  Successful  interventions  depend 
on  the  capacity  for  a  flexible  response  by  professionals, 
including  teachers  and  other  school  personnel  who  share 
understanding  of  the  child's  real  world.  This  requires,  at  the 
minimum,  the  co-ordination  of  the  efforts  of  professionals 
providing  services  for  children.  More  than  that,  it  requires  a 
rethinking  of  the  relationship  between  schools  and  the 
parents,  and  other  members  of  their  communities,  in  order 
to  enhance  the  capacity  of  the  community  as  a  whole  to  meet 
the  needs  of  all  children  and  youth. 

Our  response:  Creating  communities  of  concern 

We  believe  it  is  now  time  to  "re-invent"  schools  by  drawing 
from,  and  enhancing,  the  strengths  of  their  communities. 
Service  systems  must  be  a  public  responsibility  shared  with 
families,  schools,  and  communities,  rather  than  solely  a 
government  responsibility.  We  believe  that  "when  communi- 
ties are  empowered  to  solve  their  own  problems,  they  func- 
tion better  than  communities  that  depend  on  services 
provided  by  outsiders."'  The  challenge  is  to  overcome  the 
isolation  of  potential  partners  and,  by  redirecting  their 
resources,  capacities  and,  commitment,  develop  communities 
concerned  about  raising  our  children.  We  must  rethink  the 
partnerships  required  in  educating  our  children. 

In  our  consultations  in  communities  throughout  the 
province,  we  found  a  number  of  school  projects  that  open 
for  students  "a  window  on  the  world  out  there."  We  applaud 


->  The  old  communities  -  family,  village,  parish, 
and  so  on  -  have  all  but  disappeared  in  the 
knowledge  society.  Their  place  has  largely 
been  taken  by  the  new  unit  of  social  integra- 
tion, the  organization.  Where  community  was 
fate,  organization  is  voluntary  membership. 
Where  community  claimed  the  entire  person, 
organization  is  a  means  to  a  person's  ends, 
a  tool...  But  who,  then,  does  the  community 
tasks?  Two  hundred  years  ago  whatever 
social  tasks  were  being  done  were  done  in  all 
societies  by  a  local  community.  Very  few  if 
any  of  these  tasks  are  being  done  by  the  old 
communities  anymore.  Nor  would  they  be 
capable  of  doing  them,  considering  that  they 
no  longer  have  control  of  their  members  or 
even  a  firm  hold  over  them.  People  no  longer 
stay  where  they  were  born  either  in  terms  of 
geography  or  in  terms  of  social  position  and 
status.  By  definition,  a  knowledge  society  is  a 
society  of  mobility. 

Peter  F.  Drucker, 
"The  Age  of  Social  Transformation,"  Atlantic  Monthly,  1994 


the  wonderful  efforts  that  are  encouraging  students  to 
participate  in  environmental  projects,  to  interact  with  other 
students  through  computers,  or  to  share  in  co-operative 
education.  We  believe  these  kinds  of  initiatives  should  be 
actively  encouraged  and  supported.  Some  success  stories  are 
described  in  Chapters  7  to  10,  giving  our  vision  of  what 
good  teaching  and  great  schools  can  be. 

In  this  chapter,  we  focus  on  the  need  for  schools  to  go 
beyond  the  clearly  instructional  partnerships  —  for  exam- 
ple, early  remediation  programs  such  as  reading  recovery  — 
which  can  and  should  be  developed.  This  chapter  is  not 
about  alternative  schools  or  more  imaginative  special  educa- 
tion programs,  or  projects  for  high-risk  kids,  or  outstanding 
ways  of  enriching  the  curriculum  through  technology  or 
work  experiences.  Although  the  form  of  community  educa- 
tion that  we  advocate  may  encompass  such  efforts  to 
enhance  the  instructional  function  of  schooling,  it  requires, 
fundamentally,  that  schools  assume  a  broader  vision  of  the 
goal  of  schooling.  In  our  vision,  community  education  takes 
a  distinct  orientation,  one  that  supports  the  raising  of  chil- 
dren and  their  healthy  general  development. 

The  needs  we  want  to  address  with  this  key  strategy  of 
community  education  are  common  to  all  children  and  youth 
growing  up  in  these  challenging  and  changing  times.  If  the 
needs  are  general,  then  the  solutions  will  have  to  be  universal. 
And  when,  in  addition,  more  specific  problems  have  been 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Community  Education 


(I 

c 

c 


South  Simco  PuMtc  School,  Ovhawa 

South  Simcoe  Public  School  is  a  small,  inner-city  school,  with  about  200  students  in  Grades  7 
and  8.  It  has  developed  a  program  to  increase  the  contacts  tjetween  the  school  and  the  commu- 
nity, and  at  the  same  time  to  motivate  students  to  work  hard  and  to  do  well  at  school.  Their  expe- 
nential  learning  program  is  a  partnership  between  the  school  and  local  businesses.  Business 
representatives  come  to  the  school  to  \x  interviewed  by  students,  who  are  prepared  by  reviewing 
Interviewing,  questioning  and  note-taking  skills.  The  interviews  are  published  in  the  school  news- 
paper. Students  complete  a  survey  to  establish  their  areas  of  interest,  and  pairs  of  students  are 
matched  with  appropnate  placements  and  spend  short  periods  of  time  in  workplaces  to  gam  real- 
life  expenences.  They  write  up  descriptions  of  their  activity  for  the  school  newspaper. 

At  a  monthly  community  meeting,  representatives  of  the  businesses  and  of  the  service  agencies, 
along  with  teachers,  parents,  and  students,  get  together  at  school  or  in  one  of  the  community 
settings  to  discuss  the  various  programs  and  plans  for  the  future.  When  the  school  plan  is  drawn 
up  annually,  the  community  representatives  and  parents  work  from  a  draft  prepared  by  the  teach 
ing  staff  to  participate  in  formulating  the  Tinal  plan. 

Parent  participation  has  increased  from  a  handful  to  a  healthy  number  -  35  to  40  -  who  regulariy 
attend  the  monthly  parent  meetings  to  help  solve  problems  and  to  make  decisions  to  assist  the 
school  in  its  mission. 

The  community  outreach  programs  at  South  Simcoe  Public  School  have  widened  the  decision- 
making base  at  the  school,  so  that  the  "ownership"  of  the  school  and  its  students  has  beconr>e 
much  more  shared. 


Welland 

In  Welland  the  local  FrancoOntanan  community  is  moving  to  develop  a  multi-purpose  centre.  In 
phase  one.  the  existing  secondary  school  will  be  joined  to  a  new  building  housing  a  health 
centre,  a  food-preparation  centre,  a  community-education  and  cultural  centre,  and  a  campus  for 
the  new  francophone  college.  The  second  phase  will  add  a  recreation  centre  and  provide  a  link  to 
the  daycare  already  on  site. 


Iroquoi*  Ridge  High  School,  Oakvllle 

Iroquois  Ridge  High  School  is  the  product  of  a  three-year  collaboration  of  the  pnncipal.  staff,  and 
individuals  in  Oakville.  The  physical  design  is  the  product  of  monthly  meetings  t)etween  the  princi- 
pal and  the  parents,  and  the  principal  and  members  of  the  regions  Community  Integrated 
Services  Advisory  Council,  composed  of  representatives  of  the  Children's  Council,  the  District 
Health  Council,  the  Ministries  of  Community  and  Social  Services,  and  Tounsm  and  Recreation. 
These  agerKtes  agreed  to  provide  a  range  of  services  in  the  2.000  square  feet  of  concourse 
space  in  the  new  school  -  space  dedicated  to  the  provision  of  programs  for  families. 

The  coTKept  was  originally  proposed  by  the  pnncipal  based  on  the  changing  needs  of  the  commu- 
nity, which  were  recently  docunrtented  by  the  Integrated  Services  Advisory  Council  of  the  region. 

The  school  has  also  organized  a  close  collaboration  with  families  and  community  members  m 
order  to  enhance  Its  students'  learning.  The  school  has  identified  goals  for  its  programs,  and  the 
School  A<Jv»sof  y  Council  is  mandated  to  advise  the  pnncipal  about  the  relevance  of  the  school's 
programs  for  the  community. 


For  th«  LoM  of  LMmmg 


ii 


w 


created  by  poor  environments,  these  additional  needs  will  call 
for  more  complex  solutions,  adapted  to  local  priorities. 

Community  education,  then,  works  by  enlisting  and,  co- 
ordinating all  the  help  offered.  No  longer  can  teachers  be 
considered  the  only  human  resources  involved  in  schooling. 
Within  our  concept  of  community  education,  many 
resources  will  be  involved:  business  and  industry,  health-care 
institutions,  and  social-work  agencies,  municipal  infrastruc- 
tures and  services,  community  associations,  religious  groups, 
and  especially  families.  Teachers  supported  by  these  resources 
will  continue  to  fulfil  their  own  primary  responsibility. 

This  pool  of  possible  resources,  which  already  exists  in 
one  form  or  another  for  every  school,  is  usually  located  close 
to  our  elementary  schools.  There  is,  of  course,  a  less  obvious 
local  community  in  the  case  of  many  high  schools,  especially 
in  larger  urban  environments.  When  the  available  space  does 
not  permit  the  new  partners  to  operate  in  the  school  build- 
ing itself,  mobile  vans  could  offer  needed  services;  nearby 
offices  and  facilities  could  be  used;  and  provincial  and 
municipal  services  might  re-locate  near  the  school.  Students 
and  their  families  should  be  able  to  look  to  the  school  build- 
ing and  its  extensions  as  a  place  that  responds  to  their  vari- 
ous needs. 

Our  vision  of  community  education  is  grounded  in  a 
society  that  recognizes  a  need  to  give  high  priority  to  assist- 
ing all  parents  in  the  raising  of  their  children.  A  web  of  on- 
going supports,  articulated  in  and  around  the  school,  will  be 
both  preventive  and  remedial  if  they  are  locally  based.  This 
is  a  concept  that  insists  "...  strategies  which  focus  on  indi- 
vidual children  must  be  integrated  with  strategies  which 
improve  each  part  of  the  environment  within  which  children 
spend  their  time  -  homes,  child  care,  neighbourhoods,  and 
schools,"'  and  so  are  intended  to  benefit  all  children.  It  is  a 
concept  that  serves  society  as  a  whole  because  it  is  built  on 
the  foundation  of  equitable  educational  opportunities  for  all 
children  in  Ontario. 

A  local  focus  for  community  education 

The  value  of  the  school  as  a  hub  for  the  community  and  a 
focus  for  community  education  is  not  new.  Already  in  1973 
the  provincial  legislature  was  aware  that  there  were  better 
ways  to  use  school  facilities.  They  acknowledged  the  centrali- 
ty  of  the  school  in  most  communities,  and  the  many  ways 
schools  could  be  of  assistance  to  the  life  of  the  broad 
community."  However,  community  education  is  much  more 


e  must  find  ways  to  strengthen 
the  ability  of  parents  and 
families  to  meet  the  needs  of  children 
in  those  crucial  early  years  ...  We 
must  recognize  that  all  children  will 
require  a  variety  of  opportunities,  and 
some  will  require  more  opportunities 
than  others.  That  means  a  wide  range 
of  support  services,  particularly  for 
pre-adolescents  and  adolescents 
within  our  communities." 

Charles  Beer.  M.P.P. 


than  that.  Not  only  will  schools  open  their  facilities  to  the 
community,  but  they  will  also  become  the  hub  for  all 
services  that  assist  families  in  child  raising.  Schools  in  this 
vision  are  the  physical  centres,  thus  simplifying  access  to  a 
wide  variety  of  social,  health,  and  recreational  programs. 

The  recent  report.  Yours,  Mine,  and  Ours:  Ontario's  Chil- 
dren and  Youth,''  from  the  Premier's  Council  on  Health,  Weil- 
Being,  and  Social  Justice,  reinforced  previous  reports'"  by 
making  clear  that,  at  present,  family  services  are  unco-ordi- 
nated.  The  report  also  recognizes  that  often  the  school  is  the 
single,  shared  experience  of  most  adults.  Earlier,  the 
Premier's  Council  had  released  its  report  People  and  Skills  in 
the  New  Global  Economy,"  which  recommended  both  school 
councils  and  community  linkage  committees  at  the  school 
board  level.  The  school  lies  at  the  heart  of  the  community, 
and  is  the  only  resource  that  exists  in  practically  every 
neighbourhood  across  the  province.  Therefore,  schools 
should  be  the  centre  of  the  community  and  the  focus  point 
for  providing  a  range  of  services  to  children  and  youth.  The 
school  building  can  be  the  site  where  community  and  social 
services,  ranging  from  medical  and  dental  services  to  daycare 
and  public  libraries,  are  provided. 

Supporting  and  sustaining  a  diversity  of  models 

Just  as  we  recognize  that  community-to-school  linkage  is  not 
a  new  concept,  we  also  resist  the  notion  of  one  single  form 
of  community  education.  The  differing  environments  in 
which  young  people  grow  up  and  the  wide  diversity  of 
factors  that  affect  individual  children  demand  a  wide  variety 
of  models  and  types  of  alliances  embraced  within  the 
concept  of  community  education. 


Vol.  IV     Making  It  Happen      Community  Education 


ii«l  C^luiractmstics  of  Community 
I         .rmcnl/ttlucalion  NfixlrU 

s^...l•^^lul  prcvcniion  progr«mi  undcr»tjnil  that  the 
^1:    :  Ilv»  in  tht  limily  and  the  family  in  the  commu- 
nity, to  components  of  successful  programs  address  the 
«»holeneu  of  the  child  and  the  environment. 

Tuhrril  to  meet  local  needs  and  desire*: 
Risk  factors  and  protective  factors  vary  from  commu- 
nity to  community  -  for  example,  some  communities 
have  high  rates  of  teen  pregnanc"y;  some  communities 
are  bedroom  communities,  and  parents  are  employed 
out  of  the  community  from  dawn  to  dusk.  Therefore, 
the  successful  local  models  will  vary  from  community 
to  community  depending  on  local  needs  and  desires. 

High  quality: 

Successful  programs  have  high-quality  management 
and  administrative  approaches.  The  staff  have  enough 
time  set  aside  for  planning  and  preparation.  There  is 
good  supervision,  and  staff  are  well  trained.  People  are 
paid  well  for  the  work  they  do,  and  there  are  funds 
available  for  supplies  and  equipment. 

Iniegratwn: 

Successful  prevention  programs  link  with  other 
programs,  schools,  and  community  activities.  This 
requires  developing  common  goals,  objectives,  and 
collaborative  plans  for  sharing  human  financial  and 
material  resources. 

Meaningful,  significant  parent  and  community  resident 
imrolvement: 

The  concept  of  community,  family,  and  parent  empow- 
erment was  strong,  and  the  ecological  model  of  healthy 
child  development  certainly  supports  parent  and 
communiry  resident  involvement. 

Ministry  of  Education  and  Training. 
Bett»f  Begmmngs.  Betlw  Futures  Protect 


\Vc  have  been  guided  to  this  view  by  the  recommenda- 
tions of  the  communities  we  consulted  and  by  research  on 
effective  practices  of  promoting  community  involvement. 
\Vc  have  considered  the  recommendations  of  authors  of 
better  Beginnings,  Better  Futures  Project,  who  suggest  that 
models  of  community  involvement  be  tailored  to  meet  local 
needs  and  desires,  since  risk  factors  and  protective  factors 
vary  from  community  U)  community.  These  authors  observe, 
for  example,  that  some  communities  have  high  rates  of  teen 
pregnancy,  and  some  arc  bedroom  communities  with 
parents  employed  out  of  the  community  from  dawn  to  dusk. 

Our  consultations  confirmed  that  variability.  We  learned 
of  the  partnerships  that  made  up  the  communities  of 
concern  in  many  schools.  We  highlight  some  such  examples 
in  the  pages  of  this  chapter.  Some  involved  basic  physical, 
material  collaboration,  such  as  the  Stratford  Education  and 
Recreation  Centre  and  the  Wclland  Franco-Ontarian  initia- 
tive, where  good  thinking  linked  building  and  facilities  -  a 
prelude  probably  to  other  linkages  of  people  and  services.  In 
other  communities,  wc  found  schools  and  teachers  interact- 
ing in  their  day-to-day  operations  with  one  significant  part- 
ner group  such  as  the  parents. 

Other  projects  express  ways  of  creating  multi-partner 
participation,  including  parents,  social  services,  businesses 
and  the  community,  in  their  search  for  a  better  approach  to 
raising  children  and  nurturing  the  growth  of  pre-teens  and 
teenagers.  Some  of  these  local  initiatives  are  lop-down  ideas 
originating  with  federal,  provincial,  municipal,  or  school- 
board  levels  of  government,  where  schools  were  selected  on 
the  basis  of  their  match  with  the  goal  of  the  programs.  Wc 
found  other  examples  where  new  community  education 
initiatives  were  the  result  of  the  single-handed  efforts  of  a 
dynamic  school  principal. 

For  some,  community  education  means  parental  involve- 
ment or  community  use  of  educational  facilities  and  perhaps 
co-operative  education:  for  others,  it  involves  alliances 
between  many  more  partners  including  health-care  givers; 
libraries:  business,  and  industry;  and  recreational,  religious, 
and  social  welfare  groups.  For  yet  others,  and  perhaps  in  its 
most  sophisticated  application,  the  concept  of  community 
education  embraces  the  involvement  of  the  community  at 
large  in  the  educational  process,  with  a  view  to  setting  much 
of  the  social  agenda  of  the  community,  particularly  as  this 
agenda  touches  the  lives  of  children.  The  Sparrow  lake 


Rxttw  IjOM  o(  L«amtn| 


Alliance  is  a  coalition  of  250  members  of  11  professions 
providing  services  for  children,  including  experts  from 
teaching  hospitals  and  community  health  clinics  as  well  as 
professionals  from  social  services,  with  the  goal  of  answering 
emotional  and  mental  health  needs  of  children  and  adoles- 
cents of  Southern  Ontario.'^ 

We  do  not,  therefore,  focus  on  agencies  only.  We  believe 
that  there  is  every  reason  to  include  a  range  of  community 
and  neighbourhood  people  in  the  school.  There  should  be  a 
diversity  of  models  of  community  education.  We  imagine, 
for  example,  as  more  and  more  children  have  less  and  less 
access  to  grandparents,  that  retired  individuals  in  the 
community  may  be  invited  in  to  listen  to  children  read,  to 
read  to  them,  and  otherwise  support  their  learning.  Such 
forms  of  community  education  tell  us  much  about  the 
mutuality  of  learning  and  its  value  to  all  members  of  the 
community. 

Similarly,  a  local  community  sports  association  might 
take  over  responsibility  for  giving  children  a  period  of  physi- 
cal activity  every  day,  with  the  added  benefit  of  releasing 
teachers  to  do  planning,  meet  with  parents,  or  have  more 
time  for  professional  development  activities.  We  envision 
sports  clubs  or  municipal  recreation  departments  taking 
some  responsibility  for  the  students  physical  activities. 

We  imagine  local  businesses  in  another  domain  of 
community  life  expanding  their  links  with  schools  beyond 
providing  sites  for  career  visits,  to  take  responsibility  for 
providing  part-time  jobs  for  students  who  need  them.  Busi- 
nesses may  lend  staff  to  augment  teachers'  efforts  in  convey- 
ing certain  knowledge  in  particular  courses,  co-ordinating 
workplace  visits  by  students,  providing  schools  with  equip- 
ment that  has  become  unnecessary  at  work.  They  may  even 
promote  healthy  communities  though  their  internal  prac- 
tices by  developing  family-friendly  policies  that  assure  time 
for  employees  who  are  parents  to  maintain  regular  contact 
with  their  children's  schools. 

We  imagine  a  local  college  or  university  using  a  school  as 
a  teacher-development  laboratory,  thus  placing  more  adults 
at  the  service  of  the  children.  The  college  or  university  may 
also  work  to  forge  links  between  schools  and  themselves 
through  such  means  as  campus  visits. 

These  new  forms  of  community  education  or  alliances 
could  give  special  prominence  to  the  role  of  parents  and 
families.  Elsewhere  in  this  report  we  emphasize  that 


research,  time  and  again,  substantiates  the  intuitive  wisdom 
that  children  do  well  in  the  school  when  their  parents  create, 
within  the  home,  an  attitude  that  values  learning.  The  link- 
age with  parents  by  the  schools  and  with  the  other  alliance 
partners  is  crucial  to  any  long-term  success.  But  the  attitude 
within  the  home  remains  the  most  difficult. 

Barriers  to  community  education:  Recognizing 
them  and  removing  them 

The  only  way  to  provide  services  to  children  and  youth,  in 
an  equitable  and  financially  efficient  fashion,  is  through  the 
use  of  collaborative  and  co-operative  models.  The  imple- 
mentation of  collaborative  delivery  models  has,  however, 
been  a  long  time  in  coming.  There  are  obvious  reasons  for 
this.  Some  relate  to  the  different  mandates,  policies,  and 
organizational  models  of  the  various  ministries  and  agencies 
that  serve  youth;  others  relate  to  the  natural  tendency  of 
institutions  to  build  walls  around  themselves  and  to  jealous- 
ly guard  their  own  areas  of  responsibility;  and  yet  others 
relate  to  the  variety  of  ways  that  child  service  institutions 
are  funded. 

Much  work  remains  to  be  done  to  remove  obstacles  that 
inhibit  the  necessary  flexibility,  authority,  and  funding.  Ways 
must  be  found  to  ensure  that  support  staff  or  personnel  have 
defined  responsibilities  for  co-ordinating  efforts  and  estab- 
lishing liaisons  between  local  groups  and  agencies;  collabo- 
ration has  not  been  the  hallmark  of  inter-agency  relation- 
ships. There  are  obvious  needs  for  changes  in  the  way  local 
initiatives  are  supported  through  central  funding  mecha- 
nisms -  changes  that  will  be  based  on  the  recognized  need  to 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Community  Education 


yiit 


5 


J 


Walpo4«  Island,  Lak*  St.  Clair 

Better  Beginnings.  Better  Futures  is  a  joint  venture  of  three  provincial  ministries  and  two  federal 
departments  established  in  1989.  This  First  Nation  project,  located  halfway  between  Sarnia  and 
Windsor,  is  one  of  11  pilot  projects.  Walpole  island  has  high  seasonal  unemployment.  The  project 
Shkimnoyaawin  Niigaan  Nigeeya.  is  for  children  to  age  4  and  their  families.  It  focuses  on  the 
rediscovery  of  life-preserving.  Iife^nhancing  values  of  traditional  Native  culture  through  community 
healing  and  wellness,  and  is  charactenzed  by  significant  inter-agency  coordination. 

The  project  features  a  home-visiting  program,  a  drop-in  centre,  a  toy-  and  book  lending  library, 
clothing  exchanges,  a  play  group,  field  tnps,  and  a  coK)perative  nursery  to  help  the  families  renew 
their  capacity  to  care  for  children.  Cultural  components  of  the  program,  such  as  Nechi  training  to 
promote  community  healing,  citizenship  awards,  courses  on  social  reforms.  Native  language 
classes,  medicine  wheel  teachings,  and  dramatic  art  round  out  the  program. 


Lakashore  Collaglata  Instltuta's  CLUE  Projact,  Toronto 

LaKeshore  Collegiate  Institute,  serving  one  of  Toronto's  urban  areas,  has  a  long  history  of  involve- 
ment with  its  community.  Established  from  an  amalgamation  of  several  other  high  schools  in  the 
early  1980s,  it  has  an  enrolment  composed  of  a  diverse  student  population. 

In  responding  to  the  increase  in  the  number  and  seventy  of  problems  brought  to  class  by 
students,  the  school  first  developed  a  referral  program,  and  later  broadened  its  action  to  reach 
out  into  the  school's  community  of  social-service  agencies  for  support. 

The  program  has  evolved  to  provide  on-site  presence  by  several  groups  who  are  not  available  to 
the  entire  student  body.  Lakeshore  freed  up  office  space  and,  with  the  assistance  of  students, 
named  this  new  collaborative  project  CLUE:  Community  Link  Up  Education.  CLUE  provides  a  range 
of  general  information  counselling,  workshops,  and  in  some  cases  independent  learning  credits  to 
students  on  site.  Community  agencies  and  groups  are  scheduled  in  at  the  CLUE  project  on  a  regu- 
lar basis.  One  of  these  groups  is  the  Best  Start  Program,  an  outreach  program  for  adolescent 
mothers  and  fathers,  offering  workshops  on  childrearing,  and  independent  learning  credits  for 
expectant  or  new  teenage  mothers.  CAWL,  the  Centre  for  the  Advancement  in  Work  and  Living, 
offers  stay-in-school  and  youth  employment  programs.  Another  group,  the  Women's  Habitat- 
Community  Outreach  Program,  offers  support  services  and  counselling  for  young  women  in 
abusive  dating  relations,  and  for  sexual  assault  victims.  The  Metropolitan  Toronto  Police  Commu- 
nity Patrol  is  an  active  member  of  CLUE,  offering  general  information  and  dealing  with  the  law. 
prevention/awareness  programs  regarding  drugs,  alcohol,  and  street  proofing.  The  Public  Health 
Department  also  participates,  addressing  birth  control,  stress,  suicide,  substance  abuse  and 
other  health-related  issues. 

Along  with  the  schools  Referral  Program,  project  CLUE  has  given  teachers  concrete  ways  of 
addressing  the  student  problems  that  interfere  with  their  learning  or  with  the  learning  of  the  class 
8S  a  whole. 


YMCA  Blacli  Ac*ii«v«r*  Program,  M«tfo  Toronto 

Funded  by  the  tchool  boerdt  and  Unned  Way  contributions,  the  YMCA  Black  Achievers  pracram  brtngs  black 
youth  «Kl  succaMful  Macfc  rrwntors  together  at  »ct>ools  in  North  York.  Etobtaoke.  ScattKHOUgh.  and  Toronto. 
Each  yew  mora  than  300  students  are  Involved  in  the  program,  twttich  includes  aelf-esteeni  worVshops.  mottva 
tlonal  talks.  Mack  Mstory  lessons,  carear  advice,  and  study  sMIls. 


For  the  Love  of  teaming 


provide  services  tiiat  co-operate  with  each  other  rather  than 
compete  for  the  care  and  support  of  children  and  famiHes. 
We  recognize  that,  at  present,  advocates  of  children,  whether 
they  be  child-care  workers,  educators,  or  social  welfare 
people,  are  constrained  by  the  institutional  norms  of  the 
agencies  in  which  they  work  in  surrendering  any  of  their 
turf.  Experience  tells  them  that  their  job  is  to  advocate  for 
their  service  agency,  whether  they  be  a  clerk  at  the  local  level 
or  the  Deputy  Minister. 

The  experience  of  collaborative  child-service  models  and 
of  community  education  in  recent  years  reveals  that  where  it 
has  worked  well,  it  has  done  so  because  of  committed  indi- 
viduals at  the  local  level.  Educators  and  others  who  assist 
parents  in  the  raising  of  children  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that 
the  first  indicator  of  the  likelihood  of  success  in  co-operative 
or  collaborative  efforts  in  favour  of  children  relates  directly 
to  commitment  at  the  grass-roots  level.  Nowhere  in  recent 
years  was  this  demonstrated  more  graphically  than  in  the 
results  of  the  research  on  local  parent  involvement  done  for 
Better  Beginnings,  Better  Futures  Project.  One  of  the  power- 
ful findings  gleaned  from  that  experience  and  research  was 
that  local  collaborative  projects  were  successful  only  if  there 
was  "a  minimum  of  50  percent  parents  or  community  lead- 
ers on  every  major  committee"  and  on  the  steering  commit- 
tee responsible  for  the  initiatives."  We  also  learn  from  these 
Ontario  experiences  that  real  transfer  of  decision-making  to 
such  a  local  steering  committee  is  also  an  essential  ingredi- 
ent of  success. 

Time,  of  course,  is  the  other  key  factor.  Often,  in  any 
given  local  community  education  project,  the  whole  first 
year  is  needed  for  participants  to  build  trust,  a  process  that 
cannot  be  rushed;  the  second  year  is  required  to  identify  and 
solidify  support  for  the  project  and  to  develop  the  necessary 
planning. 

We  also  recognize  the  problems  caused  by  the  philosophi- 
cal and  administrative  differences  between  ministries:  those 
offering  universal  services,  like  education,  and  those  whose 
services  are  directed  to  a  specific  clientele,  like  correctional 
services.  These  difficulties  are  further  compounded  by  the 
ways  that  different  ministries  in  Ontario  are  organized  to 
provide  services  to  children.  There  are  effectively  two  kinds 
of  services:  those  for  "normal"  children  and  those  for  chil- 
dren defined  as  straying  from  the  norm  in  some  way.  The 
different  clienteles  of  ministries  make  it  more  difficult  to 


integrate  services.  The  risk,  of  course,  is  that  the  targeted 
groups  of  children  are  always  further  marginalized  by 
services  that  should  be  helping  them  to  avoid  just  such  stig- 
mas and  labels. 

We  know  that  the  pervasive  effects  of  jurisdictional 
protection  at  the  provincial  level  have  led  the  authors  of 
such  studies  as  the  Ontario  Child  Health  Study'*  and  Children 
First  to  insist  on  the  development  of  provincial  policies  that 
would  mandate  and  reward  co-operation  between  the  vari- 
ous Ontario  ministries  concerned  with  children.  Nonethe- 
less, questions  of  jurisdictional  turf,  and  dollar  allocation, 
especially  in  times  of  economic  constraint,  continue  to 
inhibit  meaningful  integration  of  services.  As  well  as  frus- 
trating action  provincially, "...  resulting  multiple  lines  of 
accountability  among  local  service  providers  are  a  major 
impediment  to  service  integration  at  the  local  level  in  the 
province."" 

A  laudable  initiative  of  the  provincial  government  in 
response  to  the  Children  First  report  was  the  establishment 
in  1990  of  the  Interministerial  Committee  on  Services  for 
Children  and  Youth.  It  consisted  of  assistant  deputy  minis- 
ters and  representatives  from  nine  key  ministries  and  several 
other  provincial  agencies'*  with  an  interest  in  children.  Orig- 
inally it  received  staff  support  from  within  the  Ministry  of 
Education  and  Training,  but  over  time,  interest  and  support 
for  the  initiative  dwindled,  and  the  Integrated  Services  for 
Children  and  Youth  Secretariat  created  earlier  was  disbanded 
in  1992. 

Two  years  later,  a  new  inter-departmental  committee  was 
reactivated,  the  Tri-Ministry  Committee  on  Services  for 
Children  and  Youth.  Limited,  by  choice,  to  the  three  key 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Community  Education 


AA  ■  n  order  to  address  the  co-ordination 
I  of  the  numy  social  services  that  are 
available  to  schools  in  respect  to 
outside  agencies,  the  principal's 
auttfority  needs  to  be  extended  in 
order  [that  ttie  principal]  t>ecomes 
mmnagpr  and  coordinator 
of  the  social  services.' 


hand,  community  education  and  its  alliances  will  take  a  wide 
variety  of  forms,  depending  on  local  circumstances.  Because 
the  needs  vary  enormously  from  school  to  school,  so  will  the 
pace  of  change  people  are  ready  to  accept,  their  various 
philosophies  of  v^hat  is  good  for  the  children  in  their  care 
and,  and  of  course,  the  available  local  resources.  In  the  final 
analysis,  the  solutions  cannot  come  from  the  top  -  they  can 
only  come  from  the  local  school  and  its  community  of 
parents  and  other  players.  What  "the  top"  must  undertake  to 
do  is  facilitate  access  by  local  schools  and  their  communities 
to  Vkhat  are  defined  as  the  positive  assets  that  will  meet  their 
needs. 


ministries  -  Education  and  Training,  Health,  and  Communi- 
ty and  Social  Affairs  -  it  has  as  current  chair  an  assistant 
deputy  minister  of  Community  and  Social  Affairs  who  has 
sent  a  call  to  all  interested  parties  ( 17  ministries  or  agencies 
replied).  They  are  kept  informed  of  the  committee's  work 
and  might  participate  on  an  ad  hoc  basis.  One  of  the  lessons 
learned  by  government's  responses  to  the  challenges  posed  to 
bureaucratic  structures  by  community  education  is  that 
a  separate,  dedicated  secretariat  responsible  for  inter- 
departmental action  and  top-down  links  is  a  critical  element 
of  change. 

We  are  proposing  that  to  ensure  an  integrated  approach  to 
(he  care  and  nurturing  of  children,  we  think  of  the  responsi- 
bilities of  schools  in  a  broader  way  and  acknowledge  the 
need  for  some  restructuring  in  the  delivery  of  not  only 
educational  but  of  all  supports  for  children.  This  requires 
that  together  with  families,  a  wide  variety  of  community 
agencies,  groups,  and  institutions  can,  and  should,  be 
brought  to  the  table  through  the  school  so  that  they  can 
determine  how  to  best  work  together  to  support  the  develop- 
ment and  learning  of  young  people.  It  is  not  the  school,  and 
certainly  not  the  teachers,  who  must  assume  prime  responsi- 
bility for  responding  to  the  needs  of  young  people.  But,  in 
our  vision,  the  school  must  a.tsume  responsibility  for  bring- 
ing together  the  people,  the  groups,  and  the  agencies  who 
can  respond  to  these  needs.  In  other  words,  the  school  is  the 
central  player  m  this  concept. 

We  are  convinced,  therefore,  on  the  one  hand  of  the 
importance  of  developing  clear  provincial  policies  that  will 
encourage  and  support  collaborative  efforts  in  a  variety  of 
ways  at  both  the  provincial  and  the  local  level.  On  the  other 


Community  education:  Making  it  liappen 

1  or  slIuxiIn  to  bci-omi.-  ctti-ttivi-  .is  ci'iitrcs  tor  services 
offered  by  a  community  in  support  of  children,  they  must 
become  the  primary  agent  in  searching  out  partners  who 
will  form  the  community  of  concern.  Schools  must  broker 
and  cement  the  necessary  alliances  among  the  partners  to 
ensure  an  integrated  approach  to  the  delivery  of  care  and 
support  for  children.  We  have  no  illusions  that  the  task  is 
easy.  This  concept  can  be  realized  only  if  there  is  staff 
commitment  within  the  school.  This  commitment,  we 
believe,  must  start  with  the  leader  of  the  school,  the  princi- 
pal. Because  the  role  requires  a  broad  sensitivity  to  the  needs 
and  resources  within  the  community,  we  have  recommended 
that  school-community  councils  be  formed  to  advise  and 
assist  principals. 

...  in  schools 

As  a  key  strategy,  community  education  involves  changes  in 

the  role  of  the  principal  and  in  the  training  and  attitudes  of 

teachers.  It  also  implies  the  addition  of  differentiated  staff  to 

schools  -  human-resource  people  who  will  not  be  certified 

as  teachers,  although  they  will  be  sharing  in  the  education  of 

students. 

In  keeping  with  our  vision  of  a  principal  who  knows  and 
is  involved  in  the  community  from  which  the  school  draws 
its  students,  we  believe  that  together  with  the  task  of  instruc- 
tional leader,  the  principal  must  be  the  active  agent  in  the 
development,  fostering,  and  sustaining  of  the  alliances  that 
form  the  heart  of  community  education.  Principals  are  key 
to  the  success  or  failure  of  schools.  Principals  can  be  spark 
plugs  for  efforts  to  foster  children's  growth  and  develop- 


For  Vm  IjOvv  of  Ltamtng 


ment,  by  co-ordinating  the  services  that  help  students.  Our 
report  and  its  recommendations  ask  principals  to  move  out 
into  the  community  both  as  ambassadors  of  good  will,  and, 
more  important,  as  agents  of  change  to  establish  a  new 
understanding  about  the  school  and  its  responsibilities. 
Crucial  to  our  recommendations,  therefore,  will  be  a  clear 
redefinition  of  this  new  dual  role  of  school  principals. 

Although  through  community  education  we  hope  to 
lighten  the  teacher  overload  of  recent  years,  we  believe  that 
teachers  must  be  able  to  recognize  a  wide  variety  of  social 
needs  among  their  students,  and  be  aware  of  the  various 
services  available  within  the  new  community  of  partners. 
Ensuring  that  teachers  are  equipped  for  this  becomes  an 
important  task  for  principals.  Too  often  the  very  people  who 
are  essential  to  such  new  structures  have  not  been  prepared. 
Indeed,  we  often  heard  that  teachers  have  been  trained  to 
close  the  door  of  their  classrooms  and  do  whatever  they  do 
without  the  benefit  of  colleagues  and  community.  One  result 
is  that  parents  have  often  been  kept  outside.  We  see  changing 
these  kinds  of  attitudes  as  fundamental  to  the  role  of  the 
principal  in  community  education.  In  Chapter  12  we  address 
the  need  for  all  teachers  to  learn  to  work  in  collaboration 
with  their  colleagues  as  well  with  parents  and  others  in  the 
community. 

The  notion  of  differentiated  staff  is  key  to  improving 
education  in  Ontario  schools  and  as  an  enrichment  to 
school  life.  It  may  involve  volunteer  parents,  paid  or  unpaid, 
helping  in  classes,  or  other  professionals  and  para- 
professionals,  as  well  as  aides.  But  in  fulfilling  their  new  dual 
responsibility,  principals  will  also  need  some  assistance  from 
school  boards  in  the  task  of  community  development  - 
assistance  in  implementing  the  recommendations  of  the 
school-community  council  and  the  initiatives  developed  by 
the  principal. 

...  with  families 

There  are  still  educators  who  say,  "If  the  family  would  just 
do  its  job,  we  could  do  our  job."  That  statement  represents  a 
view  of  "separate  spheres  of  influence."  According  to  one 
researcher. 

In  effect,  these  people  are  saying,  "Let's  separate  the  family  and  the 
school  in  order  to  have  the  most  efficient  organization  possible.  If 
the  family  carries  out  its  mission,  we  educators  can  teach  the  chil- 
dren what  they  need  to  know  ...  This  has  been  the  prevailing  theory 


in  sociology  from  the  turn  of  the  century  until  approximately  the 
mid-1970s  ...  As  we  began  to  study  school  and  family  partnerships, 
we  found  that  the  theory  of  separate  spheres  was  not  useful  for 
explaining  the  effective  organization  of  education  for  children. 
Rather,  our  data  suggested  the  need  to  push  the  spheres  together  so 
that  they  overlap  somewhat."" 

All  of  the  alliances  that  we  are  suggesting,  the  web  of 
supports  and  resources,  are  to  be  at  the  service  of  the  child. 
The  child,  then,  is  at  the  centre  of  our  concept  of  communi- 
ty education.  And  connecting  the  child  to  this  broad 
community  of  concern  is  his  or  her  family  unit.  Given  the 
increasing  stresses  and  pressures  on  families  discussed  earli- 
er, assuring  the  establishment  of  this  vital  link  is  the  most 
difficult  challenge  of  all.  The  efforts  of  principals,  school 
boards,  school-community  councils,  and  provincial  policy 
frameworks  must  be  directed  to  ensuring  the  active  partici- 
pation of  this  essential  partner. 

As  with  community  education  itself,  there  is  not  one 
magic  formula  or  strategy  that  adapts  to  all  families.  In  light 
of  the  research  linking  student  achievement  inextricably  to 
parental  involvement  in  the  child's  education,  participation 
must  be  encouraged.  Though  the  kind  and  the  degree  of 
involvement  may  vary,  it  is  essential  to  the  success  of  the 
student. 

There  is  no  shortage  of  strategies  to  make  schools  "family 
friendly."  Perhaps  most  important  are  those  strategies  that 
actively  encourage  parent  participation.  We  have  heard  of 
schools  approaching  families  in  their  catchment  area,  imme- 
diately following  the  birth  of  a  child,  to  make  parents  aware 
of  the  school's  interest  in  a  future  pupil.  Other  schools 
provide  parent-education  workshops  to  familiarize  parents 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen     Community  Education 


with  their  childrens  sthool  programs  and  provide  parenting 
advice.  In  the  TIPS  (Teachers  Involve  Parents  in  Schoolwork) 
program,  teachers  design  homework  assignments  in  such  a 
way  as  to  encourage  children  to  discuss  their  schoolwork 
with  parents. 

Because  of  the  difficulty  many  parents  have  in  attending 
teacher-parent  interviews,  many  schools  arc  using  telephone 
calls  or  home  visits  to  facilitate  the  involvement  of  parents. 
We  even  heard  of  schools  where  each  teacher,  each  day,  spells 
out  the  program  of  the  day  and  the  homework  for  the 
evening  on  a  voice-mail  message  that  parents  can  access  easi- 
ly at  any  time  after  school  hours.  The  increasing  use  of  tech- 
nology in  schools  -  another  of  our  main  engines  of  educa- 
tional reform  -  opens  the  door  to  a  variety  of  new  tech- 
niques to  better  link  the  home  and  the  school. 

...  and  the  new  ichool-community  councils 
At  the  heart  of  our  conception  of  a  new  approach  and 
commitment  to  community  education  is  the  recognition  of 
the  need  for  a  local  structure  that  will  place  the  school  at  the 
hub  to  build  community  support  of  student  learning.  This  is 
the  school-community  council  that  we  have  already  referred 
lo.  Our  arguments  in  favour  of  this  new  structure  are  much 
akin  to  those  in  favour  of  community  education.  We  see  this 
local  structure  as  the  vehicle  for  empowering  communities 
close  to  a  school  to  rediscover  their  assets:  those  of  "commit- 
ment, understanding  of  local  problems,  a  problem-solving 
rather  than  a  service  orientation,  caring,  flexibility  and 
creativity,  efficiency,  shared  values,  and  a  focus  on  human 
capacity  rather  than  deficiency."  '  Wc  also  believe  that 
Khool-community  councils  will  enhance  the  primary  role  of 


parents  in  the  education,  growth,  and  development  of  their 
children  by  putting  parents  in  regular  contact,  not  only  with 
teachers,  but  with  the  various  community  agencies  that  assist 
parents  in  their  responsibilities. 

To  meet  these  cornerstone  needs  for  supporting  our 
vision  of  a  new  community  education. 

Recommendations  108,  109 

•We  recommend  that  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training 
mandate  that  each  school  in  Ontario  establish  a  school- 
community  council,  with  membership  drawn  from  the  follow- 
ing sectors: 

-  parents 

-  students  (from  Grade  7  on) 

-  teachers 

-  representatives  from  local  religious  and 

ethnic  communities 

-  service  providers  (government  and  non-government) 

-  municipal  government(s) 

-  service  clubs  and  organizations 

-  business  sectors 

*  We  recommend  that  each  school  principal  devise  an  action 
plan  for  the  establishment  and  implementation  of  the  school- 
community  council. 

We  conceive  of  the  school-community  council  as  an 
essential  underpinning  or  resource  in  aiding  principals  in 
the  determination  of  the  kind  of  alliances  needed  and 
resources  available  in  a  given  community.  We  see  principals 
playing  pivotal  roles  in  convening  the  council  and  in  moti- 
vating its  work.  School  boards  and  government  ministries 
and  agencies  should  define  a  support  function  and  support 
services  available  to  principals  according  lo  local  needs. 

Because  of  their  representation  from  health  care,  social, 
and  recreational  agencies,  families  and  business,  these  coun- 
cils can  be  of  particular  assistance  to  principals  by  advising 
how  parents  in  a  given  area  can  best  be  contacted  and 
encouraged  to  participate  more  in  the  education  of  their 
children  and  in  the  life  of  the  school.  School-community 
councils  bring  together  many  of  the  partners  in  education  to 
reinforce  their  understanding  of  how  they  can  influence  and 
complement  one  another  in  their  efforts  on  behalf  of  chil- 
dren. Within  the  area  of  the  school  and  among  the  networks 
associated  with  the  school,  these  councils  should  play  an 


Forth*  LoM  or  L««ming 


educative  role  in  making  all  aware  of  the  necessity  of  this 
community  approach  to  education,  which  we  are  recom- 
mending. They  will  liaise  with  the  business  community, 
health-care  groups,  municipal  facilities,  and  the  like. 

In  establishing  the  framework  for  school-community 
councils,  we  take  for  granted  the  principle  that  local  deci- 
sion-making must  recognize  the  various  constituencies 
represented  in  public  and  Catholic,  English,  and  French 
schools.  Although  drawing  on  many  common  groups, 
services,  and  associations,  schools  differentiated  by  religion 
or  language  will  also  draw  on  specific  groups  that  can  be  of 
assistance  to  their  particular  school. 

Recommendation  110 

*\Ne  recommend  that  school  boards  provide  support  to  prin- 
cipals to  establish  and  maintain  school-community  councils 
and  that  the  boards  monitor  the  councils '  progress  and  indi- 
cate the  progress  in  their  annual  reports. 

...  with  school  boards 

We  see  the  role  of  the  school-community  councils  as 
complementary  to  the  role  of  school  boards.  We  believe  that 
these  councils  can  provide  the  depth  of  response  to  local 
conditions  that  has  been  lost  at  the  school-board  level. 
Parents  entrust  their  children  to  schools  so  that  the  latter 
can  assist  them  in  the  task  of  child  raising.  This  expectation 
lies  at  the  heart  of  the  trusteeship  exercised  by  members  of 
school  boards.  This  responsibility  can  be  fulfilled  by  trustees 
only  if  they  share  this  task  with  the  many  other  community 
groups  who  serve  children.  School-board  trustees  in  most 
instances  can  best  fulfil  their  chief  task,  that  of  policy 
setting,  when  they  acknowledge  the  need  for  community 
alliances. 

This  reliance  on  community  has  obvious  practical  conse- 
quences. School  boards  must  take  the  leadership  in  estab- 
lishing regular,  structured  liaison  among  themselves,  munic- 
ipalities, business  groups,  health-care  facilities,  recreational 
and  social  agencies,  religious  and  other  groups  to  facilitate 
the  development  of  the  alliances  and  communities  of 
concern.  Principals  and  school-community  councils  must  be 
encouraged  by  boards  to  develop  the  kind  of  alliances  best 
suited  to  their  area,  and  must  be  given  substantial  support 
by  supervisory  officers  acting  as  leaders  at  the 
municipal/county  level.  Principals  and  school-community 


councils  will  therefore  require  greater  local  autonomy  and 
budget  control. 

Achieving  such  a  vision  can  in  many  instances  involve  the 
location  of  community  services,  other  agencies,  and  schools 
in  one  building.  Although  Ontario  is  not  currently  in  a 
school-building  boom,  new  schools  are  being  built,  and 
older  schools  are  being  renovated,  added  to,  or  replaced. 
Now  is  the  time  to  ensure  that  multi-purpose  perspectives  are 
taken  so  that  we  have  multi-purpose  facilities. 

A  collaborative  approach  to  meeting  the  needs  of  chil- 
dren should  also  result  in  cost  savings.  Now,  there  is  duplica- 
tion between  school  boards  and  other  services  as  schools  try 
to  cope  with  problems  of  a  social,  health,  or  psychological 
nature,  with  insufficient  expertise,  and  spend  considerable 
time  trying  to  get  other  agencies  to  deal  with  the  problem. 
Those  agencies  likewise  spend  time  trying  to  get  into 
schools,  but  an  us-versus-them  attitude  sometimes  intrudes. 

Recommendation  111 

*We  recommend  that  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training, 
teachers '  federations,  and  school  boards  take  whatever 
actions  are  necessary  to  ensure  that  community  liaison  staff 
persons  are  sufficiently  available  to  assist  principals  in 
strengthening  school-community  linkages.  These  staff,  who 
would  not  be  certified  teachers,  would  be  responsible  for 
helping  to  implement  decisions  and  initiatives  of  the  school- 
community  councils  as  well  as  other  school-community  initia- 
tives. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Community  Education 


c 


X 


I.S.  21t  Salom*  Ur*n«  Middle  Acad«ml«ft,  N«w  Yorti,  N.Y. 

This  Junior  high  school,  which  serves  1.200  students  In  Grades  6.  7,  and  8.  is  located  in  the 
Washington  Heights-lnwood  section  of  Manhattan,  a  neighbourhood  clearly  having  great  needs  on 
all  fronts.  The  partnership  project,  a  joint  venture  involving  the  Children's  Aid  Society  (an  agency 
with  a  purpose  that's  different  from  the  Canadian  version),  the  Board  of  Community  School 
District  Sixth  and  the  New  York  City  Board  of  Education  and  local  parents,  is  unique  in  that  its 
definition  of  partnership  goes  beyond  most  understandings  of  the  concept. 

The  school,  and  the  community  facilities  built  within  it.  did  become  the  centre,  even  a  second 
home,  for  its  entire  community,  playing  for  its  students  a  role  well  t)eyond  the  traditional  school 
day  arKJ  school  ways.  All  of  this  was  accomplished  by  educators  and  social  service  groups  wor1<- 
ing  closely  together,  in  full  partnership  -  truly  the  school  as  the  hub  of  community  life. 

In  addition  to  its  four  specialized  academies  (Business  Studies:  Community  Service:  Expressive 
Arts:  and  Math,  Science  and  Technology)  into  which  the  student  body  has  t>een  divided,  the 
school  includes  the  Family  Resource  Centre  and  a  medical/dental  facility,  both  run  by  CAS. 
Besides  the  Extended  Day  Program  (7  a.m.  to  6  p.m.),  there  are  programs  for  teens,  parents,  and 
other  adults,  all  defined  locally  by  community  needs.  There  is  the  SUMA  Store,  a  for- 
profit  student-run  corporation  offenng  books,  school  supplies,  snacks,  comics,  posters,  to  name 
a  few  Items.  There  are  also  classes,  workshops,  and  services,  often  on  evenings  and  weekends, 
for  parents  and  other  adults.  A  few  of  the  parents  work  almost  full-time  in  the  school  and  some  of 
them  receive  a  small  stipend  from  CAS. 


Partir  d'un  bon  pas  pour  un  avanir  maillaur,  Cornwall 

Cornwall's  Better  Beginnings.  Better  Futures  project  Involves  both  a  breakfast  project  and  school 
facilitators  (mostly  parents)  who  are  hired  by  the  project.  These  facilitators  are  trained  in  child 
development  and  specialize  in  French-language  development,  culture,  and  self-esteem.  Child-care 
services  assist  parents  who  would  not  otherwise  be  able  to  obtain  child  care  on  Saturday  morn- 
ings, dunng  the  summer,  or  on  professional  development  days.  The  community  development 
component  includes  numerous  activities,  most  of  which  focus  on  parent  Involvement  and  the 
volunteer  training  program  for  the  four  basic  planning  committees. 


Tha  Stratford  Education  aitd  Racraation  Cantra 

The  Stratford  Education  and  Recreation  Centre  (SERC)  is  an  exciting  shared  development  of  the 
City  of  Stratford,  the  Perth  County  Board  of  Education  and  the  Huron-Perth  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  and  is  located  on  a  60-acre  site  in  the  northwest  sector  of  Stratford. 

Included  in  the  development  is  the  new  St.  Michael  Catholic  Secondary  School,  containing  30 
teaching  spaces  on  two  floors,  plus  a  double  gym.  cafetena.  communications  lab  and  a  main  floor 
chapel.  Next  to  St.  Michael  is  another  two-storey  building  containing  a  library  resource  centre  on 
the  upper  floor  that  will  be  shared  by  St.  Michael  School  and  Northwestern  Secondary  School.  On 
tf>e  lower  floor  of  this  building  is  a  child<:are  centre  operated  by  the  Stratford-Perth  Family  YMCA. 
which  accomrTKXlates  72  children,  as  well  as  the  media  centre  for  the  Perth  County  Board  of 
Education. 

Substantial  coat  savings  have  been  achieved  by  three  public  bodies  shanng  land  and  buildings. 


For  tha  Lofm  et  Uamtnt 


...  with  the  provincial  government:  Adopting  an  agenda  for 
redesigning  systems  to  support  community  education 

Government  must  become  the  leading  partner  in  creating  a  public 
agenda  for  children  and  in  establishing  an  integrated  framework 
that  ensures  that  the  entitlements  of  children  are  met  through  a 
holistic  system  of  supports  and  services." 

Developing  a  strategy  at  the  provincial  level  has  proven  to 
be  difficult,  not  least  because  of  entrenched  bureaucracies. 
By  their  very  nature,  bureaucracies  are  resistant  to  change 
and  to  surrendering  turf.  Although  precise  recommenda- 
tions to  address  the  requisite  new  structures  at  the  provincial 
level  are  beyond  the  mandate  of  the  Commission  and  the 
time  constraints  under  which  we  have  been  working,  we 
raise  a  number  of  broad  policy  issues  in  regard  to  provincial 
government  action. 

We  cannot  ignore  the  criticisms  of  studies  that  document 
the  effects  of  the  fragmented  non-systems  of  children's 
services  in  Ontario.  Their  crisis  orientation  focuses  on  reme- 
dy rather  than  prevention.  Instead  of  considering  the  inter- 
action of  causes  and  solutions  for  children  and  their  fami- 
lies, professionals  tend  to  rigidly  categorize  problems.  The 
lack  of  communication  among  systems  is  well  documented, 
as  is  the  specialization  of  the  service  providers  that  often 
renders  them  unable  to  propose  effective  solutions  to 
complex  problems.  Most  troubling  for  our  conception  of 
community  education  is  the  failure  of  ministries  to  work 
towards  a  common  goal  of  supporting  children's  learning. 
Ministries  in  Ontario,  as  in  other  jurisdictions,  have  created 
discrete  local  service  systems  characterized  by  differences 
and  even  contradictions  in  the  assessment  of  child  and  fami- 
ly needs,  and  by  solutions  (to  the  complex  problems  of  chil- 
dren) that  are  too  narrowly  focused.  We  are  troubled  by  the 
tendency  in  these  systems  for  clashes  in  approaches  and  by 
the  tendency  to  ignore  problems  because  they  fall  into 
another  ministry's  mandate. 

One  suggestion  made  to  address  the  question  of  the 
bureaucratic  divisions  and  confusions  is  found  in  the 
Children  First  report.  The  report  recommends  that  a 
Ministry  of  the  Child  be  established.  Although  we  discussed 
this  idea  during  our  public  hearings,  and  are  in  principle  not 
opposed,  our  sense  is  that  immediate  action  at  the  local  level 
is  more  critical  to  the  lives  of  children  and  their  families. 
Such  immediate  local  action  must  not  wait  for  such  complex 
provincial  restructuring. 


Obviously,  provincial  policy  must  address  issues  such  as 
the  funding  of  education  programs  dealing  with  sex,  AIDS, 
and  drugs  if  these  are  to  be  assigned  to  another  community 
partner.  If  other  agencies  either  deliver  or  assist  in  delivering 
fitness  programs,  job  or  career  counselling,  or  other  services, 
there  must  be  new  determinations  for  the  allocation  of 
human  and  financial  resources.  And  in  all  of  this,  account- 
ability mechanisms  must  be  built  in  so  that  students  in  need 
of  services  do  not  fall  through  the  cracks  of  integrated 
services,  and  so  that  principals  have  some  guarantee  of  co- 
operation in  seeking  to  build  the  necessary  alliances  for  their 
schools. 

If  we  want  genuine  collaboration,  significant  change  in 
provincial  structures  is  necessary,  now  or  eventually.  But  it 
must  not  be  the  sine  qua  non  for  the  development  of 
community  education.  The  provincial  government  must 
both  get  out  of  the  way  and  give  collaboration  a  push.  By 
getting  out  of  the  way,  we  mean  that  legislative,  regulatory, 
and  administrative  restrictions  should  not  intrude  in  making 
the  best  decisions  or  providing  the  best  services  for  children 
at  the  local  level.  By  giving  collaboration  a  push,  we  suggest 
that  there  should  be  incentives  for  local  agencies  and 
managers  to  work  together.  In  fact,  it  may  well  be  necessary 
for  legislation  to  be  enacted  that  clarifies  the  primary  and 
secondary  responsibilities  of  schools  and  the  Ministry,  and 
those  of  other  ministries  and  agencies. 

These  conditions  have  led  other  provinces  and  states  to 
initiate  efforts  to  redesign  and  to  even  reinvent  children's 
services  systems.  We  recognize  the  difficulty  of  these  efforts 
and  the  need  to  initiate  change  at  the  local  community  level. 
Our  recommendations  so  far  have  taken  this  "bottom-up" 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Community  Education 


ii 


[w: 


e  recommend]  that  govern- 
ment and  community 
services  for  children  and  family, 
including  "head  start"  programs,  be 
integrated  for  seamless  delivery 
through  tt>e  local  school,  but  ttiat  ttie 
expertise,  funding  and  responsibility 
for  outcomes  t>e  clearly  and  appropri- 
ately delineated;  ttvat  all  children 
receive  the  full  program  available  at 
their  neighbourtK>od  school." 


approach.  However,  we  have  been  warned  by  professionals 
from  local  agencies,  schools,  and  school  boards  that  bottom- 
up  initiatives  can  only  succeed  if  the  constraints  to  collabo- 
ration and  community  outreach  that  have  their  source  in 
provincial-level  institutional  structures  are  removed.  We 
believe  the  time  has  come  to  set  out  the  direction  for  long- 
term  systemic  reform  of  the  multiple,  hierarchical,  children's 
service  systems  that  have  evolved  in  the  province.  The 
redesign  initiative  we  propose  reflects  our  conclusion  that 
the  expansion  of  the  large  children's  service  systems  already 
in  place  does  not  promise  greater  well-being  for  our  children 
and  youth.  We  have  in  this  chapter  argued  for  a  new  direc- 
tion that  builds  on  the  strengths  of  communities,  families, 
children,  and  youth. 

The  systemic  changes  in  provincial  children's  services 
systems  that  we  believe  are  needed  to  fulfil  our  vision  of 
community  education  require  significant  political  leadership 
committed  to  redesigning  existing  flows  of  authority, 
resources,  skills,  and  capacities. 

Recommendation  112 

*We  recommend  that  the  Premier  assign  responsibility  for 
retormir\g  children's  services  to  a  senior  Minister,  in  addition 
to  his/her  regular  portfolio:  and  that  this  senior  Minister  be 
supported  by  an  Intermimstenal  Committee  of  Ministers 
responsible  for  children's  services:  and  that 

a)  the  Committee  be  assisted  by  permanent  staff: 

b)  the  Committee  irKlude  the  systematic  review  and  revi 
sion  of 


-  service  approaches  taken 

-  quality  of  services  provided 

-  funding  mechanisms 

-  legislation 

-  regional  organization  of  authority 

-  provincial  structures: 

c)  the  Committee  establish,  through  the  regional  offices  of 
the  MET.  a  leadership  and  coordinating  plan  between  the 
school  boards  and  the  other  local  providers  of  services  to 
develop  and  help  implement  the  mechanisms  necessary 
to  support  the  work  of  school-  community  councils. 

Community  education  can  only  become  an  effective 
engine  lor  changing  supports  for  children's  learning  with 
strt)ng  leadership  and  co-ordinatit)n  at  the  regional  and 
local  levels. 

We  believe  that  a  review  of  present  legislation  and  regula 
tions  would  lead  to  the  removal  of  impediments  to  the  kind 
of  alliances  we  are  advocating.  Also  needed  is  a  policy  frame- 
work to  clarify  how  partnerships  might  be  structured  and 
funded.  Such  a  review  should  also  identify  the  necessary 
additional  mandates  to  be  given  to  ministries  other  than 
Education  and  Training  and  to  agencies  other  than  schools. 

Recommendation  113 

•  We  recommend  that  the  provincial  government  review 
legislative  and  related  impediments,  and  that  they  develop 
a  policy  framework  for  collaboration  to  facilitate  partnerships 
between  community  and  schools. 

Sattln^  a  tlm«llne  for  action 

II  tlusi  iii.iiinm(.iul.itiiiiis  .III  Id  h.ivc  effect,  they  must  be 
supported  by  a  timeline  for  action  that  recognizes  the 
complexity  of  the  changes  proposed.  We  remind  the  govern- 
ment of  the  lessons  from  decades  of  research  on  the  condi- 
tions required  to  support  implementation. 

Recommendation  114 

*We  recommend  that  the  Interministenal  Committee  of 
Ministers,  under  the  senior  minister  responsible,  as  its  first 
task  set  a  sustainable  timeline  for  implementating 
community  partnership,  policies,  and  mechanisms,  with 
specific  points  for  reporting  and  disseminating  the  results 
of  the  efforts. 


For  \h»  Love  o<  LNrnlnc 


These  recommendations  should  signal  the  importance  we 
place  on  the  need  for  long-term  systemic  reform  of  chil- 
dren's services. 

Conclusion 

Defining  what  we  mean  by  community  education  has  been  a 
difficult  part  of  our  work  in  this  Royal  Commission.  Our 
conception  recognizes  the  variety  of  local  influences  that 
change  the  form  and  nature  of  community  education.  This 
is  as  it  should  be.  Only  by  developing  the  capacity  for 
communities  to  re- invent  their  relations  with  schools  can 
student  learning  be  supported  and  ultimately  sustained.  We 
recognize  that  the  redesign  of  schooling  we  have  proposed  in 
this  chapter  is  complex.  It  requires  a  change  in  what  school- 
ing means  and  what  schools  are  for.  It  amounts  to  social 
change  of  the  highest  order. 

Despite  these  difficulties,  we  are  convinced  that  commu- 
nity education  is  central  to  education  reform  in  the 
province.  It  is  one  of  the  essential  levers  to  the  changes  we 
are  recommending.  Teacher  education  (Chapter  12)  will 
remain  a  keystone  of  the  profession  only  if  it  is  based  on  the 
needs  of  schools  as  rooted  in  contemporary  communities. 
Our  recommendations  regarding  early  childhood  education 
(Chapter  7)  find  their  genesis  in  the  necessity  of  forging 
developmental  links  between  schools  and  children's  homes 
and  communities.  Information  technology  (Chapter  13)  as  a 
lever  or  strategy  of  educational  change  depends  not  only  on 
children's  being  immersed  in  this  new  way  of  learning,  but 
on  many  partners  being  brought  together  through  this  tech- 
nology in  what  might  be  called  electronic  communities. 

In  short,  it  is  the  concept  of  community  education  ties 
together  with  the  four  key  levers  that  we  hope  will  provide 
the  impetus  for  tomorrow's  education  in  Ontario. 

Community  education  is  potentially  powerful:  it  can 
provide  the  most  economic  use  of  the  community's  financial 
resources;  schools  can  become  more  effective  in  supporting 
their  students'  academic  achievements  and  general  develop- 
ment; and  if  the  pressure  on  teachers  to  meet  non-academic 
needs  is  relieved,  we  can  expect  renewed  commitment  to 
teaching.  Finally,  parents  with  strong  community  support 
are  likely  to  carry  out  their  parenting  responsibilities  with 
greater  confidence  and  skill. 


Joining  Hands  for  Student  Success 

Students 

Parents 

Give  life  and  love, 
food  and  shelter. 

Learn  how  to  learn 

and  achieve  their 

potential. 

Teachers 

Nurture,  instruct, 

guide,  and  support 

students.  Relate  to 

students,  parents, 

and  community. 

_  1 

Provide  safety,          ^M 
support,  and              ■ 

^441 

W                   Principals 

'            Manage,  evaluate 

staff,  use  vision  to 

k                coordinate  and 

f                  communicate 

school  initiatives. 

Trustees 

Represent  people 
by  listening,  facili- 
tating communica- 
tion and  decision 
making. 

Business  Industry  Labour 

Lend  Leadership  through 

Superintendents 

Support  students,  staff, 

parents,  or  community 

through  assisting, 

providing,  planning,  and 

reviewing  educational 

economic  strength,  clear 
direction,  and  role  models. 

initiatives  and  stan- 
dards. 

Source;  North  York  Board  of  Education  Newsletter,  1994. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Community  Education 


Endnotes 


10 


Thunrui  ].  S«rgiovanni.  BuiUing  Community  in  Sthools 
(San  Francisco:  losscy-Bau,  1994).  p.  xi. 

Canadian  Institute  of  Child  Health.  "Suicide,"  factsheet. 
Ottawa.  1994. 

Bntuh  Columbia,  Office  of  the  Ombudsman,  Public  Strvices 
to  ChiUren,  Youth  and  Thetr  Families  in  British  Columbia: 
The  Seed  for  Integration,  Public  Report  no.  22  (Victoria. 
1990).  p.  60. 

M.  Philp,  "Welfare  Spicm  Shaiicrs  Dreams  of  a  Better  Life," 
Globe  and  Mail,  21  January  1994. 

Ontario,  Ministry  of  Community  and  Social  Services,  rime 
for  Action:  Towards  a  New  Social  Assistance  System  for  Ontario 
(Toronto,  1992). 

D.  Osborne  and  T.  Gaebler,  Reinventing  Government:  How 
the  Entrepreneurial  Spirit  Is  Transforming  the  Public  Sector 
(Readmg.  .VIA:  Addison -Wesley,  1992).  p.  51. 

Ontario,  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training.  Belter 
Beginnings,  Better  Futures  Project:  Model,  Program  and 
Research  Ovrrvio*- (Toronto,  1994).  Prepared  by  R.  DcV. 
Peters  and  C.C.  Russell. 

Ontario,  Select  Committee  on  the  Utilization  of  Educational 
Facilities,  Interim  Report  Number  One  and  Interim  Report 
Number  Ttw  ( Toronto,  1973). 

Premier's  Council  on  Health,  Well-Being,  and  Social  lustice. 
Yours,  Mine,  and  Ours  (Toronto:  Ontario  Children  and  Youth 
Project.  1994).  p.  53. 

The  Better  Beginnings.  Better  Futures  Project  was  established 
in  1989  as  a  joint  venture  of  three  Ontario  and  two  federal 
departments.  It  supports  1 1  pilot  projects  in  Ontario 
schools. 

Alberta.  Ministry  of  Education.  Coort/inarion  of  Services  for 
Children:  Terms  of  Reference  (Edmonton.  1992). 

MSrrta.  Ministry  of  Family  and  Social  Services.  Reshaping 
(  hiUI  VvVZ/arr  ( F^monton.  1993). 

British  Columbu.  Ministry  of  Education,  Report  of  the 
Rpyitl  Commission  on  Education:  A  Legacy  for  Learnen 
Vutoru.  I9M). 

Ontario.  Advisory  Committee  on  Children's  Services,  Chil- 
dren Firii  (Toronto,  1990). 

Qurhrt.  Ministry  of  Health  and  Socul  Service*.  Vn  Quibec 

'  intf:  Rapport  du  Croupe  de  travail  pour  les  jeunes 
1991). 

Saskatchewan,  Ministry  of  Education,  Integrated  School- 
Based  Services  for  Children  and  Families  (Regitva,  1992). 


See  Rrcommrndation  no.  9,  "Building  a  New  Relationship 
for  School.  Community  and  Workplace,"  in  Premier's 
Council  of  Ontario.  People  and  Skills  in  the  New  Global 
Economy  (Toronto.  1990).  p.  51. 

Sparrow  Lake  Alliance,  submission  to  the  Oniariu  Royal 
Commission  on  Learning.  1993. 

Ontario.  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  Better 
Beginnings,  Belter  Futures:  The  199}  Progress  Report 
(Descripiwn  and  Lessons  learned}  (Toronto.  1994).  p.  5. 
Prepared  by  R.  DeV.  Peters  and  C.C.  Russell. 

D.  OfTord.  M.  Boyle,  and  Y.  Racine,  Onrdrio  Child  Health 
Study:  Children  at  Risk  (Toronto:  Queen's  Printer.  1989). 

Hanne  B.  Mawhinney,  "The  Policy  and  Practice  of  School- 
Based  Interagency  (Collaboration  "  Research  paper  prepared 
for  the  Ontario  Royal  CCommission  on  l.earning. 

The  tommitlcc  consisted  of  Assistant  Deputy  Ministers  and 
representatives  from  the  Ontario  Ministries  of  Education, 
Health,  (Community  and  Social  Services.  Housing,  Tourism 
and  Recreation,  the  Solicitor  (Icncral,  the  Attorney  (ieneral, 
(Correctional  Services,  and  Natural  Resources,  as  well  as 
representatives  from  the  Ontario  Women's  Directorate,  the 
Ontario  Anti-Racism  Secretariat,  the  Office  of  Disability 
Issues,  and  the  Premier's  CCouncil  on  Health  Strategy. 

Joyce  L.  Epstein,  "School,  Family,  and  Community 
Partnerships:  Building  Blocks  for  Education  Reform" 
(paper  presented  at  the  Short  CCourse  for  Educational 
Leaders.  Canadian  Education  Association.  Banff,  May  1994). 

D.  Osborne  and  T.  Gaebler.  Reinventing  Government,  p.  10. 

Ontario,  Advisory  Committee  on  Children's  Services, 
Children  First,  p.  107. 


For  ttt«  Lo««o(LMmir\( 


i^M^SI^^i 


Constitutional 
issues 


any  of  the  concerns  expressed  by  these  three 
groups  with  special  constitutional  status  mirror 
those  of  the  broader  community,  and  thus  are 
part  of  other  sections  of  our  report.  For  example,  parents  in 
these  three  communities  share  the  concerns  of  parents  of 
children  in  the  public  system  about  having  greater  involve- 
ment in  their  children's  education  and  about  effective 
communication  between  home  and  school.  This  chapter, 
however,  deals  only  with  issues  that  are  the  specific  priorities 
of  these  groups. 

Roman  Catholics,  who  have  constitutional  rights  to  their 
own  system,  are  concerned  about  barriers  to  equal  opportu- 
nities for  excellence:  funding,  preferential  hiring  of  Roman 
Catholic  teachers,  teacher  education,  and  structures  in  the 
Ministry  of  Education  and  Training.  We  make  recommenda- 
tions in  three  of  these  areas,  while  those  related  to  funding 
can  be  found  in  Chapter  18. 

Franco-Ontarians,  who  also  have  constitutional  guaran- 
tees, are  pressing  for  full  implementation  of  their  legally 
awarded  right  to  manage  their  French-language  education  - 
a  right  that  they  believe  is  related  to  the  opportunities  for 
their  students  to  reach  a  higher  level  of  academic  excellence, 
as  well  as  to  equity  measures.  Like  the  Roman  Catholic 
community,  Franco-Ontarians  are  concerned  about  having 
the  resources  to  support  and  enhance  their  education 
system. 

Aboriginal  communities  seek  self- governance  in  educa- 
tion, and  most  of  this  concern  must  be  dealt  with  at  the 
federal  level.  However,  aboriginal  people  articulated  to  us, 
and  we  responded  to,  several  specific  concerns  about  the 
quality  of  education  for  their  children  as  it  relates  to  language 
of  instruction,  curriculum  content,  resources,  and  teacher 
training  -  issues  in  which  the  province  does  have  a  role. 


The  Roman  Catholic  education  system 

During  the  public  hearings,  we  spoke  with  a  wide  range  of 
Roman  Catholic  educational  representatives,  as  we  did  with 
public  and  francophone  representatives.  We  found  much  in 
common  among  these  systems,  just  as  we  discovered  that 
each  system  has  qualities  and  features  distinctively  its  own. 
This  suggested  that  while  we  must  ensure  equity  and  excel- 
lence in  all  three  systems,  their  diversity  means  we  do  not 
have  to  have  a  one-size-fits-all  approach  to  our  strategies  for 
educational  reform. 

The  fact  of  the  Roman  Catholic  system  as  a  distinct 
educational  community  became  particularly  evident  to  us  in 
a  presentation  by  the  Council  of  Ontario  Separate  Schools 
(COSS),  an  umbrella  organization  made  up  of  the  provincial 
associations  of  Roman  Catholic  parents,  trustees,  teachers, 
supervisory  officers,  and  bishops.  In  their  joint  presentation, 
these  groups  focused  more  on  their  common  vision  of 
education  than  on  their  different  tasks  and  responsibilities 
within  their  educational  system.  They  told  us: 

This  grouping  of  associations  comes  to  you  together  because  in  the 
separate  schools  of  the  province  we  are  a  community.  We  consider 
ourselves  as  participants  in  a  deeply  held  covenant.  The  philosophi- 
cal and  theological  underpinnings  of  our  approach  to  education 
hold  us  together  in  ways  which  the  exigencies  of  daily  operations 
cannot  alter. 

They  went  on  to  develop  a  series  of  common  positions  and 
declarations  that  had  a  high  degree  of  congruence  and 
agreement  on  the  major  concerns  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
educational  community.  Consequently,  as  a  commission,  we 
had  very  little  difficulty  in  getting  a  clear  sense  of  their 
priorities  for  educational  reform. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


On  UM  waN  of  Room  2S7,  F  xk  Elementary  ScNxM. 

C«t«ton  Roman  CathoMc  Saparale  Scnooi  Board  (reproduced  here 
•ucuy  as  \Morded). 

OCARGOO: 

Help  u«  lo  do  weli  at  tcttooi  and  oMam  eicellem  axacagaa. 

BieM  our  tamtltes 

Help  aM  of  us  oveftoofc  peoples  differences  and  find  there  ftreat  points. 

RemirKl  me  to  IM  kind  to  others. 

Help  treat  others  as  you  want  to  t>e  treated. 

^ase  guide  us  m  our  directions. 

Fbrstve  our  stra. 

Amen. 


A  brief  history  of  Roman  Catholic  schools 
The  first  classes  csubluhcd  by  huropcans  in  Ontario  were 
for  Native  children,  offered  by  French  Jesuit  priests  in  Huro- 
nia  in  1634.  which  can  he  said  to  mark  the  beginning  of 
Roman  Catholic  education  in  this  province.  These  classes 
were  followed  in  the  17th  century  by  classes  for  the  children 
of  settlers  in  New  France. 

Veiy  early  in  the  19th  century,  one-room  English- 
language  Roman  (.atholic  schools  were  opened,  the  first  in 
Glengarry  County  in  eastern  Ontario.  Under  the  leadership 
of  Bishop  Alexander  Macdonell  in  Kingston.  Catholic  educa- 
tion expanded  when  the  first  Catholic  grammar  (secondary) 
Khool  was  established  in  Kingston  in  1839:  it  still  operates 
today. 

Initially.  Roman  Catholic  schools  were  made  possible  by 
religious  communities  of  women  and  men  who  organized 
the  settlers  to  establish  the  schools,  and  who  ensured  their 
fmancial  support. 

We  were  told  that  the  contribution  of  these  communities 
-  particularly  the  communities  of  sisters  -  to  Roman 
Catholic  education  in  this  province  cannot  be  overstated. 
Indeed,  until  the  past  quarter  century,  the  history  of 
Catholic  education  in  Ontario  is  inseparable  from  the  histo- 
ry of  these  communities  and  the  people  who  led  them:  until 
the  193CK.  their  members  constituted  the  majority  of  princi- 
pals and  teachers  in  Catholic  schools. 

This  pattern  of  Khool  development  and  organization 
created  the  distinctive  three-part  character  of  Roman 
'  >ols  m  Ontario.  Church  leaders,  with  parents 

A-  rs.  created  these  schools  from  a  joint  vision  of 

(he  place  of  education  in  the  life  of  the  broader  community. 


The  schools  existed  only  because  of  the  conscious  and  delib- 
erate effort  of  parents  to  establish  and  financially  support 
them.  Many  Ontario  Roman  Catholics  acknowledge  that 
constructing  these  schools  was  possible  only  through  the 
efforts  of  the  local  church,  and  operating  them  was  afford- 
able only  through  the  contributed  services  and  sacrifice  of 
the  religious  communities  who  staffed  them.  Thus,  the  part- 
nership of  home,  school,  and  parish  was  always  the  ideal  that 
guided  their  development. 

Pre-Confcderation  legislation  passed  by  the  united  legis- 
latures of  Canada  West  (later  Ontario)  and  Canada  East 
(Quebec)  gave  more  formal  recognition  and  support  to 
Roman  Clatholic  education.  Notably,  the  lache  Act  ( 1855) 
and  the  Scott  Act  ( 1863),  among  other  things,  allowed  the 
election  of  separate  school  trustees,  established  separate 
school  zones,  and  provided  legislative  grants  to  separate 
schools. 

By  the  time  of  C'onfederation,  Roman  t^atholic  schools 
were  well  established:  18,924  students  were  being  educated 
in  Catholic  elementary  schools  in  1867.  The  existence  of 
denominational  schools  became  a  key  feature  in  the  discus- 
sions over  the  unification  of  British  provinces  into  one 
country.  The  guaranteed  maintenance  of  C^atholic  denomi- 
national schools  in  Ontario,  and  of  Protestant  denomina- 
tional schools  in  Quebec,  was  part  of  the  "historic  compro- 
mise" that  made  possible  the  union  of  Canada. 

Section  93  of  the  British  North  America  Act  (now  the 
Constitution  Act,  1867)  said  clearly  that  such  schools  were 
guaranteed,  and  it  placed  a  constraint  on  provincial  authori- 
ty over  education,  an  otherwise  unrestricted  jurisdiction. 

Section  9.^: 

In  ind  for  each  Province  the  Legislature  may  exclusively  make  Laws 
in  relation  to  Education,  subject  to  and  according  to  the  following 
Provision!: 

( 1 )  Nothing  in  any  such  Law  ihall  prejudicially  affect  any  Right  or 
Privilege  with  respect  to  Denominational  Schoolt  which  any  Ga»»  of 
Person*  have  by  Ijw  in  the  Province  at  the  Union; 

(2)  All  the  Powers,  Privileges,  and  Duties  at  the  Union  by  Ijw 
conferred  and  imposed  in  Upper  Canada  on  the  Separate  Schoolt 
and  School  Trustee*  of  the  Queen'*  Roman  (  jtholic  Subiect*  ihall 
be  and  the  vime  are  hereby  extended  lo  the  Di»*enticnl  School*  of 
the  Queen'*  Prole*tant  and  Roman  tjlholic  Subfecti  in  Quebec; 


For  the  Lo««  of  Learning 


(3)  Where  in  any  Province  a  System  of  Separate  or  Dissentient 
Schools  exists  by  Law  at  the  Union  or  is  thereafter  estabhshed  by  the 
Legislature  of  the  Province,  an  Appeal  shall  lie  to  the  Governor 
General  in  Council  from  any  Act  or  Decision  of  any  Provincial 
Authority  affecting  any  Right  or  Privilege  of  the  Protestant  or 
Roman  Catholic  Minority  of  the  Queen's  Subjects  in  relation  to 
Education; 


AA  Vihe  Catholic  school  aims  to  extend 
I  for  the  child  the  micro  community 
of  the  home,  first  to  that  of  the 
school,  then  into  the  parish  and, 
thence,  outward  into  the  neighbour- 
hood and  ever  larger  communities 
into  which  the  child  will  grow." 

Ontario  Catholic  Supervisory  Officers'  Association  (OCSOA) 


(4)  In  case  any  such  Provincial  Law  as  from  Time  to  Time  seems  to 
the  Governor  General  in  Council  requisite  for  the  due  Execution  of 
the  Provisions  of  this  Section  is  not  made,  or  in  case  any  Decision  of 
the  Governor  General  in  Council  on  any  Appeal  under  this  Section  is 
not  duly  executed  by  the  proper  Provincial  Authority  in  that  Behalf, 
then  and  in  every  such  Case,  and  as  far  only  as  the  Circumstances  of 
each  Case  require,  the  Parliament  of  Canada  may  make  remedial 
Laws  for  the  execution  of  the  provisions  of  this  Section  and  of  any 
Decision  of  the  Governor  General  in  Council  under  this  Section. 

Constitution  Act,  1867 

The  constitutionally  guaranteed  rights  were  confirmed  in 
Section  29  of  the  Canadian  Charter  of  Rights  and  Freedoms, 
which  is  part  of  the  Constitution  Act,  1982. 

Section  29: 

Nothing  in  this  Charter  abrogates  or  derogates  from  any  rights  or 
privileges  guaranteed  by  or  under  the  Constitution  of  Canada  in 
respect  of  denominational,  separate  or  dissentient  schools. 

Constitution  Act,  1982 

In  the  decades  that  followed  Confederation  -  and  despite 
substantial  financial  obstacles,  particularly  to  the  creation  of 
secondary  schools  -  Roman  Catholic  education  continued  to 
flourish.  By  1900,  there  were  42,397  students  in  Catholic 
schools;  by  1925,  the  number  had  more  than  doubled  to 
95,300  students.  Religious  communities  of  sisters,  brothers, 
and  priests  continued  to  take  the  lead  in  setting  up  schools, 
including  many  secondary  schools,  with  both  residential  and 
day  students. 

In  1969,  provision  was  made  for  the  creation  of  county 
and  regional  separate  school  boards,  similar  to  the  provision 
made  the  previous  year  for  public  school  boards.  For  histori- 
cal reasons,  these  separate  boards  operated  with  some  degree 
of  public  funding  through  Grade  10.  Tuition  fees  were  paid 
by  parents  of  children  in  Grades  11,  12,  and  13. 


Through  partnerships  between  the  religious  communities 
that  owned  and  operated  the  schools  and  the  newly  created 
school  boards,  a  small-scale  secondary  school  system 
emerged  -  small  not  only  in  terms  of  the  number  of 
students  it  could  educate  but  also  in  the  limited  range  of 
course  offerings  it  could  make  available. 

Typically,  Roman  Catholic  secondary  schools  at  that  time 
offered  only  core  academic  subjects  such  as  math,  English, 
science,  and  then  only  at  the  advanced  level.  Catholic 
students  who  could  not  afford  the  tuition,  or  who  did  not 
match  the  academic  profile  of  Catholic  secondary  schools, 
either  went  directly  to  the  local  public  secondary  school  or 
left  at  the  end  of  Grade  10. 

Furthermore,  the  fact  that  parents  had  to  pay  tuition  fees 
in  Grades  11,  12,  and  13  ensured  that  a  Roman  Catholic 
secondary  school  education  was  a  possibility  for  only  the 
wealthier  or  most  educationally  committed  families.  This 
system  could  operate  only  on  the  basis  of  tuition  fees  paid 
by  parents,  lower  salaries  paid  to  teachers,  and  services  and 
facilities  provided  by  religious  communities.  Even  this  on- 
going sacrifice  and  commitment  left  the  system  on  the  verge 
of  financial  insolvency  throughout  this  period. 

In  1984,  then-Premier  William  Davis  announced  his 
intention  of  completing  the  Roman  Catholic  education 
system  by  granting  public  funding  through  Grade  13  in 
Catholic  schools.  The  Conservative  government  initiated  the 
legislation,  but  the  process  was  concluded  by  the  minority 
Liberal  government  that  won  the  next  provincial  election. 

While  Bill  30  was  supported  in  its  amended  form  by  all 
three  political  parties,  and  was  passed  in  the  House  on  June 
24,  1986,  it  was  and  still  is  the  subject  of  much  controversy. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


i£  ^^atholic  schools  provide  a  full  and 
\#  integral  education  thanks  to  the 
spiritual  and  Christian  aspects  of 
their  teaching.  To  become  ful^fledged 
humans,  we  must  interact  with  four 
realms  of  our  being:  the  physical, 
cultural,  social  and  spiritual  spheres. 
Any  day-toKlay  practice  of  education 
ttiat  fails  to  promote  <iny  one  of 
four  roakns  cannot  claim 


Issues  and  recommendations 

Alter  we  reviewed  the  tour  months  of  our  pubMc  hearings,  a 
group  of  issues  of  particular  concern  to  the  Cathohc 
community  clearly  emerged.  The  following  sections  summa- 
rize these  specific  issues,  some  of  which  are  also  shared  by 
the  French  community.  Essentially  these  are  related  to  the 
provision  of  resources  and  support  services  needed  to 
preserve  and  enhance  the  Roman  Catholic  education  system. 


In  a  1987  legal  proceeding,  the  Supreme  Court  of  Canada,  in 
a  7-0  decision,  ruled  that  the  legislation  was  constitutional. 

This  completion  of  the  Roman  Catholic  school  system 
has  resulted  in  both  growth  and  change,  especially  at  the 
secondary  school  level.  With  tuition  fees  abolished,  children 
who  previously  could  not  afford  to  go  to  (Catholic  schools 
were  given  an  opportunity  to  attend;  this  reduced  the 
private-school,  elitist  image  of  Roman  Catholic  education, 
and  made  it  authentically  public  and  of  service  to  all. 

Moreover,  improved  funding  made  it  possible  to 
construct  better  facilities  and  to  offer  a  wider  range  of 
courses.  For  the  first  time.  Catholic  schools  had  automotive 
shops  and  technical  departments,  as  well  as  Latin  programs 
and  theology  courses.  The  schools  began  to  look  more  like 
the  whole  Catholic  community,  and  not  just  a  segment  of  it. 

The  development  has  brought  substantial  discussion  in 
the  Roman  Catholic  educational  community  on  the  issue  of 
remaining  faithful  to  its  religious  origins  while  being 
responsive  to  its  public  mandate. 

In  1993,  there  were  621,143  students  in  Ontario  Roman 
Catholic  schools,  30  percent  of  the  2,042,710  students 
enrolled  in  the  province.  Of  the  total  Roman  Catholic 
student  enrolment,  444,990  were  at  the  elementary  level  and 
171,153  at  the  secondary  level.  They  were  being  educated  in 
1,343  elementary  schf>ols  by  23.570  teachers,  and  in  201 
tecondary  "school*  by  10,444  teachers. 

Ovcrwhelmmgly,  teachers  m  Roman  Catholic  Khools 
today  are  not  members  of  religious  communities:  laypeople 
make  up  97  percent  of  the  teaching  body.  VXTicther  they 
teach  in  the  English-  or  French-language  sections  of  the 
separate  Khool  system,  these  teachers  have  a  shared  vision  of 
the  education  process. 


Funding 

Without  exception,  every  significant  provincial  Roman 
Catholic  organization  spoke  to  us  of  the  need  to  reform 
education  financing  in  Ontario.  Trustees,  parents,  teachers, 
supervisory  officers,  principals,  and  clergy  identified  historic 
underfunding  of  Catholic  schools  as  a  province-wide  prob- 
lem and  as  an  unjustifiable  inequity,  one  that  leaves 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  students  without  educational 
resources  that  meet  generally  accepted  standards. 

We  were  told  that  while  there  have  been  some  recent 
changes  in  funding  practices,  several  separate  school  boards 
hover  on  the  edge  of  bankruptcy.  Growth  in  the  Catholic 
school  system  over  the  past  two  decades  has  compounded 
the  problems  caused  by  underfunding,  and  has  resulted  in 
inadequate  facilities  and  permanent  overcrowding. 

Of  the  40  boards  in  the  province  with  the  lowest  pcr- 
pupil  income  from  property  assessment,  39  are  Catholic.  Of 
the  60  boards  in  the  province  with  the  highest  such  assess- 
ment income,  only  three  arc  (Catholic,  and  none  of  these 
three  is  among  the  top  ten.  This  province-wide  situation 
means  profound  disparities  in  programs  and  facilities 
between  and  within  the  same  municipalities  and  counties. 

Wc  were  told  of  a  board  that  was  compelled  to  choose 
between  computers  or  musical  instruments  for  its  schools. 
The  times  being  what  they  arc,  the  board  chose  computers, 
but  it  was  the  kind  of  necessary  choice  that  diminishes  us  as 
a  society. 

We  were  told  of  C^atholic  boards  with  schools  in  which, 
except  for  kindergarten,  children  spend  their  entire  elemen- 
tary level  years  in  temporary  facilities  -  a  euphemism  for 
portables  -  to  be  followed  by  life  in  a  high  school  where 
lunch  begins  at  9:00  a.m.  becau.se  the  cafeteria  holds  only 
300  of  the  school's  1,800  students.  In  this  context,  it  is 
understandable  that  a  sense  of  desperation  was  evident  in 
some  submissions  from  the  (Catholic  community. 


For  ttw  IjOw*  or  LMmmc 


In  Chapter  18,  we  discuss  the  present  structures  in  educa- 
tion funding  that  have  caused  this  situation,  and  make 
recommendations  for  comprehensive  reform  of  education 
financing  to  ehminate  these  inequities. 

Section  136  of  the  Education  Act 
As  described  earher.  Bill  30  did  not  accord  funding  to 
Catholic  schools  equivalent  to  that  of  public  schools,  but  it 
did  permit  completion  of  the  Catholic  education  system  as  a 
publicly  funded  education  entity.  Specifics  of  the  revised 
funding  are  discussed  in  detail  elsewhere;  essentially,  the 
Roman  Catholic  system  became  fully  public  in  that  it  was 
funded  totally  from  public  sources. 

Section  136  of  the  Education  Act,  covering  hiring  prac- 
tices of  separate  school  boards,  was  passed  as  part  of  the 
legislation  enacted  with  Bill  30;  it  was  an  amendment  to  the 
original  Bill,  and,  beginning  in  1995,  will  have  the  effect  of 
denying  Roman  Catholic  school  boards  the  right  to  favour 
Catholics  in  hiring  teachers  for  Roman  Catholic  secondary 
schools. 

At  the  time,  the  Catholic  community  strongly  opposed 
this  amendment,  and  it  remains  convinced  that  the  section 
would  be  declared  unconstitutional  should  any  legal  chal- 
lenge be  raised.  During  the  public  hearings,  there  was  a 
clearly  stated  belief,  expressed  especially  by  trustees,  that 
over  time  the  very  identity  of  Catholic  schools  is  at  risk  if 
boards  lose  the  right  to  hire,  preferentially,  Roman  Catholic 
teachers. 

Catholic  schools  have  always  hired  a  number  of 
non-Roman  Catholic  teachers,  and  we  encourage  them  to 
continue  to  do  so.  Most  of  these  men  and  women  are  recog- 
nized by  Catholic  boards  as  excellent  teachers  who  have 
made  substantial  contributions  to  their  schools.  However, 
these  teachers  have  always  been  a  small  minority,  and  with 
the  exception  of  the  designated  teachers  who  were  trans- 
ferred to  the  Roman  Catholic  from  the  public  system  after 
Bill  30  was  passed,  they  were  freely  chosen  by  the  boards  that 
employ  them.  Thus  the  religious  orientation  and  character 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  school  was  never  at  risk. 

The  concern  of  the  Catholic  community  is  that  once 
section  136  comes  into  effect,  the  inability  of  the  boards  to 
guarantee  Catholic  teachers  in  the  classrooms  will  erode  the 
school's  religious  foundations.  Parents  who  have  specifically 
chosen  to  send  their  children  to  Catholic  schools  -  some- 


iiMf  Catholic  schools  are  to  continue 
I  to  exist,  it  is  essential  that  Catholic 
school  boards  also  continue  to  have 
the  right  to  hire  only  Catholic  teach- 
ers to  teach  in  Catholic  schools. 
Allowing  noivCatholic  teachers  to 
have  equal  access  to  teaching  posi- 
tions in  a  Csitholic  school  system 
would  destroy  the  Catholic  character 
of  the  system.  Non^atholic  teachers 
cannot  use  their  faith  experience  as 
witness  to  a  Catholic  doctrine  which 
they  do  not  believe." 

St.  Aloysius  Parent  Advisory  Council 


times  at  considerable  inconvenience  -  have  particularly 
strong  feelings  on  this  issue. 

Central  to  the  curriculum  in  any  school  is  its  culture:  the 
sum  of  the  dominant  values,  ideas,  and  beliefs  that  shape  the 
learning  environment  and  give  the  school  its  character  and 
identity.  It  is  evident  that  in  Roman  Catholic  schools,  reli- 
gion is  a  core  element  of  the  school's  culture  and  its  reason 
for  being.  Throughout,  this  report  has  made  clear  the 
centrality  of  teachers  in  creating  and  sustaining  the  learning 
culture  of  the  school.  Thus,  the  religious  commitment  of  the 
teachers  in  Roman  Catholic  schools  is  a  vital  element  in 
establishing  and  maintaining  their  religious  focus. 

The  declared  expectation  in  Catholic  schools  is  not  that 
teachers  will  be  spiritually  neutral  but  that  they  actively 
attempt  to  blend  their  professional  abilities  and  skills  with 
their  own  spirituality.  Presenters  to  the  Commission 
frequently  repeated  that  Roman  Catholic  schools  attempt  to 
be  communities  of  faith  as  much  as  they  attempt  to  be 
centres  of  learning. 

In  order  for  Catholic  schools  to  maintain  their  identity 
and  preserve  their  unique  philosophy  of  education,  Catholic 
school  boards  should  not  lose  the  right  to  favour  hiring 
teachers  who  are  members  of  the  community  of  faith  that  is 
itself  at  the  heart  of  the  school. 

The  members  of  the  Catholic  education  community  have 
clearly  stated  that  the  potential  introduction  of  large 
numbers  of  non-Catholic  teachers  into  the  system  places  the 
religious  identity  of  Catholic  schools  in  jeopardy.  The  main- 
tenance and  promotion  of  this  identity  is  crucial  to  the  work 
of  the  school  and  is  part  of  the  very  reason  it  exits. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


ii 


w; 


e  also  welcome  the  opportunrty 
to  explain  Catholic  education 
to  you,  since  our  experience  suggests 
ttvat  ttie  nature  of  Catt>olic  education 
and  the  means  by  wtiich  K  is  provided 
are  not  well  under  stood." 

<<iilOS<ratnt*      en'      Trus'-'S    Assoc,  idon      bSTA) 


Recommendation  115 

*We  recommend  that  section  136.  which  restricts  preferen- 
tial hiring  in  the  Roman  Catholic  school  system,  be  removed 
from  the  Education  Act. 

Representation  in  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training 
Many  Catholic  stakeholders  told  us  that  although  Roman 
Catholic  schools  educate  30  percent  of  Ontario  students, 
including  almost  83  percent  of  all  francophone  students,  and 
constitute  a  province-wide  education  system  from  kinder- 
garten to  OAC,  that  system  is  not  appropriately  represented 
at  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training. 

This  is  particularly  evident  in  two  ways.  First,  the  number 
of  Ministry  education  officers  with  a  separate  school  back- 
ground is  not  always  representative  of  the  size  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  system;  consequently,  there  is  a  lack  of  understand- 
ing by  the  Ministry  of  the  Catholic  system's  priorities  and 
concerns.  Second,  the  Ministry  has  no  "team"  (formerly 
called  a  "branch")  comparable  to  the  French -language 
Education  Policy  and  Programs  Team,  which  would  be 
responsible  for  presenting  the  Catholic  education  viewpoint. 

These  numeric  and  organizational  deficiencies  account 
for  the  repeated  references  made  during  our  public  hearings 
to  an  inability  by  the  Ministry  to  understand  and  meet  the 
specific  needs  of  the  Roman  Catholic  education  system. 

The  Common  Curriculum,  Grades  1-9,  released  in  Febru- 
ary 1993.  readily  demonstrates  the  point.  In  the  words  of 
The  Common  Curriculum.  "The  outcomes  in  this  document 
shall  form  the  basis  of  the  programs,  learning  activities,  and 
specific  outcome*  that  school  boards  develop  for  each 
grade  '  Although  it  is  supposed  to  be  the  province's  core 
curriculum  document  for  Grades  I  to  9,  the  97  pages  of  the 


document  contain  one  reference  to  Catholic  curriculum  -  a 
footnote  on  the  bottom  of  the  first  page.  The  subsequent 
version,  written  for  parents  and  the  general  public  later  that 
year,  contains  no  reference  whatsoever  to  curriculum  in 
Roman  C^alholic  schools. 

Without  a  Catholic  Education  leam,  the  document  did 
not  receive  essential  expert  curriculum  input  from  that 
perspective  at  the  design  stage.  Therefore,  before  it  is 
implemented,  enormous  work  will  have  to  be  done  by 
boards  to  make  the  document  consistent  with  the  education 
philosophy  and  priorities  of  separate  schools. 

This  does  not  appear  to  us  to  be  an  appropriate  curricu- 
lum development  process  for  the  Ministry  to  follow, 
especially  in  light  of  the  added  curriculum  responsibilities 
that  elsewhere  in  this  report  we  recommend  the  Ministry 
undertake.  The  Catholic  education  community  does  not 
experience  this  as  an  isolated  example  of  Ministry  unaware- 
ness  of  the  curriculum  differences  between  public  and 
separate  schools. 

We  recognize  that  there  are  two  English-language  compo- 
nents in  the  province's  publicly  funded  education  system, 
and  that  each  has  a  distinct  curriculum  orientation  and 
philosophy.  It  is  imperative  that  the  Ministry,  in  the  develop- 
ment of  its  programs  and  curriculum,  be  aware  of  these 
differences  and  be  capable  of  meeting  the  needs  of  both 
components.  WTiile  an  element  of  Roman  Catholic  educa- 
tion comprises  courses  in  religious  education,  the  fact  of  this 
additional  subject  in  Catholic  schools  is  not  the  e.ssential 
curriculum  difference  between  public  and  Catholic  schools: 
the  essential  difference  is  the  philosophy  and  values  that 
shape  the  rest  of  the  curriculum. 

At  present,  there  is  no  structure  in  the  Ministry  to  ensure 
that  an  appropriate  curriculum  is  developed  for  a  school 
system  that  educates  one-third  of  Ontario  students. 

In  order  to  meet  the  curriculum  needs  of  separate 
schools,  as  well  as  other  system-wide  needs,  it  is  essential 
that  the  Ministry  have  adequate  and  influential  representa- 
tion of  the  Roman  (Catholic  system  among  its  education  offi- 
cers, senior  administrators,  and  other  professionals.  Further- 
more, the  Ministry  should  have  a  team  with  the  specific  task 
of  representing  Catholic  education  concerns.  Its  responsibili- 
ty could  include  co-ordinating  Ministr)'  policies  related  to 
Catholic  education  and  mainlaining  liai.son  with  the 
Catholic  education  community. 


For  Vm  Lov«  of  L«amln( 


i£ 


w. 


The  focus  of  this  discussion  has  been  on  curriculum 
issues,  but  assessment,  teacher  education,  and  governance 
are  other  areas  where  the  Roman  CathoHc  system  perspec- 
tive would  vary  from  that  of  the  public  system. 

Recommendation  116 

*We  recommend  that,  with  reference  to  the  role  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  education  system,  the  Ministry  of  Education 
and  Training  ensure  appropriate  and  Influential  representation 
from  the  Roman  Catholic  education  system  at  all  levels  of  Its 
professional  and  managerial  staff,  up  to  and  including  that  of 
Assistant  Deputy  Minister;  and  that  the  Minister  establish  a 
Roman  Catholic  Education  Policy  and  Programs  Team  or 
branch  in  the  Ministry. 

Teacher  education 

The  vision  of  education  and  the  nature  of  curriculum  in 
Catholic  schools  imply  a  specific  professional  preparation 
for  teachers  intending  to  work  in  the  Roman  Catholic 
system.  If  Catholic  schools  are  to  meet  the  mandate  they 
have  been  given  by  their  community,  they  not  only  require 
teachers  who  are  Roman  Catholic  but  people  who  are 
professionally  prepared  to  teach  in  a  Roman  Catholic 
context  and  tradition. 

Part  of  the  pre-service  formation  of  all  teachers  who  wish 
to  work  in  the  separate  school  system  should  include  at  least 
one  course  dealing  explicitly  with  Catholic  education  theory 
and  practice,  and  there  should  be  one  course  specifically  for 
teachers  who  will  be  teaching  religious  education.  The  first 
course  is  described  by  the  Catholic  community  as  a  founda- 
tions course,  while  the  second  is  referred  to  as  a  religious 
education  course. 

At  the  present  time,  pre-service  teaching  programs  at 
English-language  faculties  of  education  in  Ontario  do  not 
differentiate  in  their  degree  requirements  between  teachers 
who  wish  to  teach  in  the  public  school  system  and  those 
who  wish  to  teach  in  the  separate.  Programs  offer  mandato- 
ry foundation  courses  that  do  not  adequately  prepare  teach- 
ers to  work  in  the  distinctive  Catholic  education  context  and 
thus  do  not  meet  the  needs  of  the  separate  school  system. 
Candidates  aspiring  to  teach  in  Catholic  schools  need  to  be 
familiar  with  the  history  of  Catholic  education  in  Ontario, 
with  the  governance  and  organizations  in  the  separate 
school  system,  and  with  the  approach  to  curriculum  used  in 
these  schools. 


hile  we  support  the  contempo- 
rary programs  of  the  faculties, 
we  are  amazed  at  and  frustrated  by 
the  void  of  programs  designed  specifi- 
cally for  those  preparing  to  teach  in 
Catholic  schools  ...  OSSTA's  position 
is  that  the  Ministry  of  Education  and 
Training  and  the  faculties  of  educa- 
tion have  a  responsibility  to  ensure 
that  the  needs  of  both  branches  of 
the  publicly  funded  system  of  educa- 
tion in  Ontario  are  satisfied.  We  call 
on  the  Ministry  of  Education  and 
Training  and  the  Acuities  of  educa- 
tion to  accept  this  responsibility." 

Ontario  Separate  School  Trustees'  Association  (OSSTA) 


In  the  area  of  religious  education,  faculties  currently  have 
limited  programs  available,  some  of  which  are  for  credit  and 
some  of  which  are  not.  Courses  vary  in  length  from  15  to  40 
hours,  with  program  content  differing  substantially  among 
faculties. 

Characteristically,  these  pre-service  religious  education 
courses,  accredited  or  not,  are  optional  and  taken  in  addition 
to  a  full  academic  program.  This  program  and  credit  dispar- 
ity causes  problems  for  the  Catholic  education  system 
because  religious  education  in  Catholic  schools  exists  at  all 
grade  levels  as  a  core  subject  area  and  is  based  on  province- 
wide  curriculum  documents.  The  random,  ambiguous  status 
of  pre-service  religious  education  courses  at  faculties  does 
not  do  justice  to  the  importance  of  this  subject  in  Catholic 
schools. 

While  the  pre-service  religious  education  courses  are  of 
value  to  student  teachers  and  school  boards,  and  while  the 
people  who  teach  them  work  very  hard  to  provide  the  best 
possible  programs,  irregular  credit  status  and  content 
restrict  their  effectiveness  in  preparing  religious  educators. 

If  we  take  seriously  the  proposition  that  education  in 
Roman  Catholic  schools  is  based  on  an  educational  philoso- 
phy and  practice  distinct  from  the  public  system,  we  must 
also  conclude  that  the  preparation  of  teachers  for  the  Roman 
Catholic  system  must  have  distinctive  elements. 

In  current  pre-service  programs,  the  Catholic  component 
of  teacher  preparation  is  treated  as  an  add-on  and  discre- 
tionary, not  as  fundamental  and  mandatory.  In  their 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


£i  fof  teachers  preparing  for  the 

I     Catholic  school  system  we  require 
professjonal  deveiopfnent  in  religious 
education  and  family  life  education  as 
is  accorded  ottver  teaching  subjects. 
The  pre-service  training  must  include 
a  foundation  course  in  tt>e  history 
and  philosophy  of  Ontario  Catholic 
education. 

n  (OCSOA) 


programs,  faculties  ot  education  do  not  reflect  the  reality 
that  Catholic  education  philosophy  is  derived  initially  from  a 
theological  foundation,  not  from  pedagogical  theory,  and 
they  do  not  give  student  teachers  exposure  to  this  philoso- 
phy as  part  of  their  initial  training. 

Nor  do  faculties  take  seriously  the  fact  that  religious 
education  is  a  core  part  of  the  curriculum  in  Catholic 
schools,  and  that  teachers  require  professional  preparation 
in  order  to  teach  the  subject  effectively. 

The  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  has  a  responsi- 
bility to  ensure  that  professional  preparation  of  teachers 
reflects  the  needs  of  the  separate  and  the  public  sections  of 
the  publicly  funded  education  system.  Some  people  in  the 
Catholic  education  community  have  suggested  that  to 
accomplish  this  effectively,  a  Catholic  faculty  of  education 
with  its  own  program  is  required  for  those  preparing  them- 
selves to  teach  in  Roman  Catholic  schools  -  although  by  no 
means  does  it  seem  to  be  a  unanimous  opinion  in  this 
community. 

Having  considered  the  various  options,  the  Commission 
IS  of  the  opinion  that  in  order  to  respond  to  the  Catholic 
education  community's  legitimate  request  for  professional 
preparation  of  its  teachers,  it  is  not  now  necessary  to  create  a 
Catholic  faculty  of  education,  nor  are  two  completely  differ 
enl  tracks  or  streams  required  within  faculties.  However,  we 
are  convinced  that  faculties  of  education  should  respond  to 
this  request  by  providing  a  single  core  course  (a  foundations 
of  Catholic  education  course)  and  a  religious  education 
course  for  all  Catholic  teachers. 


Recommendations  117.  118 

•  liVe  recommend  that  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training 

and  the  faculties  of  education  establish  a  pre-service  credit 

course  in  the  foundations  of  Roman  Catholic  education,  and 

that  this  course  be  available  at  all  faculties  of  education  in 

Ontario. 

'We  recommend  that  the  religious  education  courses  current- 
ly offered  at  faculties  of  education  receive  full  credit  status 
and  be  made  part  of  the  regular  academic  program. 

Learning  In  French:  Rights,  needs,  and  barriers 

More  than  250  briels  and  presentations  were  made  to  our 
Commission  by  Franco-Ontarians,  both  young  and  old.  This 
is  a  clear  indication  that  they  participated  fully  in  our  delib- 
erations. We  also  held  a  special  day  of  consultation  in 
Timmins  for  Franco-Ontarian  associations  involved  in 
education,  as  well  as  a  comprehensive  video-forum  in  both 
Ottawa  and  Toronto  with  ethno-cultural  francophones.  Both 
individuals  and  associations  spoke  passionately  of  the  histo- 
ry that  has  led  to  the  development  of  their  schools  and  of 
French-language  education  in  Ontario.  They  expressed  hope 
for  the  (Commission's  recommendations,  taking  great  care  to 
clearly  spell  out  their  viewpoints  and  claims.  They  conveyed 
their  vision  of  a  French  education  system  "from  cradle  to 
grave,"  even  sharing  with  us  plans  for  their  budding  commu- 
nity colleges  and  dreams  of  a  francophone  university. 

Their  presentations  repeatedly  echoed  the  injustices  they 
suffered  at  the  turn  of  the  century,  with  the  suppression  of 
some  of  their  rights  in  French-language  education.  Men  and 
women,  parents  and  educators,  students  of  all  ages  -  all 
spoke  of  their  frustrations  with  an  education  system  whose 
structures  and  management  methods  put  them  at  a  disad- 
vantage, systematically  trip  them  up,  and  paralyze  their 
development.  Again  and  again,  they  urged  us  to  see  to  it  that 
their  rights  are  respected,  thereby  enabling  Franco-Ontarian 
schools  to  play  their  role  to  the  fullest  in  helping  the  fran- 
cophone community  achieve  its  highest  potential.  To  a  large 
extent,  they  attributed  their  high  drop-out  level,  lesser  acad- 
emic successes  and  lower  economic  status  of  their  adult 
population  to  the  system's  built-in  inequities  and  restric- 
tions. In  a  nutshell,  they  clearly  conveyed  to  us  just  how  crit- 
ical a  quality  education  in  French  is  to  the  survival  of  their 
language,  their  culture,  and  their  community. 


For  ow  LOM  o(  iMmmg 


We  also  learned  from  other  francophones  in  Ontario  - 
new  Canadians  and  citizens  from  other  provinces  whose  life 
experiences  are  different  from  those  born  here  -  that  their 
perspectives,  needs,  and  expectations  do  not  always  mesh 
with  Franco-Ontarian  objectives  when  it  comes  to  their  chil- 
dren's education. 

Our  mandate  was  very  specific  with  respect  to  the  consti- 
tutional rights  of  francophones  and  Catholics.  While  the 
reader  will  have  observed  the  extent  to  which  francophones' 
particular  interests  are  reflected  throughout  this  report,  this 
section  deals  primarily  with  the  administrative  and  political 
aspects  of  French-language  education  in  Ontario  from  a 
management  and  governance  perspective.  Following  a  look 
at  the  historical,  socio-demographic,  and  educational 
dimensions,  we  will  address  the  issue  of  Franco-Ontarians' 
constitutional  rights  and  the  extent  to  which  they  are 
enforced,  and  conclude  with  an  overview  of  the  equity 
measures  needed  to  ensure  the  future  of  this  community. 

A  glimpse  of  history 

French-language  classes  had  been  taught  and  courses  given 
in  isolation  throughout  Ontario  almost  a  century  before  the 
end  of  the  Seven- Year  War  in  1763,  when  all  of  New  France 
was  taken  over  by  England.  However,  the  first  true  French- 
language  school  -  to  be  precise  a  Catholic  and  private  school 
-  in  what  is  now  known  as  Ontario  did  not  come  into  exis- 
tence until  1786,  in  Windsor,  then  known  as  L'Assomption 
du  Detroit.  The  establishment  of  another  French-language 
school  then  followed  in  Kingston.'  In  practice  -  and  this  may 
surprise  some  -  French-language  education  in  Ontario  had 
been  on-going  since  the  arrival  of  Europeans  -  that  is,  from 
the  moment  the  French  arrived  in  the  17th  century,  which 
means  well  before  Confederation  in  1867  and  the  British 
North  America  Act,  which  granted  provinces  total  and  exclu- 
sive jurisdiction  over  education.  Until  then,  French-language 
schools  were  treated  in  the  same  way  as  English-language 
schools,  receiving  the  same  type  of  funding  and  enjoying  the 
same  status.  Usually  established  by  the  parish  priest  or  a 
local  group  of  parents  and  parishioners,  these  schools  were 
partially  funded  by  property  taxes,  even  receiving,  at  the 
turn  of  the  19th  century,  government  grants.  However,  as 
most  French-Canadian  schools  were  Roman  Catholic,  they, 
like  anglophone  Catholic  schools,  were  subject  to  the  same 
restrictions. 


AA  It  is  increasingly  evident  tliat  French- 
I  language  schools  will  be  managed 
effectively  only  once  they  are  admin- 
istered by  francophones.  Instances  of 
confrontation  and  conflict  such  as  we 
have  seen  in  recent  years  prove  once 
again  that  francophones,  as  a  minori- 
ty, particularly  in  the  southern  part  of 
the  province,  will  always  be  vulnerah 
ble  to  the  actions  of  the  maionty." 


Association  des  enseignantes  et  des  enseignants 
franco-ontariens,  Essex  elementaire  oatholique 


At  the  turn  of  the  19th  century,  the  francophone  popula- 
tion was  centred  in  the  southwestern  region  of  Upper  Cana- 
da, in  both  Essex  and  Kent  counties.  Around  the  1830s,  the 
population  began  to  expand  into  the  southeastern  region, 
into  what  is  now  the  Prescott-Russell  area. 

It  was  during  the  decades  immediately  preceding  Confed- 
eration, following  the  affirmation  of  Protestant  Anglo-Saxon 
political-economic  power  with  the  infamous  Family 
Compact  in  Upper  Canada  (Ontario)  that  the  political  issues 
in  education  in  this  province  were  crystallized,  especially 
with  respect  to  the  constitutional  rights  of  Roman  Catholics. 
From  1846  to  1850,  when  legislation  was  passed  to  establish 
the  basis  of  the  current  education  system,  and  in  the  years 
that  followed,  education  in  the  French  language  was  for  all 
practical  purposes  accepted  by  Ryerson,  education  superin- 
tendent for  Upper  Canada,  thus  recognizing  de  facto  rights 
of  francophones.  Towards  the  end  of  the  19th  century,  less 
than  20  years  after  Confederation,  Ontario  began  to  system- 
atically deny  these  rights.  Regardless  of  their  particular  inter- 
pretation of  the  root  cause  of  this  injustice,  historians  agree 
in  their  identification  of  a  link  between  the  new  restrictive 
language  policies  after  1885  and  the  increase  of  francophone 
immigration  into  Eastern  Ontario  from  Quebec.  In  this 
regard,  on  November  24,  1886,  the  Toronto  Mail  published 
the  following: 

The  Prescott  and  Russell  schools  are  the  nurseries  not  merely  of  an 
alien  tongue  but  of  ahen  customs,  of  aHen  sentiments,  and,  we  say  it 
without  offence,  of  a  wholly  alien  people." 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


££  ^^espite  rts  efforts,  the  French- 
■^  speaking  communrty  in  this 
region,  and  elsewhere  in  the  province, 
is  losing  ground  and  t>eing  assimilated 
at  an  alarming  rate.  This  trend  must 
be  stopped,  and  even  reversed,  at  ail 
costs  if  we  want  to  preserve  this 
cuitural  resource." 

and     Hjnty  ■■  tr.  Dsrstt  Schi      Board, 


According  to  the  historian  Chad  Gafficld.  this  same  time 
period  signalled  the  birth  of  the  Franco-Ontarian  identity.' 
From  1885  to  1927,  discrimination  against  education  in  the 
French  language  for  Franco-Ontarians  was  actually  being 
legislated,  a  measure  that  culminated  in  the  notorious  Regu- 
lation 17  of  1912.  to  this  day  an  open  wound  in  the  heart  of 
ihe  community  and  a  symbol  of  Franco-Ontarians'  fight  for 
survival.  (This  regulation  limited  the  teaching  in  French  to 
Grades  1  and  2,  forbidding  it  at  any  other  le%'el.  In  effect 
until  1927,  Regulation  17  was  not  abolished  until  1944.) 

At  the  national  level,  the  denominational  rights  of 
Catholic  or  Protestant  minorities  were  recognized  constitu- 
tionally in  1867,  under  section  93  of  the  Confederation  Act 
of  1867  (the  British  North  America  Act),  which  were 
confirmed  in  section  29  of  the  Canadian  Charter  of  Rights 
and  Freedoms  of  1982.  However,  it  wasn't  until  the  1960s 
that  the  linguistic  rights  of  minorities  -  francophones 
outside  Quebec  and  anglophones  in  Quebec  -  were  gradual- 
ly recognized,  and  until  the  1980s  that  they  were  enshrined 
in  the  Constitution.  One  can  see  the  progression  from  the 
recommendations  of  the  Bilingualism  and  Biculturalism 
(x)mmission  to  the  Official  languages  Act  and  the  federally 
supported  programs  for  linguistic  minorities  that  followed  it. 

In  Ontario,  the  creation  of  French-language  elementary 
and  secondary  Khools  within  public  school  boards  was 
finally  legislated  in  1968.  French-language  high  schools 
therefore  have  only  a  25-year  history  in  Ontario.  However,  as 
there  was  no  funding  for  Catholic  high  schools,  either  anglo- 
phone or  francophone,  prior  to  1986  and  Bill  30,  Catholic 
francophones  often  sent  their  children  to  public  secondary 
Khoob.  After  Bill  30,  most  of  these  students  and  their 


schools  were  transferred  en  bloc  to  the  separate  -  that  is. 
Catholic  -  school  boards.  The  Ontario  Ministry  of  Educa- 
tion set  up  minimal  francophone  structures  at  the  provincial 
level  with  the  establishment  in  1972  of  the  Conseil  supericur 
dcs  <^coles  de  langue  franvaisc,  an  advisory  committee  to  the 
Minister  on  French-Language  education.  In  1980,  this 
committee  became  the  Conseil  de  I'^ducation  franco-ontari- 
enne  (CEFO).  or  the  Council  for  Franco-Ontarian  Educa- 
tion, and  then  Conseil  de  I'^ducation  et  de  la  formation 
franco-ontarienncs  (CEFFO).'  or  the  Council  for  Franco- 
Ontarian  Education  and  Training,  in  1993. 

In  1977,  the  Minister  of  Education  also  appointed  an 
Assistant  Deputy  Minister  to  be  an  advisor  on  French- 
language  education.  Since  1991,  this  function  has  changed  to 
more  direct  responsibility  for  issues  in  French-language 
education.  In  1993,  the  position  was  broadened  to  include 
responsibility  for  other  portfolios  of  interest  to  Ontario 
education  in  general,  and  therefore  no  longer  officially 
designated  as  the  Assistant  Pcputy  Minister,  French- 
language  Education.  Reluctant  at  first  to  accept  this  change 
that  it  perceived  as  a  lessening  of  its  status  within  the 
Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  the  Franco-Ontarian 
community  now  sees  that  the  positive  result  of  this  move  is 
better  representation  of  its  interests. 

Who  are  the  Franco-Ontarians? 

The  Franco-Ontarian  population  is  by  far  the  largest  thriv- 
ing francophone  minority  group  living  outside  Quebec  and 
in  all  of  Canada,  followed  by  New  Brunswick's  Acadian 
community,  which  is  half  as  large.  If  one  refers  to  the  OECD 
definitions,  it  could  be  said  that  the  Franco-Ontarian 
community  is  made  up  of  an  "established  minority" 
(Ontario-born)  and  of  "new  minorities"  (new  Canadians 
whose  mother  tongue  is  French).' 

According  to  Statistics  Canada's  1991  census  data,  which 
is  confirmed  in  the  latest  study  of  the  Association  canadi- 
enne-frani^aise  de  I'Ontario  (ACFO),  the  French-Canadian 
Association  of  Ontario,  the  Franco-Ontarian  community  can 
be  described  as  follows: 

The  FrancnOnUnan  communily  conti«t>  of  485.390  membert 
whoK  mother  tongue  it  the  French  language  -  that  it,  one  Onlanan 
out  of  20.  One  quarter  of  Ontario'i  northraitern  population  it  Fran- 
co-Ontarian; in  the  cast,  15  percent  of  rcudcnn  arc  FrancoOntari- 


Fdr  ttw  Ldm  or  LMRHm 


French-language  Regions  of  Ontario 

(according  to  Ontario  Office  of  Francophone  Affairs) 


ans.  The  102,695  Franco-Ontarians  living  in  central  Ontario  make 
up  only  1 .6  percent  of  the  region's  population,  and  elsewhere  in  the 
province  those  whose  mother  tongue  is  French  are  few." 

By  adding  to  those  numbers  some  36,000  persons  who 
declare  French  and  another  language  as  mother  tongues,  and 
by  taking  into  account  all  corrective  factors,  the  study  points 
to  an  adjusted  total  of  503,568  Franco-Ontarians. 

We  are  therefore  looking  at  half  a  million  people  spread 
out  in  communities  that  are  more  or  less  francophone  (with 
younger  populations),  first  in  eastern  Ontario  (Ottawa, 
Cornwall,  and  Hawkesbury)  and  then  in  the  northeastern 
regions  (Sudbury,  North  Bay,  Timmins,  Hearst,  Kapuskasing, 
Kirkland  Lake,  and  New  Liskeard);  or  scattered  elsewhere, 
throughout  the  anglophone  population,  with  all  the  prob- 
lems this  entails  for  the  school  system.  Despite  the  concen- 
tration of  Franco-Ontarians  in  two  of  the  province's  regions 
(according  to  the  Office  of  Francophone  Affairs'  own  region- 
al divisions;  the  Ontario  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training 
divides  the  province  into  six  regions),  they  still  do  not, 
except  in  northeastern  Ontario,  form  a  critical  mass  in  the 
socio-political  sense,  although  they  are  getting  closer.'  We 
also  note  the  existence  of  a  number  of  mixed  marriages,  a 
natural  sociological  factor  when  a  minority  finds  itself  scat- 
tered throughout  an  overwhelmingly  anglophone  society. 
This  marriage  of  francophones  to  non-francophones  invari- 
ably has  a  bearing  on  the  language  spoken  in  the  home  and 
contributes  to  some  children's  lack  of  knowledge  of  French 
when  they  begin  kindergarten  in  francophone  schools.  This 
explains  why  for  some  200,000  people  within  the  Franco- 
Ontarian  population,  French  is  not  the  prinicipal  language 
spoken  at  home.  The  highest  level  of  linguistic  stability  is 
currently  found  in  both  eastern  and  northeastern  Ontario, 
which  have  the  greatest  concentrations  of  francophones  in 
the  province. 

In  matters  of  education,  a  majority  of  Franco-Ontarian 
parents,  i.e.,  82.5  percent,  favour  Catholic  schools,  a  choice 
that  generally  doubles  the  problems  of  non-recognition  of 
their  rights. 

The  problems  encountered  by  Catholics  has  been  referred 
to  earlier  in  this  chapter. 

Given  the  absence  of  French-language  secondary  schools 
in  Ontario  until  the  1970s,  an  often-forgotten  fact,  it  is  not 
surprising  to  learn  that  many  in  the  current  generation  of 
adult  francophones  are  under-educated  or  even  illiterate. 


NORTHWESTERN                      T 

^      \ 

^^^'^[     Kapuskasing    \ 

Geraldton» 
BayylT 

\  "'  .JWHtniEASTERN      \ 

\                              Timmins\ 

' — \,^'-~>,   Thuncfe 

\      \          -.    Kirkiand  LaHe«      C 

-vy 

^^^     .                          '.     V.                      Hawl<esbury 

\           'T'^i'^-.'^'^^^^'^T'^^^^ornwall 

-^x^ 

^      7^P==)~\  <^"<\  '    -  Teastern 

Legend 

J?eneta^uis»]eoe\  '-\y 
^H,^_/CEfrtRjMA:X'^ 

—  regions 
•■-■  census  ar 

eas 

c-  ■  -'■^'  ■  ■^-.'I^oronto 

southwesternA  :  W>.r7? 

Indeed,  numerous  briefs  submitted  to  the  Commission 
convincingly  illustrated  the  root  causes  of  this  phenomenon. 
"Nearly  18  percent  of  francophones  have  not  reached  Grade 
9,  whereas  only  7.4  percent  of  anglophones  have  left  school 
before  Grade  9.*  Progress  has  been  made,  given  that  the 
percentage  of  francophones  in  this  situation  a  few  years  ago 
stood  at  the  21.6  percent  mark;  however,  the  disparity 
between  these  two  groups  remains.  "Under-education  is  one 
of  the  primary  causes  of  illiteracy  within  the  Franco-Ontari- 
an community."' 

The  drop-out  rate  is  higher  among  francophones  than 
among  anglophones,  and  this  rate  is  thought  to  be  higher  yet 
in  mixed  secondary  schools,  where  students  of  both 
languages  are  taught  under  one  roof,  and  which  often  have 
anglophone  principals,  as  opposed  to  homogeneous  French- 
language  high  schools  with  francophone  principals. 

Young  Franco-Ontarians,  as  a  whole,  also  achieve  lower 
scores  on  tests  than  their  anglophone  counterparts.  In  the 
1993-94  provincial  Grade  9  French-language  reading  and 
writing  tests,  only  66  percent  of  students  achieved  or  exceed- 
ed provincial  standards,  compared  with  89  percent  of  anglo- 
phones. In  the  national  mathematics  test  administered  in 
1993  to  students  aged  13  to  16,  following  a  decision  by  the 
Council  of  Ministers  of  Education,  scores  obtained  by  fran- 
cophones compared  favourably  to  those  of  anglophones 
with  respect  to  material  learned,  but  their  scores  were 
considerably  lower  than  those  of  Anglophones  in  solving 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


£i 


At  our  school,  we  only  have  three 
teachers  to  cover  ten  different 
levels  (from  kindergarten  through  to 
Grade  8)  and  teach  all  subjects, 
Including  physical  education.  For  two 
consecutive  school  years  (1990-91 
and  1991-92),  we  were  able  to  offer 
full-time  kindergarten  to  five-year 
olds,  which  makes  a  huge  difference 
In  the  case  of  a  FrendHan^age 
school  located  in  an  anglophone  area. 
By  attending  school  full^me,  children 
•nrlch  their  vocabulary  and  can  better 
prepare  themselves  for  Grade  1. 
Since  then,  we  haven't  been  able  to 
repeat  tt>e  experience  because  we 
don't  have  ttie  'magic  number'  which 
requires  us  to  have  at  least  eight 
children  ciged  five." 

L ^-.i.;.  ^^■^^^:.^f^.  lgnac« 


complex  problems.  (It  is  noteworthy  that  young  Qucbcckcrs 
from  the  same  age  group  achieved  the  highest  scores  in 
Canada  in  both  respects).  In  1992,  the  same  trend  was 
observed  internationally  in  both  science  and  mathematics 
tests  (IAEP-2)  administered  to  nine-  and  thirtccn-ycar-old 
students:  in  sciences,  thirteen-year-old  Franco-Ontarians 
ranked  20  percent  lower  than  Anglo-Ontarians,  and  in  math, 
the  nine-year-olds  were  at  the  very  bottom  of  the  interna- 
tional scale. 

Francophone  teenagers,  when  compared  with  anglo- 
phones,  appear  to  have  difficulty  getting  over  the  hurdle  of 
Grade  1 1,  but  of  those  who  do  stay  in  school,  the  same 
percentage  of  francophones  earn  the  Ontario  Secondary 
School  Diploma  (OSSD)  at  the  end  of  Grade  12  as  anglo- 
phones.  However,  of  those  francophones  that  do  complete 
Grade  1 2  or  OAC,  proportionately  fewer  of  them,  by  at  least 
half,  go  on  to  community  college  or  university."  According 
to  researcher*  at  the  Centre  de  Recherches  en  Education  du 
Nouvel-Ontario  (CRENO).  their  participation  at  the 
secondary  and  post -secondary  levels  is  linked  to  the  avail- 
ability of  French-language  programs. 

Average  individual  earnings  are  5  percent  lower  for 
Onlario'i  francophones  than  for  anglophones."  With  a  few 


rare  exceptions,  the  Franco-Ontarian  community  is  notice- 
ably absent  in  Ontario's  political  or  economic  power  struc- 
tures, and  under- represented  at  the  management  level  of  the 
Ontario  public  service.  "  However,  as  with  the  educational 
statistics,  economic  indicators  reveal  that  young  Franco- 
Ontarians  compare  favourably  to  young  anglophones. 
Tomorrow's  generation  appears  to  have  a  promising  future, 
and  this  is  undoubtedly  linked  to  education. 

New  Canadians  who  speak  French  are  also  making  an 
enriching  contribution  to  the  traditional  Franco-Ontarian 
community.  The  ethno-cultural  francophone  community,  a 
third  of  whom  were  born  abroad,  numbered  81,375  in  the 
1991  census,  and  all  were  of  an  ethnic  origin  other  than 
French  or  British.  At  least  10,000  of  them  have  settled  in  the 
province's  northeastern  region,  with  some  30,000  living  in 
eastern  Ontario,  and  their  greatest  recorded  concentration  is 
in  the  Metro  Toronto  area. 

Were  Ontario  not  the  most  heavily  populated  anglophone 
province  in  (Canada,  French  schools  would  constitute  a 
major  component  of  its  school  system.  "It  is  equal  in  size  to 
half  or  more  of  the  provincial  education  system  of  four 
provinces  (Alberta,  Nova  Scotia,  New  Brunswick  and 
Saskatchewan)  and  is  larger  than  that  of  Prince  Edward 
island."    Within  the  Ontario  French-language  education 
system,  students  currently  attending  the  398  Francophone 
schools  and  the  37  mixed  schools  number  100,000. 

The  collective  voice  of  Franco-Ontarian  youth  was  heard 
throughout  our  public  meetings  thanks  to  their  provincial 
association,  the  F<?d^ralion  des  ^l^ves  du  secondaire  franco- 
ontariennc  (FESFO),  which  represents  some  25,000  students 
from  the  province's  71  French  or  mixed  high  schools  and 
had  undertaken  to  conduct  a  survey  with  some  8,650 
students  across  Ontario.  The  Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontaricns  (AFFO),  the  Franco- 
Ontarian  leachers'  Association,  and  its  local  chapters,  which 
represent  7,000  teaching  professionals  in  Ontario,  also 
submitted  briefs. 

The  way  that  the  francophone  student  population  is 
divided  into  French-language  instructional  units  differs  from 
the  division  of  the  anglophone  student  population,  with 
proportionally  more  francophone  children  in  elementary 
schools  (72  percent  as  opposed  to  65  percent  in  anglophone 
elementary  schools),  but  a  number  of  factors  could  account 
for  this  situation. 


for  0W  LoM  of  LMfMng 


Their  constitutional  rights 

It  is  by  way  of  denominational  and  not  linguistic  distinctions 
that  the  Fathers  of  Confederation  decided  in  1867  to  protect 
Canada's  minorities  through  constitutional  rights,  thus 
imposing  on  the  provinces  the  obligation  to  provide  educa- 
tion for  Protestants  and  education  for  Catholics.  The  consti- 
tutional and  linguistic  rights  of  the  francophone  minority 
outside  Quebec  and  of  the  anglophone  minority  in  Quebec 
are  still  relatively  recent.  They  are  also  very  clear.  These 
rights  are  firmly  entrenched  in  section  23  of  the  Canadian 
Charter  of  Rights  and  Freedoms,  which  reads  as  follows: 

Language  of  instruction 

23(1)  Citizens  of  Canada: 

(a)  whose  first  language  learned  and  still  understood  is  that  of  the 
English  or  French  linguistic  minority  population  of  the  province  in 
which  they  reside,  or 

(b)  who  have  received  their  primary  school  instruction  in  Canada  in 
English  or  French  and  reside  in  a  province  where  the  language  in 
which  they  received  that  instruction  is  the  language  of  the  English 
or  French  linguistic  minority  population  of  the  province, 

have  the  right  to  have  their  children  receive  primary  and  secondary 
school  instruction  in  that  language  in  that  province. 

23(2)  Citizens  of  Canada  of  whom  any  child  has  received  or  is 
receiving  primary  or  secondary  school  instruction  in  English  or 
French  in  Canada,  have  the  right  to  have  all  their  children  receive 
primary  and  secondary  school  instruction  in  the  same  language. 

According  to  this  definition  and  based  on  the  1991 
census,  the  Federation  des  associations  de  parents  franco- 
phones de  rOntario,  a  provincial  federation  of  francophone 
parent  associations,  estimates  that  163,695  Ontario  children 
between  the  ages  of  5  and  17,  compared  with  the  100,000 
registered  for  French  classes,  are  the  children  of  "righthold- 
ers,"  and  thus  constitutionally  entitled  to  receive  an  educa- 
tion in  French,  under  section  23  of  the  Charter.'" 

In  subsection  23(3),  which  can  be  found  in  the  endnotes 
of  this  text,"  the  Charter  limits  these  rights  by  the  principle 
of  "where  numbers  warrant."  In  Ontario,  the  provincial 
government  eliminated  this  clause  from  its  legislation. 
Under  the  Education  Act  (1990),  which  deals  with  French- 
language  instruction  in  sections  288-308,  the  education 


rights  of  Franco-Ontarians  go  further  than  elsewhere.  These 
rights  read  as  follows: 

288  The  following  definitions  apply  to  this  section  ... 

"French-speaking  person"  means  a  child  of  a  person  who  has  the 
right,  under  subsections  23(1)  or  (2),  without  regard  to  subsection 
23(3),  of  the  Canadian  Charter  of  Rights  and  Freedoms,  to  have  him 
or  her  receive  their  primary  and  secondary  school  instruction  in  the 
French  language  in  Ontario;  ("francophone") 

"French-language  instructional  unit"  means  a  class,  group  of  classes 
or  school  in  which  French  is  the  language  of  instruction,  but  does 
not  include  a  class,  group  of  classes  or  school  created  under  clause  8 
(1)  (y)  (French-language  instruction  for  English-speaking  pupils); 

289(  1 )  Every  French-speaking  person  who  is  qualified  under  this  Act 
to  be  a  resident  pupil  of  a  board  has  the  right  to  receive  elementary 
school  instruction  in  a  French-language  instructional  unit  operated 
or  provided  by  the  board. 

Subsection  291(1)  extends  the  same  right  to  secondary 
education. 

On  the  other  hand,  access  to  education  in  French  for 
ethno-cultural  francophones  is  not  entrenched  in  constitu- 
tional documents,  as  the  Charter  provisions  are  based  on  the 
citizenship  of  the  parents,  and  then  on  whether  they  fall  into 
one  of  the  three  categories  described  in  section  23.  Conse- 
quently, this  right  is  not  automatically  conferred.  A  number 
of  immigrants  or  refugees  who  settle  in  Ontario  know 
French,  either  as  a  mother  tongue  or  as  a  second  language, 
and  want  their  children  to  maintain  this  tradition.  In  this 
case,  subject  to  parental  choice  and  local  availability,  the 
Education  Act  (1990)  applies,  providing  a  procedure  where- 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


a  §k  though  the  Supreme  Court  of 
r^Canada  (Mahe  case)  has  ruled 
that  francophone  minorities  outside 
Quebec  have  the  right  to  manage 
education,  and  notwithstanding  the 
publication  of  the  Cousineau  Report, 
tt>e  Ontario  government  does  not 
always  respect  this  right  in  most 
rations  of  Ontario." 


by  parents  submit  a  request  to  the  French-language  admis- 
sion committee  o!  the  appropriate  school  board.  Made  up  of 
a  school  superintendent,  principal,  and  teacher,  this  body 
decides  whether  to  grant  admission  in  accordance  with  the 
board's  own  set  of  estabhshed  criteria,  which  may  include 
the  newcomer's  knowledge  of  French  or  the  parents'  attitude 
with  respect  to  the  mandate  of  Franco-Ontarian  education. 
Not  surprisingly,  ethno-cultural  francophones  feel  insecure 
and  often  frustrated  by  their  status  in  the  Franco-Ontarian 
school  system.  "We  arc  not  tenants!"  they  stated  during  our 
video- forum.  *  The  lack  of  information  about  the  rules  of 
the  game  and  the  apparently  arbitrary  nature  of  decisions 
pertaining  to  the  admission  of  their  children  could,  in  our 
view,  easily  be  remedied. 

Recommendation  119 

*We  recommend,  with  reference  to  the  admission  of  non- 

nghtholders  to  French-language  schools,  that: 

a)  the  Minister  of  Education  and  Training  give  the  CEFFO  a 
mandate  in  consultation  with  school  tioards.  to  propose 
ar)d  ensure  the  adoption  of  uniform  critena  for  the  admis- 
sion of  'norhrightholders '  or  their  children; 

b)  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  require  school 
boards  to  assume  responsibility  for  making  information 
about  these  cntena  available  to  the  relevant  communities, 
particularly  ethno<ultural  communities: 

c)  the  composition  of  committees  to  admit  non-righthold 
ers  or  their  children  irKlude  one  or  more  Franco-Ontanan 
parents  arnS  one  or  more  parents  from  ethnocultural 
communities. 


Briefs  submitted  to  our  Commission  provided,  for  our 
benefit,  lengthy  analyses  of  the  limits  and  delays  in  imple- 
menting the  Charter  over  the  course  of  more  than  a  decade. 
Ihe  following  excerpt  from  a  Sudbury  presentation  summa- 
rizes succinctly  the  current  situation: 

Most  francophone  minorily  groups  outside  Quebec  have  had  lo 
resort  lo  the  courts  to  force  their  provincial  governments  to  comply 
with  the  spirit  and  the  letter  of  section  23  of  the  Canadian  Charter 
of  Rights  and  Freedoms,  which  guarantees  their  right  to  manage 
their  schools.  The  Acadians  of  New  Brunswick  and  Quebec's  anglo- 
phone minority  were  the  only  exceptions  to  this  rule.  Although  the 
Charter  has  existed  for  more  than  a  decade.  Ontario  is  only  |usl 
beginning  lo  timidly  address  the  problem  of  autonomous  Krench- 
language  school  boards  and  of  communiry  colleges.' 

It  is  therefore  understandable  that  in  their  briefs  to  the 
Commission,  francophones  often  felt  compelled  to  refer  in 
great  detail  to  historic  judgments  confirming  the  educational 
rights  of  the  French-language  minorities  outside  Qut^bec. 
They  referred  especially  to  the  Supreme  Court's  two  unani- 
mous decisions,  in  the  case  of  Mah^  (Alberta)  in  April  1990 
and  in  the  case  of  Franco-Manitohan  parents  v.  the  Public 
Schools  Act  in  March  1993,  in  which  the  Supreme  Court 
explicitly  upheld  their  educational  rights  as  set  out  in  section 
23  of  the  Charter. 

The  recognition  of  constitutional  rights 

What  exactly  is  the  problem  in  Ontario  today?   The  Report  of 
the  French -language  Education  Ciovcrnancc  Advisory  Group, 
also  known  as  the  Cousineau  report,  and  often  referred  to  in 
presentations  to  the  Commission,  details  Franco-Ontarians' 
constitutional  educational  rights  as  follows: 

These  rights  ...  include: 

a)  The  right  to  a  quality  education  in  the  French  language  equiva- 
lent to  that  provided  in  the  English  language: 

b)  The  right  to  educational  facilities; 

c)  The  right  to  public  funds  to  supftort  French -language  education 
programs,  services  and  facilities: 

d)  The  right  to  manage  and  control  such  programs,  tervicct  and 
facilities.' 

NNTiile  representatives  of  the  Franco-Ontarian  and  ethno 
cultural  franiDphonc  lommunilics  also  addressed  the  first 


For  Vm  Lo««  of  Lcamtng 


three  rights  in  their  presentations,  the  fourth  one,  i.e., 
"governance  by  and  for  francophones,"  was  unequivocally 
the  subject  of  pressing  recommendations  throughout  the 
province.  Indeed,  it  was  identified  as  the  most  crucial  step  in 
the  recognition  of  the  education  right  of  the  francophone 
minority. 

In  Ontario,  school  boards  currently  number  about  170, 
70  of  which  share  the  responsibility  for  the  existing  435 
"French-language  instructional  units"  (FLIU),  a  term  used 
by  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  to  describe  the 
province's  French-language  schools  or  classes,  both  small 
and  large  units.  Four  of  these  school  boards  are  designated  as 
French-language  boards;  they  are  located  in  Toronto  (1), 
Ottawa-Carleton  (2)  and  Prescott-Russell  (1)  and  they  are 
responsible  for  110  French-language  instructional  units 
(made  up  of  both  classes  and  schools).  One  of  the  Ottawa- 
Carleton  boards  and  the  one  in  Prescott-Russell  are  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  school  boards.  The  Prescott-Russell  board 
was  created  in  1992,  the  other  three  in  1989.  Their  creation 
was  made  possible  through  the  adoption  of  Bill  75  ( 1986), 
which  amended  the  Education  Act  to  affirm  Franco- 
Ontarians'  right  to  govern  their  own  schools,  and  to  Bill 
109  (1988),  the  Ottawa-Carleton  French-Language  School 
Board  Act. 

Out  of  the  other  66  boards  responsible  for  French- 
language  instructional  units,  10  are  practically  French- 
language  school  boards,  and  are  responsible  for  155  such 
units.  (One  of  these  boards  has  neither  an  English-language 
school  nor  an  English-language  trustee.)  Among  these  we 
find  four  small  isolated  school  boards  that  manage  one 
French-language  school  each,  and,  although  they  are  not 
designated  as  such,  these  boards  are  for  all  practical  pur- 
poses French-language  boards.  Three  other  small  and  isolat- 
ed boards  have  mixed  schools.  However,  163  French- 
language  instructional  units  are  still  being  managed  by  49 
English  language  boards  that  include  a  francophone  section 
made  up  of  three  trustees  who  sit  on  an  18-  to  22-member 
board. 

In  addition  to  the  70  school  boards  operating  FLIUs,  nine 
other  English-language  school  boards  have  no  French- 
language  instructional  units,  but  they  purchase  French- 
language  education  from  other  boards.  This  formula  applies 
in  areas  with  fewer  than  300  French-language  students.  It  is 
up  to  these  small  francophone  advisory  committees  working 
in  entirely  English-language  boards  to  look  after  the  French- 


AA  ■  n  southern  Ontario,  there  are  still 
I  seven  French-Language  Advisory 
Committees  in  existence  that  are 
allowed  to  intervene  solely  in  an 
advisory  capacity  in  public  education 
matters  pertaining  to  francophone 
children  and  that  have  no  real 
political  clout." 

Excerpt  of  the  brief  submitted  by  Metro  Toronto's 
French-language  Public  School  Board: 
le  Conseli  des  ecoles  frangaises  de  la  communaute 
urbaine  de  Toronto  (CEFCUT) 


language  education  needs  of  these  communities.  These 
committees,  called  FLACs  (French-Language  Advisory 
Committees),  were  heavily  criticized  before  the  Commission 
and  were  accused  of  being  tools  of  assimilation."  These 
"administrative  variations  on  the  same  theme"  make  it  more 
difficult  to  deal  with  the  reality  of  the  governance  and 
management  of  French-language  education  with  its  hybrid 
and  multiple  forms. 

The  needs  of  francophone  students  and  teachers  could 
conceivably  be  understood  by  the  anglophone  administrative 
and  political  powers  to  the  extent  that  these  needs  are 
perfectly  identical  to  those  of  anglophone  students  and 
teachers.  However,  it  would  be  naive  or  insensitive  to  believe 
that  a  majority  could  possibly  be  capable  of  putting  itself  in 
the  minority's  shoes  to  really  understand  from  within  the 
specific  issues  and  challenges  related  to  being  a  minority,  to 
find  ways  of  solving  them,  and  to  place  the  minority's  inter- 
ests ahead  of  its  own.  The  probability  of  achieving  such  an 
ideal  state  of  true  understanding  is  further  weakened  by  the 
complexity  of  issues  such  as  the  challenges  born  out  of  "the 
dilemma  of  bilingualism  and  socio-cultural  identity,"^"  the 
need  to  revitalize  the  spoken  and  written  language,  cultural 
isolation,  inter-community  marriages,  and  the  absence  of  a 
critical  mass  of  francophones. 

Furthermore,  the  majority  group  is  not  likely  to  analyze 
its  own  rules  and  procedures  in  order  to  find  out  how  often 
they  are  structurally  biased  against  the  minority,  whose 
interests  are  either  arbitrarily  swept  aside  or  relegated  to  the 
lowest  priority,  either  because  of  its  small  numbers  or  for 
some  other  "valid"  reason.  It  is  not  surprising  therefore  that 
Franco-Ontarians  insisted  so  strongly,  in  all  their  presenta- 
tions to  the  Commission,  on  governance  "by  and  for  fran- 


Vol.  iV    Making  it  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


^£  f  quftable  taxation  and  educational 
^Hfunding  are  closely  linked  to  the 
issue  of  ttfe  m^vagement  of  a 
comprehensive  education  system 
for  tt>e  Franco-Ontarian  communKy. 
Without  tax  fairness,  the  Franco- 
Ontarian  minority's  exercise  of  its 
constitutional  right  to  manage 
education  liecomes  illusory." 


cophoncs,"  defining  it  as  "their  full  right  to  make  all 
decisions  relating  to  education  without  being  subject  to  rati- 
fication by  the  anglophone  majority."-' 

The  Commission  also  made  passing  note  of  the  observa- 
tions shared  by  the  provincial  auditor  of  Ontario  in  his  19V3 
annual  report  concerning  the  shortcomings  of  French- 
language  education  and  of  the  criticism  aimed  at  the 
Ministry.  The  following  is  an  excerpt: 

Ministry  revicwi  tuggest  that  the  quality  of  French-language  educa- 
tion in  Ontario  may  on  average  not  be  equivalent  to  that  provided 
to  English  schools.  The  main  difficulty  is  in  trying  to  provide  quality 
curriculum,  teacheri  and  facihties  to  a  small,  widely  dispersed  popu- 
lation in  a  costefTeclive  manner.  One  impediment  is  that  the  distri- 
bution of  students  entitled  to  receive  French-language  education 
«lo«s  not  frequently  coincide  with  the  boundaries  of  the  Ministry's 
regional  offices  and  the  school  boards." 

On  this  point,  the  provincial  auditor  concludes  by  under- 
Koring  the  necessity  for  the  Ministry  of  Education  and 
Training  to  redefine  the  boundaries  of  its  regional  offices  to 
meet  Ontario's  French-language  education  needs.  In  addi- 
tion, he  sharply  criticizes  the  Ministry  for  the  inadequate 
production  of  French-language  learning  materials,  especially 
for  the  specialization  years. 

Francophone  presenters  were  quite  clear  in  noting  that  if 
on  the  one  hand  school  governance  is  indeed  a  constitution- 
al right,  governance  is  not  an  end  in  itself.  "Governance  is  a 
means  of  attaining  a  goal,  that  of  providing  a  community 
with  a  system  that  favours  empiowerment  and  allows  it  to 
thrive.""  Consequently,  presentations  and  briefs  viught  not 
only  to  reaffirm  the  fundamental  principle  of  governance 


"by  and  for  francophones,"  but  also  to  underscore  the  fact 
that  a  number  of  governance  models  arc  worthy  of  consider- 
ation, without  necessarily  offering  the  symmetry  usually 
favoured  by  the  bureaucracy. 

With  respect  to  governance  models,  the  broad  consulta- 
tion on  governance  of  French-language  education  carried 
out  in  1991  by  the  French-language  Education  Governance 
Advisory  Group  cannot  be  ignored.  Our  Commission  noted 
the  general  support  expressed  by  the  spokesperson  of  the 
francophone  community  during  our  public  hearings,  for  the 
basic  principles  contained  in  its  report  (the  Cousineau 
report)  and  their  impatience  in  the  face  of  government  inac- 
tion. (The  Cousineau  report  has  yet  to  be  implemented,  and 
more  than  three  years  later,  the  government  is  said  to  be 
waiting  for  this  Commission's  findings  before  taking  further 
action.) 

The  Cousineau  report  presented  57  recommendations 
relating  to  governance,  supporting  both  the  creation  of  new 
management  structures  and  their  implementation,  as  well  as 
the  establishment  of  conflict-resolution  mechanisms.  After 
stating  that  it  was  up  to  local  communities  to  determine  the 
fate  of  existing  French-language  sections,  the  report  then 
went  on  to  suggest  the  establishment  of  school  boards  at 
local,  district,  or  regional  levels,  based  on  electoral  represen- 
tation in  geographic  areas  defined  differently  from  the 
current  ones.  More  specifically,  the  report  proposes  the 
following  as  models  for  school  governance: 

a)  the  possibility  of  establishing  up  to  two  regional  French- 
language  school  hoards,  one  Roman  ("atholic  separate  and  the 
other  public,  in  each  of  the  six  administrative  regions  of  the 
Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  with  appropriate  fund- 
ing and  complete  authority; 

b)  the  possibility  of  creating,  within  each  of  the  Ministry 
regions,  French -language  area  school  boards  each  having, 
among  other  criteria,  a  resident  day  school  population  of 
1,300  or  more,  all  of  the  geographic  area  served  by  the 
participating  school  boards,  and  the  capacity  to  offer 
French-language  education  from  kindergarten  through  to 
the  end  of  secondary  school; 

c)  the  possibility  of  creating,  within  the  Ministry  regions, 
local  French-language  school  hoards  each  having,  among 
other  criteria,  a  resident  day  school  population  of  l,f>00  or 
more  (subject  to  some  adjustment  in  sparsely  populated 


For  titt  IJMW  o(  l^armng 


i£ 


B 


areas  or  other  special  circumstances),  the  same  geographical 
boundaries  as  the  existing  school  board  from  which  it  origi- 
nates, and  the  capacity  to  offer  French-language  education 
from  kindergarten  through  to  the  end  of  secondary  school. 

The  report  also  recommends  that  French-language  school 
trustees  must  submit,  for  Ministry  approval,  a  detailed  plan 
including  an  analysis  of  the  impact  of  the  proposed  changes 
on  their  English-language  counterparts. 

It  is  true  that  reverse  situations,  i.e.,  English  school 
boards  that  are  too  small,  could  result  from  the  recommen- 
dations of  the  Cousineau  report,  or  from  any  other  chosen 
model  of  French-language  governance.  The  government  will 
therefore  have  to  ensure  that  the  governance  model  chosen 
by  a  given  community  does  not  result  in  a  critical  deteriora- 
tion of  the  local  English-language  board  (or  of  the  future 
district  or  regional  French-language  school  board)  that  such 
a  community  might  be  part  of.  Administrative  creativity  and 
flexibility  will  be  required.  For  English  boards  in  this  situa- 
tion, consideration  may  have  to  be  given  to  grouping  or 
consolidating,  while  respecting  the  interests  of  the  local 
communities,  even  if  this  should  lead  to  the  implementation 
of  different  structures  that  do  not  yet  exist  in  the  Ontario 
education  system,  or  to  a  particular  asymmetrical  situation 
similar  to  what  would  apply  to  French-language  education. 

We  also  recognize  that  at  first  glance  some  may  fear  the 
proliferation  of  French-language  school  boards  of  various 
natures,  which  would  not  lead  to  desirable  economies  of 
scale.  However,  this  fear  is  dispelled  by  a  more  in-depth 
analysis  because  present-day  economic  pressures  are  already 
pushing  school  boards  (and  all  other  funded  institutions  like 
hospitals,  universities,  municipalities)  to  develop  consortia 
and  other  co-operative  management  ventures.'^ 

A  number  of  francophone  groups,  both  formally  and 
informally,  have  since  developed  their  own  innovative  school 
governance  models.  For  instance,  Ontario's  two  French - 
language  School  Board  Associations  (AFCSO  -  public 
boards  -  and  AFOCEC  -  Catholic  boards)  together  reviewed 
the  governance  issue  and  developed  a  number  of  governance 
models,  all  of  which  are  on  record.  A  group  of  francophone 
directors  of  education  have  drafted  a  document  that 
describes  such  a  model.'' 

The  stakes  are  very  high  and  the  problem  can  no  longer 
be  put  off;  that  can  never  be  emphasized  enough.  The 


ecause  of  the  minority  status 
of  Ontario's  francophone 
community,  the  levels  of  proficiency 
in  French  are  very  disparate.  One 
essential  way  for  francophone 
students  to  achieve  excellence  is 
through  recovery,  actualization  and 
perfection  of  the  language,  at  all 
levels,  as  well  as  through  cultural 
activities  and  leadership  training." 

Federation  des  associations  de 
parents  francophones  de  I'Ontario 


solutions  do  exist  and  models  have  been  designed.  There  is 
therefore  no  need  to  reinvent  the  wheel;  the  time  has  come 
for  action.  As  our  Commission  had  neither  the  mandate  nor 
the  resources  to  tackle  this  challenge,  the  responsibility  lies 
with  the  government  and  compels  it  to  ensure  that  the 
proposed/chosen  model  respects  the  rights  of  Franco- 
Ontarians  and  meets  their  expectations. 

We  have  discussed  Franco-Ontarians'  constitutional 
rights  and  the  existing  disparity  between  these  rights  and 
today's  educational  reality.  We  could  build  a  case  on  the 
issue  of  equity,  as  this  is  also  a  matter  of  basic  equity.  In  light 
of  this,  and  conscious  of  both  the  relative  size  of  the  fran- 
cophone population  and  its  geographic  dispersement  except 
in  two  regions,  we  put  forth  the  following  recommenda- 
tions, whose  synergy  and  impetus  are  essential  to  assure  the 
continued  vigor  of  the  Franco-Ontarian  community. 

Recommendation  120 

*We  recommend  that  the  Ontario  Ministry  of  Education  and 
Training  give  the  Conseil  de  ('education  et  de  la  formation 
franco-ontariennes  (CEFFO)  the  mandate  to  recommend  to 
the  Ministry,  as  soon  as  possible  and  on  the  basis  of  exist- 
ing documents,  school  governance  model(s)  by  and  for 
francophones,  encompassing  education  from  preschool  to 
the  end  of  secondary  school  without,  however,  seeking  to 
define  structures  that  are  administratively  symmetrical  to 
those  of  the  English-language  system;  and  that  the  govern- 
ment, through  the  Ontario  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training, 
approve  and  diligently  implement  the  recommendations 
submitted  by  the  CEFFO  with  respect  to  school  governance 
by  and  for  francophones. 


Vol.  IV     Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  issues 


££  ^phe  absence  of  an  animateur 

I  cutturel  (a  cultural  animator)  in  all 
Franco-Ontarian  high  schools  deprives 
students  of  one  of  their  fundamental 
rights  -  the  right  to  experience  ttieir 
culture  to  ttie  fullest.  Of  course  we  all 
have  the  right  to  live  whatever  experi- 
ences we  choose,  but  without  tt>e 
proper  environment  and  stimulus,  this 
becomes  impossibto." 


(      -fC 


^^ 


Needless  to  say,  having  full  governance  without  the 
appropriate  resources  currently  being  provided  to  the  major- 
ity only  represents  yet  another  frustration,  or  one  more 
injustice.  The  Ontario  education  funding  system  is  not  equi- 
table, and  as  a  result,  Franco-Ontarians  generally  suffer  in  a 
number  of  ways  -  as  francophones,  as  Catholics,  as  residents 
of  remote  and  isolated  regions  where  their  numbers  are 
proportionately  higher,  and  as  residents  of  communities 
with  limited  property  tax  revenue.  The  stakes  are  quite  high 
for  the  Franco-Ontarian  community,  and  this  subject  is  dealt 
with  in  more  depth  in  Chapter  18. 

The  future  of  a  community 

Beyond  the  family  structure,  school  is  an  ideal  milieu  for  the 
transmission  of  language  and  culture.  Of  course  there  are 
other  agents  that  play  a  greater  or  lesser  role,  not  the  least  of 
which  are  television,  radio,  and  popular  culture.  Without  a 
linguistic  and  cultural  identity,  a  people  in  a  minority  situa- 
tion languishes  and  slowly  dies,  swallowed  up  by  the  domi- 
nant culture.  Earlier  in  this  chapter,  we  underscored  the  high 
assimilation  rate  of  the  Franco-Ontarian  community.  In 
concrete  terms,  this  means  that  francophone  students  often 
find  themselves  speaking  English  among  themselves,  in  the 
hallways  and  at  recess,  because  of  the  overwhelming  appeal 
of  the  North-American  anglophone  youth  sub-tulturc  and 
Its  products.  Even  more  troubling:  many  students  in 
Ontario's  French -language  schools  are  unable  to  speak  a 
tvord  of  French.  As  we  have  noted,  some  rightholders  may 
not  use  the  language  at  home. 

We  share  the  point  of  view  of  some  researchers  "that  the 
assimilation  of  young  people  depends  heavily  on  level  of 


concentration  of  the  francophone  population."'*  Without 
significant  geographic  concentrations  or,  better  yet,  the 
.iddcd  protection  of  a  Franco-Ontarian  critical  mass,  it  is  the 
sthools  that  bcct)mc  the  preferred  rallying  points  ior  the 
communities.  In  their  briefs,  francophones  constantly 
referred  to  the  Franco-Ontarian  school  as  having  both  a 
pedagogical  mission  and  a  community  mission. 

When  francophones  spoke  to  us  of  the  necessity  and  the 
urgency  for  ariirnalion  culliirfllc  in  schools,  we  were  at  first 
somewhat  perplexed  and  not  quite  sure  what  it  was  all 
about,  because  this  was  obviously  not  an  educational 
component  of  conventional  schools.  This  concept,  which 
was  new  to  us,  seemed  akin  to  another  often-cited  and 
almost  as  mysterious  a  concept  called  projei  ^ducatif.  At  the 
conclusion  of  our  public  meetings,  the  concept  became  clear. 
(Both  concepts  became  clear!)  In  discussing  the  matter  and 
further  reflecting  on  it,  we  came  to  agree  with  the  recent 
findings  of  a  commission  on  young  French-Canadians.  In  its 
report,  this  commission  concluded  that  "we  must  create 
environments  where  life  in  French  is  possible."' 

Contrary  to  what  is  often  believed,  the  Commission  bchevcs  that 
assimilation  is  not  primarily  a  linguistic  issue.  Rather,  it  is  a  ques- 
tion of  culture.  Those  who  wish  to  maintain  a  language  must  also 
support  the  culture  that  makes  it  useful. 

Therefore,  it  seems  to  us  that  Ontario's  French-language 
schools  must  be  able  to  play  a  pivotal  role  in  "life  in  French" 
for  young  francophones  from  prc-school  to  the  end  of 
secondary  school,  as  recognized  in  the  preamble  of  the 
French -Language  Services  Act  (1986):  "  ...  the  Ixgi.slative 
Assembly  recognizes  the  contribution  of  the  cultural 
heritage  of  the  French  speaking  population  and  wishes  to 
preserve  it  for  future  generations ..." 

The  ties  between  language  and  culture  have  also  been 
defined  in  the  Supreme  Court  decision  in  the  Mah^  case. 
Chief  justice  Brian  Dickson  describes  it  this  way: 

My  reference  to  cultures  is  significant:  it  is  based  on  the  fact  that  any 
broad  guarantee  of  language  rights,  especially  in  the  context  of 
education,  cannot  be  separated  from  a  concern  for  the  culture  asso- 
ciated with  the  language  language  is  more  that  a  mere  meant  of 
communication,  it  it  part  and  panel  nf  the  identity  and  culture  nf 
the  people  speaking  it.  It  is  the  means  by  which  individualt  under 
ttand  ihemtelvet  and  the  world  around  them." 


tar  0w  LoM  or  LMmmi 


A£ 


w; 


He  also  quotes  from  another  decision: 

Language  is  not  merely  a  means  or  medium  of  expression;  it  colours 
the  content  and  meaning  of  expression.  It  is,  as  the  preamble  of  the 
Charter  of  the  French  Language  itself  indicates,  a  means  by  which  a 
people  may  express  its  cultural  identity.'' 

With  regard  to  schools  he  states, 

...  it  is  worth  noting  that  minority  schools  themselves  provide 
community  centres  where  the  promotion  and  preservation  of 
minority  language  culture  can  occur;  they  provide  needed  locations 
where  the  minority  community  can  meet  and  facilities  which  they 
can  use  to  express  their  culture." 

These  texts  could  not  have  better  expressed  what  Franco- 
Ontarians  advocate  in  terms  of  French-language  education. 

Like  so  many  others,  including  the  writers  of  the 
Cousineau  report,  the  Association  franc^aise  des  conseils 
scolaires  de  I'Ontario  (AFCSO),  a  provincial  association  of 
French-language  school  boards,  also  embraced  the  following 
definition  of  culture,  adopted  by  UNESCO  in  1982.  It  is  a 
definition  we  also  adopt: 

In  its  largest  sense,  one  can  say  that  culture  is  the  whole  of  spiritual, 
material,  intellectual  and  emotional  characteristics  that  makes  any 
society  or  social  group  distinct.  These  include  not  only  the  arts,  but 
also  ways  of  living,  fundamental  rights  of  the  human  being,  value 
systems,  traditions  and  beliefs." 

We  underscore  here  the  work  of  the  Centre  franco- 
ontarien  de  ressources  pedagogiques,  the  living  embodiment 
of  the  relationships  between  language  and  culture  within  the 
education  world. 

To  return  to  the  concept  of  animation  culturelle  advocat- 
ed in  so  many  briefs,  we  were  pleased  to  learn  of  the  Guide 
d' intervention  auxpaliers  elementaires  et  secondaires:  Investir 
dans  I'animation  culturelle  (1994),  a  guide  for  the  implemen- 
tation of  cultural  "animation"  at  the  elementary  and 
secondary  levels.  Published  by  the  Ministry  of  Education 
and  Training,  this  document  is  currently  being  reviewed  in 
the  Franco-Ontarian  schools.  It  seems  clear  to  us  that  while 
this  concept  may  include  a  pedagogical  component,  its  roots 
are  nevertheless  embedded  in  the  community  and  conse- 
quently require  resources.  It  is  equally  clear  that  the  new 
partnerships  with  society  that  we  see  as  one  of  the  key 
strategies  in  reforming  the  Ontario  education  system  (see 


e  ...  firmly  believe  in  the 
importance  of  'animation 
culturelle'  in  our  school ...  Franco- 
phones in  Ontario  are  an  endangered 
species,  owing  to  assimilation. 
'Animation  culturelle'  enables  us  to 
experience  our  culture  and  express 
ourselves  in  French.  'Animation 
culturelle'  can  therefore  promote  the 
French-speaking  community  among 
Ontario's  youth." 

The  students  of  Ecole  secondaire  Algonquin,  North  Bay 


i 


Chapter  14),  as  well  as  the  community  school  advocated  by 
leaders  of  the  Franco-Ontarian  community,  can  converge, 
depending  on  local  choices. 

Ontario's  French-language  schools  must  not  only  nour- 
ish, correct,  enrich,  and  transmit  the  language  but  also  its 
cultural  foundations.  They  must  do  this  within  a  delicate 
balance,  in  classes  that  include  natives  of  the  province  as  well 
as  ethno-cultural  francophone  immigrant  children,  who  also 
need  to  embrace  their  own  distinctive  identities  before 
embracing  the  culture  of  their  new  milieu. 

During  the  video-forum,  a  teacher  spoke  of  her  difficulty 
in  suddenly  finding  herself  in  a  minority  situation  on  her 
own  turf,  in  a  class  of  newcomers,  and  accepting  the  cultural 
differences.  Parents,  on  the  other  hand,  shared  their  anxiety 
about  the  culture  shock  and  the  two  sets  of  values  -  the 
family's,  and  the  schools'  -  which  often  send  contradictory 
messages  to  their  children.  In  only  one  year,  1989-90,  the 
percentage  of  the  Franco-Ontarian  students  in  the  popula- 
tion in  one  of  Ottawa's  large  French-language  high  schools 
dropped  from  80  to  30  percent. 

The  impatience  and  frustration  experienced  by  newly 
arrived  francophones  is  quite  certainly  legitimate,  but  the 
resistance  to  change  or  the  slow  pace  of  it  among  certain 
elements  of  the  Franco-Ontarian  community  are  also  under- 
standable in  the  provincial  educational  context.  As  a 
Commission,  we  do  not  have  any  qualms  about  the  future; 
the  briefs  from  key  groups  involved  in  French-language 
education  all  underscored  the  importance  of  opening  up  to 
ethno-cultural  francophone  communities.  We  endorse  the 
recent  policy  document  of  the  Ministry  of  Education  and 
Training,  Vers  une  nouvelle  optique  (1993),  (the  equivalent 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutiorjal  Issues 


AA^Phe  school  must  create  an  all- 
I  encompassing  cultural  enviroo- 
ment  that  enables  students  to 
immerse  themselves  in  and  identify 
with  their  own  culture.  Our  mission, 
then,  cannot  be  confined  to  ttie 
language.  It  must  also  extend  to  the 
cuKure  ttiat  characterizes  us  as  a 
people.  Her>ce  the  importance  of 
sludMits  f99ttng  accefited  and  good 
alMNit  themselves,  so  that  they  can 
experience  community  life  at  school. 
The  school  should  therefore  become  a 
community-based  educational  centre 
wttere  interaction  between  sciK>ol  and 
community  takes  place." 

tcokt  cooMTHinMrtatre  Hort^on-Jeunesse.  Cornwall 


document  for  English-language  schools  is  Changing  Perspec- 
tives, released  in  the  same  year),  and  most  especially  the 
Guide  pour  I'Haboration  d'une  politique  d'aminagement 
Unguisiuiue  pour  les  Scales  franco-ontariennes  ( 1994),  a  guide- 
line for  developing  language  policies  in  Ontario's  French- 
language  schools. 

The  other  danger  that  threatens  classes  in  French  schools, 
just  as  it  does  in  English  schools,  is  the  ghetfoization  by 
ethnic  origin  and  the  division  into  closed  groups  that  ignore 
or  are  opposed  to  one  another.  Franco-Ontarian  schools  are 
therefore  advancing  with  the  twin  challenge  of  having  to 
develop  both  their  own  future  and  an  educational  direction 
that  integrates  pluralism  and  heterogeneity. 

We  will  not  repeat  here  a  discussion  of  the  education 
problems  that  ethno-cultural  francophones  share  with  other 
newcomers  to  Ontario:  the  assessment  and  placement  of 
their  children,  parental  participation,  the  equity  of  services 
offered,  and  the  necessity  of  a  culturally  inclusive  curricu- 
lum and  resources.  Besides  these  problems,  the  Association 
interculturelle  franco-ontarienne  (AIFO),  a  Franco-Ontarian 
inlrrcullural  association,  also  points  out  in  its  brief  the 
improvements  required  in  the  recruitment,  training,  and 
professional  development  of  instructional  staff.  This  subject 
is  dear  to  us.  We  arc  sensitive  to  these  issues  and  address 
them  in  appropriate  sections  of  this  report. 


We  will  also  not  revisit  the  requests  for  education  equal 
in  quality  to  that  of  the  province's  anglophone  majority,  or 
other  general  issues  that  parallel  those  found  in  the  various 
briefs  submitted  to  us.  A  number  of  requests  made  by 
Franco-Ontarians  overlap,  for  various  reasons,  the  request  of 
other  presenters  throughout  the  province  -  for  example,  the 
importance  of  early  childhood  education,  or  of  a  real  part- 
nership between  the  school  community  and  social,  cultural, 
and  other  community  services. 

Based  on  the  collective  responsibility  of  Ontario  society 
toward  its  francophone  minority  community,  and  to  ensure 
that  its  rights  are  truly  protected  and  exercised  to  the  fullest, 
we  add  to  our  previous  recomnicndations  the  following 
three  points. 

Recommendations  121,  122 

•IVe  recommend  that  funding  by  the  Ministry  of  Education 
and  Training  automatically  include  among  its  calculation  of 
grants  and  weighting  factors,  for  all  French-language  instruc- 
tional units,  the  budgetary  supplements  required  to  allow 
these  units  to  offer,  according  to  the  needs  identified  by  the 
community: 

a)  accelerated  language  retrieval  programs  (designed  for 
recovery,  actualization  and  skill  and  development):  and 

b)  the  necessary  animation  culturelle  in  classes  and 
schools. 

*We  recommend  that  for  the  early  childhood  education 
programs  (children  age  3  to  5).  one  of  our  key  recommenda- 
tions in  Chapter  7,  the  provincial  government  give  priority 
funding  to  French-language  instructional  units  over  every 
other  school. 

This  section  devoted  to  the  issue  of  full  recognition  of 
Franco-Ontarians"  education  rights  has  sought  to  highlight 
two  fundamental  points  in  our  report:  without  governance 
for  and  by  francophones,  the  Franco-Ontarian  community  is 
held  back  in  its  development  and  growth.  It  is  further  disad- 
vantaged by  inequitable  access  to  funding  and  other 
resources.  We  also  want  to  re-emphasi/e  the  urgenc>'  of  exer- 
cising basic  justice  toward  a  minority  community  whose 
survival  is  essential  to  us  all. 


ft 


Fof  tht  LOM  of  LMmtng 


Aboriginal  peoples 

Currently,  the  federal  government  has  responsibility  for  the 
education  of  aboriginal  students  living  on  reserves.  However, 
a  significant  portion  of  the  delivery  of  this  education,  espe- 
cially at  the  secondary  level,  actually  takes  place  in  schools 
operated  by  provincial  school  boards,  through  purchase-of- 
service  agreements  between  Native  education  authorities, 
bands,  or  councils  of  bands  and  various  school  boards.  Even 
when  education  takes  place  on  the  reserve,  in  schools  oper- 
ated by  the  bands  themselves,  the  provincial  curriculum  is 
followed. 

When  aboriginal  people  move  off  the  reserves,  their 
education  comes  under  provincial  jurisdiction  through  the 
local  school  board;  therefore,  whether  aboriginal  people  live 
on  or  off  a  reserve,  they  have  a  considerable  stake  in  provin- 
cial education  policy. 

Our  recommendations  here  focus  on  aboriginal  issues  in 
relation  to  federal-provincial  co-operation,  programs, 
decision-making,  and  aboriginal  languages. 

Who  are  the  aboriginal  peoples  of  Ontario? 

Like  the  rest  of  Ontario's  population,  the  aboriginal  people 
in  this  province  are  not  a  single,  homogeneous  group;  there 
are  13  distinct  Native  languages  spoken  in  the  province, 
although  some  by  only  a  handful  of  people. 

The  total  number  of  aboriginal  people  in  Ontario, 
approximately  244,000  according  to  the  1991  census,  is 
approximately  2.4  percent  of  the  province's  population." 
About  88  percent  of  the  total  are  North  American  Indian;  9 
percent  are  Metis;  1  percent  are  Inuit;  and  2  percent  are  of 
other  multiple  origins. 

Ontario's  aboriginal  population  is  the  largest  of  any 
Canadian  province.  At  the  same  time,  it  should  be  noted  that 
the  proportion  of  children  and  youth  in  the  aboriginal 
population  is  higher  than  in  the  general  population  of 
Ontario  or  of  Canada;  this  has  important  implications  for 
the  future. 

According  to  the  Ministry's  1993  September  report  statis- 
tics, there  were  almost  3,000  Native  elementary  students  in 
the  province's  schools,  under  tuition  agreements  with  the 
Government  of  Canada  or  with  Native  education  authori- 
ties; 3,029  Native  students  receive  their  secondary  education 
under  similar  arrangements.  This  is  a  decline  of  almost  500 
students  since  1992  and  reflects  the  increase  in  the  number 
of  secondary  students  continuing  their  secondary  education 


in  the  21  private  secondary  schools  registered  with  the 
Ministry  and  controlled  by  Native  education  authorities. 
Almost  6,000  students  were  enrolled  in  programs  that 
teach  Native  languages  as  a  second  language,  either  in 
schools  under  provincial  jurisdiction  or  in  inspected  private 
(secondary)  schools.  Another  866  students  were  enrolled  in 
these  language  programs  in  continuing  education  provided 
by  schools  boards  -  more  than  twice  the  number  enrolled  in 
such  programs  the  previous  year. 

History  of  Native  education 

The  aboriginal  peoples  had  their  own  system  of  education 
long  before  the  first  European  arrived.  Aboriginal  education 
was  practical,  begun  almost  at  birth  and  continued  through- 
out life,  and  it  emphasized  the  transmitting  of  traditions  and 
values. 

From  the  time  Europeans  first  began  to  play  a  major  role 
in  education  here,  aboriginal  children  followed  European 
systems  and  concepts  of  education;  schooling  was  in  either 
French  or  English,  although  there  was  some  instruction  in 
Native  languages.  After  Confederation,  the  British  North 
America  Act,  1867  (now  the  Constitution  Act,  1867)  gave  the 
federal  government  jurisdiction  over  "Indians  and  lands 
reserved  for  Indians."  The  federal  government  initially 
carried  out  its  responsibility  for  aboriginal  education  mainly 
through  residential  schools. 

Residential  schools 

Most  of  these  schools  were  operated  by  the  churches,  with 
financial  support  from  the  government.  Schools  were  located 
in  or  near  reserves  with  sufficient  aboriginal  populations,  or 
in  central  locations  for  students  from  remote  and  small  First 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


total  segregation,  many  aboriginal  people  saw  it  as  another 

way  of  denying  the  worth  ot  their  people  and  their  cultures. 


Nations  communities.  As  a  matter  of  conscious  government 
policy,  these  residential  schools  were  completely  segregated 
from  regular  schools  and  from  the  aboriginal  communities, 
if  not  physically,  then  culturally  and  emotionally.  Some 
continued  to  operate  well  into  the  1960s. 

A  number  of  aboriginal  people  who  made  presentations 
to  the  Commission  spoke  of  painful  experiences  and  the 
influence  the  residential  schools  have  had  on  their  lives  and 
on  the  lives  of  their  parents.  They  talked  about  a  particularly 
far-reachmg  impact  of  the  residential  school  -  the  way  it 
destroyed  the  relationship  between  parents  and  children  and 
denied  aboriginal  culture  and  language. 

Inifgration 

In  about  1930,  the  federal  government,  responding  to  wide- 
spread criticism  from  aboriginal  people,  made  a  major  poli- 
cy shift  away  from  segregation  toward  a  policy  of  integration 
of  aboriginal  children  into  the  regular  provincial  school 
systems.  By  1970,  more  than  half  of  Canada's  aboriginal  chil- 
dren attended  provincial  and  territorial  schools,  and  by  1979 
that  had  risen  to  two-thirds. 

Even  as  that  was  happening,  however,  another  tendency 
emerged.  In  1969,  at  the  height  of  the  integration  initiative, 
the  federal  government  produced  a  White  Paper  proposing 
that  Indian  education  be  completely  integrated  into  the 
provincial  and  territorial  systems.  The  reaction  of  aboriginal 
people  was  vehemently  negative.  They  did  not  see  total  inte- 
gration as  a  desirable  goal  for  educating  their  children  and 
could  not  fathom  how  the  specific  needs  of  aboriginal 
students  could  povsibly  be  met  in  an  integrated  provincial 
system.  This  (Commission  was  told  that  while  integration 
might  have  been  an  improvement  over  the  previous  policy  of 


Self-government 

In  1972,  Native  leadership  published  a  response  to  the  White 
Paper,  titled  "Indian  Control  of  Indian  Education."  In  it  they 
outlined  two  goals  for  the  education  of  aboriginal  children: 
to  reinforce  their  aboriginal  identity,  and  to  provide  them 
with  the  education  and  training  necessary  to  earn  a  good 
living  in  modern  society. 

They  felt  that  to  make  this  happen,  parental  responsibility 
and  local  control  of  education  would  be  essential.  Within 
two  months,  the  federal  government  accepted  the  paper  as 
the  basis  for  its  new  policy  on  aboriginal  education,  and  it 
embarked  on  a  process  of  turning  over  control  of  education 
to  the  First  Nations'  education  authorities.  This  has  not 
always  gone  smoothly,  and  in  many  places  it  has  been  much 
slower  than  the  aboriginal  community  might  have  wished. 

In  the  mid-1980s,  recognizing  that  there  were  serious 
problems,  the  federal  government  funded  a  study  conducted 
by  aboriginal  people  under  the  leadership  of  the  Assembly  of 
First  Nations.  The  result  was  a  four-volume  report.  Tradition 
and  Education:  Towards  a  Vision  of  Our  Future,  which  was 
published  in  1988,  and,  at  the  request  of  the  federal  govern- 
ment, reviewed  by  lames  MacPherson,  dean  of  Osgoode  Hall 
Law  School.  MacPherson  not  only  reviewed  the  most  recent 
report,  he  also  looked  at  some  earlier  events,  and  he  identi- 
fied a  number  of  causes  for  the  slow  implementation  of  the 
1972  federal  initiative: 

1 )  There  is  no  definition  of.  or  agrremrni  about,  ihc  nolion  of 
"control"; 

2)  Indian  lonlrol  to  far  hat  often  mean)  nolhing  more  than  Indian 
management  (or  worte,  mere  panicipalion  in  management)  of 
federal  programs  and  policiet; 

})  (ireater  Indian  control  of  education  will  not  lead  to  belter  educa- 
tion for  Indian  children  if  no  proviiion  it  made  for  enhanced 
support  systems  and  more  funding  to  facilitate  the  trantition; 

41  dreater  Indian  control  of  education  will  not  achieve  the  goal  of 
reinforcing  the  Indian  identity  of  Indian  children  if  Indian- 
controlled  Khoolt  simply  mirror  the  curriculum,  programs  and 
policies  of  provincial  Khools  because  of  a  lack  of  support  and  fund- 
ing neceuary  for  promoting  the  programs  which  would  encourage 
Indian  distinctiveness; 


For  ttw  LOM  o(  LMrr«int 


5)  Experience  has  shown  that  equating  Indian  control  with  local 
control  is  not  appropriate  in  all  facets  of  Indian  education." 

While  Tradition  and  Education  clearly  builds  on  the  1972 
paper  "Indian  Control  of  Indian  Education,"  prepared  by  the 
National  Indian  Brotherhood,  there  are  some  very  important 
differences.  First,  while  the  major  principle  of  the  1972 
paper  is  "control,"  in  Tradition  and  Education  the  emphasis  is 
on  "self-government."  In  the  words  of  the  paper: 

Children  are  the  most  precious  resource  of  the  First  Nations.  They 
are  the  link  to  the  past  generations,  the  enjoyment  of  the  present 
generations,  and  the  hope  for  the  future.  First  Nations  intend  to 
prepare  their  children  to  carry  on  their  cultures  and  government. 
Because  education  shapes  the  minds  and  values  of  First  Nations' 
young  people,  it  is  vitally  important  that  First  Nations  governments 
have  jurisdiction  over  the  education  programs  which  have  such  a 
lasting  impact." 

"Jurisdiction"  goes  well  beyond  "control."  In  subsequent 
pages.  Tradition  and  Education  defines  "jurisdiction"  as  "the 
rights  of  each  sovereign  First  Nation  to  exercise  its  authority, 
develop  its  policies,  laws,  and  control  financial  and  other 
resources  for  the  education  of  its  citizens."" 

The  words  "each  sovereign  nation"  clearly  indicate  that 
the  authors  of  the  report  do  not  see  education  to  be 
governed  by  one  central  national  policy  for  all  First  Nations. 
Rather,  self-government  is  to  be  local  and  community  based, 
an  important  concept  for  understanding  the  work  that  has 
taken  place  in  Ontario  in  recent  years. 

The  report  also  calls  for  the  federal  government  to  recog- 
nize the  "inherent"  aboriginal  right  to  self-government  in 
the  Canadian  Constitution.  This  view  of  inherent  right  is 
based  on  the  fact  that  First  Nations  were  self-governing 
nations  long  before  Canada  came  into  being  as  a  nation. 

The  Province  of  Ontario  publicly  recognized  this  right 
several  years  ago,  and  in  January  1994  the  federal  govern- 
ment announced  it  was  prepared  to  act  on  its  commitment 
to  respect  the  inherent  right  of  self-government. 

Declaration  of  political  intent  (DPI) 
Ontario  arrived  at  the  recognition  of  the  right  of  self- 
government  in  two  stages.  In  December  1985,  the  Province 
of  Ontario,  certain  Political  Territorial  Organizations  (PTOs) 
of  First  Nations,  and  the  Government  of  Canada  signed  a 
Declaration  of  Political  Intent  to  establish  a  forum  for 


tripartite  negotiations  to  resolve  issues  relating  to  First 
Nations'  self-government  in  Ontario.  A  committee  for 
education  was  set  up  and  discussions  began  on  aboriginal 
jurisdiction  over  education  on  reserves  or  Crown  lands. 

Early  discussions  identified  a  number  of  important  areas. 
As  a  result,  working  groups  were  set  up  to  develop  hand- 
books to  assist  First  Nations  and  school  boards  in  negotiat- 
ing tuition  agreements  (these  are  purchase-of-service  agree- 
ments previously  negotiated  by  the  federal  government  on 
behalf  of  the  First  Nations)  to  deal  with  the  issue  of  Native 
representation  on  school  boards  and  to  develop  First 
Nations  education  legislation. 

Currently,  Ontario  is  trying  to  focus  negotiations  so  that 
self-government  agreements  can  be  in  place  by  March  1996. 
In  addition,  the  province  agreed  to  include  discussions  on 
aboriginal  jurisdiction  in  post-secondary  education  in  the 
Declaration  of  Political  Intent  process,  and  said  that  when 
self-government  agreements  are  finalized,  it  will  consider 
including  early  childhood  education  in  the  negotiations. 

Over  time,  the  declaration  process  funded  seven  pilot 
projects  that  support  different  aspects  of  self-government.  As 
James  MacPherson  said,  one  major  problem  with  Native 
education  was  the  lack  of  support  services  available  for 
curriculum  development,  teacher  professional  development, 
counselling,  and  other  support  services  for  students  in  on- 
reserve  schools;  therefore,  several  of  the  projects  focus  on 
those  areas. 

Another  project  is  the  development  of  a  local  community- 
based  First  Nations  Education  Act,  and  still  another  is  seek- 
ing to  promote  understanding  of  and  a  model  for  the  self- 
government  of  education  in  the  territory  of  the  Nishnawbe- 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


tt^^hild  care  is  an  important  i&sue 
\#for  our  First  Nations,  for  child 
care  provides  formalized  learning  and 
socialization  opportunities  and  is  an 
important  basis  for  learning  a 
language.  In  our  case,  langucige  loss 
occurs  amongst  the  very  young.  This 
can  be  prevented  through  property 
managed  First  Nations  child-care 
pro-ams  which  are  connected  with 
•lamontary  programs.' 


Aski  Nation,  which  consists  of  many  First  Nations  mostly 
scattered  in  isolated  communities  throughout  northern 
Ontario.  The  intent  is  that  these  projects  should  result  in  the 
development  of  a  number  of  practical  models  for  achieving 
and  supporting  self-government  in  education  by  aboriginal 
people  in  ways  appropriate  to  their  particular  areas  and 
needs. 

Statement  of  political  relationship  (SPR) 
The  second  step  in  recognizing  First  Nations'  rights  to  self- 
government  was  taken  on  6  August  1991,  when  the  Govern- 
ment of  Ontario  and  representatives  of  First  Nations  of 
Ontario  signed  the  Statement  of  Political  Relationship.  In  it, 
Ontario  explicitly  recognized  the  First  Nations'  "inherent" 
right  to  self-government  withm  the  constitutional  frame- 
work of  Canada  and  pledged  to  promote  the  exercise  and 
implementation  of  this  inherent  right  in  Ontario.  The  fourth 
clause  is  particularly  important  to  education;  it  says  that 
nothing  in  the  Statement  of  Political  Relationship  "shall  be 
construed  as  determining  Ontario's  juri.sdiction  or  as  dimin- 
ishing Canada's  responsibilities  towards  First  Nations." 

What  we  heard 

We  made  a  special  ettort  to  hear  Irom  Native  people  them- 
selves. We  established  an  Aboriginal  Working  (ir(»up  with 
representatives  of  First  Nations  and  Native  service  organiz^a- 
lions;  It  met  several  times  over  the  life  of  the  (x)mmission  to 
help  us  clarify  key  issues  and  offer  suggestions  for  solutions. 
Natl".  t inns  and  individuals  made  formal  written  or 

oral  in  such  places  as  Thunder  Bay,  Kcnora, 

Sioux  Lookout,  Saull  Sic.  Marie,  Sudbury,  Timmins, 


Moosonee,  Moose  Factory  Island,  London,  Windsor, 
and  Toronto. 

In  Sioux  Lookout,  we  visited  j  secondary  school  and  the 
\S'ahsa  Distance  F.ducatu)n  centre,  both  operated  by  the 
Northern  Nishnawbe  hducaiion  Clouncil.  We  held  hearings 
in  a  number  of  schools  that  had  a  substantial  number  of 
Native  students  under  tuition  agreements;  we  visited  the 
Walpole  Island  Reserve  and  made  a  special  trip  to  Moosonee 
and  Moose  Factory  Island  to  visit  the  schools,  which  have 
very  high  percentages  of  Native  students. 

Given  the  diversity  of  Ontario's  aboriginal  peoples,  there 
was  not  always  agreement  on  all  issues,  but  there  were  a 
number  of  key  concerns  in  common.  We  learned  that  like 
the  Franco-Ontarian  community,  First  Nations  are  very 
worried  about  the  survival  of  their  cultures  and  languages. 
They  also  feel  that  appropriately  recognizing  and  teaching 
their  languages  and  culture  will  help  their  children  develop 
a  better  sense  of  identity  and  enable  them  to  participate 
more  productively  in  their  own  and  in  the  broader  (Canadian 
society. 

A  sense  of  urgency  and  even  desperation  pervaded  many 
requests  for  help  in  rescuing  languages  and  cultures  before  it 
is  too  late. 

Cultural  values  and  traditions 

Aboriginal  people  also  point  out  that  recognition  and  teach- 
ing of  the  culture  and  contribution  of  aboriginal  people 
should  not  be  limited  to  aboriginal  students  and  teachers:  all 
students  and  teachers  must  be  more  knowledgeable  about 
and  sensitive  to  Native  culture  and  history.  Not  only  will  this 
help  all  schools  become  more  hospitable  places  for  aborigi- 
nal students,  but  it  will  ensure  also  that  Ontario  society  as  a 
whole  has  a  better  understanding  of  aboriginal  peoples. 

Native  people  feel  that  as  long  as  we  teach  and  believe 
that  Canadian  history  began  with  the  arrival  of  the  first 
Furopeans  on  its  shores,  and  that  the  aboriginal  people 
living  here  had  no  languages,  cultures,  or  traditions  worth 
preserving,  neither  Native  nor  non- Native  students  will 
respect  aboriginal  people  as  important  members  of  their 
own  nations  or  of  Canadian  society. 

Aboriginal  parents  and  educators  also  feel  that  their 
students  will  be  more  successful  if  teaching  and  evaluation 
methods  used  in  schools  are  more  sensitive  to  their  cultures 
and  learning  styles.  They  are  concerned  that  aboriginal 


For  ttw  IjOM  of  LMmtng 


students  are  being  suspended  and  expelled  out  of  all  propor- 
tion to  their  numbers.  They  feel  that  teachers  and  other 
students  do  not  understand  the  problems  and  expectations 
of  Native  students.  They  also  worry  about  outright  racism 
that  sometimes  reveals  itself  in  a  school's  lack  of  willingness 
to  work  with  aboriginal  students  and  help  them  gain  dignity 
and  a  more  positive  sense  of  themselves. 

Support  for  students 

Representatives  of  the  First  Nations  communities  are 
convinced  of  the  value  of  education  for  their  children,  but 
schools  by  and  large  are  still  not  comfortable  places  for 
aboriginal  students;  their  drop-out  rate  is  extremely  high, 
especially  in  northern  Ontario.  Many  find  it  difficult  to 
make  the  transition  to  off-reserve  schools,  especially  when, 
at  age  14  or  15,  they  have  to  move  hundreds  of  kilometres 
away  from  their  communities  to  board  with  people  who  are 
usually  strangers.  There  were  many  requests  for  more  coun- 
selling and  support  services  for  Native  students. 

It  was  suggested  that  more  student  residences  such  as 
those  at  Pelican  Falls  Centre,  the  First  Nation-operated 
secondary  school  outside  Sioux  Lookout,  would  help. 
Aboriginal  students  live  together  in  these  residences  and, 
with  the  help  of  house  parents  (often  themselves  aboriginal), 
support  each  other.  It  is  also  easier  to  provide  special 
programs  and  services  to  students  when  they  are  together  in 
residences. 

Teachers 

More  and  more  aboriginal  students  on  reserves  are  being 
taught  in  schools  operated  by  bands,  councils  of  bands,  or 
Native  education  authorities.  First  Nations  communities 
were  pleased  with  the  introduction  of  destreaming  and  The 
Common  Curriculum  in  Grade  9,  which  has  made  it  easier 
for  them  to  provide  schooling  for  students  in  that  initial 
secondary-level  year,  and  delayed  the  need  to  send  young 
teenagers  off-reserve  for  their  schooling.  However,  the  added 
grade  brings  with  it  an  increased  need  for  already  scarce 
aboriginal  teachers,  and  teachers  who  understand  aboriginal 
learners  and  who  will  commit  themselves  to  First  Nations 
communities  for  some  time.  Parents  and  leaders  are 
concerned  about  the  very  high  turnover  of  teachers  in  First 
Nations  communities;  they  believe  that  if  more  teachers 
were  members  of  those  communities,  they  would  remain 


AA  ^%chool  texts  present  Canadian 
^9history  from  the  perspective  of 
British  imperialism,  not  the  point  of 
view  of  the  real  Canadians,  the  First 
Nations.  Where  are  the  First  Nations 
heroes  in  Canadian  history;  the  men 
and  women  who  fought  to  defend 
their  homes,  families  and  way  of  life 
from  the  invaders?  ...  From  the  point 
of  view  of  the  Hrst  Nations,  Canada 
has  been  an  occupied  country  for  four, 
hundred  years." 

Margaret  Kenequanash, 

Northern  Nishnawbe  Education  Council, 


and  provide  the  continuity  and  understanding  that  are  so 
important  to  any  successful  education  program. 

Shared  decision-making 

Although  post-secondary  education  was  not  part  of  our 
mandate,  representatives  of  First  Nations  communities 
frequently  commented  on  the  need  for  better  post-secondary 
and  training  opportunities  for  their  people.  As  part  of  their 
traditional  view  of  education  as  a  lifelong  process.  First 
Nations'  aspirations  for  self-governance  in  education  also 
encompass  that  part  of  the  process. 

Recently,  Native  people  have  made  significant  advances 
working  together  on  plans  to  establish  their  own  post- 
secondary  institutions.  We  would  expect  that  the  provincial 
and  federal  levels  of  government  would  want  to  support 
such  efforts  and  take  them  into  consideration  in  their  poli- 
cies on  funding  and  recognition  of  credentials. 

Native  people  also  identify  a  lack  of  constructive  working 
relationships  between  their  communities  and  schools  and 
provincial  school  boards  and  teacher  federations,  as  well  as  a 
lack  of  recognition  by  the  Ministry  of  the  authority  of  band 
councils  and  Native  education  authorities.  They  are  asking 
for  legislation  that  would  permit  more  co-operative  and 
reciprocal  arrangements  between  provincial  school  boards 
and  Native  education  authorities. 

Aboriginal  people  feel  that  part  of  the  problem  may  be 
that  the  Ministry  designates  band-operated  secondary 
schools  as  private  schools.  At  the  moment,  that  is  the  only 
legislated  mechanism  available  to  the  Ministry  to  allow  it  to 
inspect  the  school  so  that  their  principals  can  grant  the 
Ontario  Secondary  School  Diploma  to  graduating  students. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


a  ■  am  a  parent  of  two  schoof-aged 
I  children.  I  will  soon  have  to  support 
them  in  making  ttie  decision  whettier 
to  end  ttieir  formal  education,  take 
full-time  distance  education  through 
Wahsa  -  a  wonderful  option  but  a 
tremendous  challenge  for  an  adoles- 
cent -  or  whether  tt>ey  will  have  to 
leave  home  as  I  dkl  at  the  age  of  14 
to  contkMM  thek  schooling.'' 


Under  the  current  Icjii^lation,  Ontario  slHooI  boards  arc 
allowed  to  enter  into  purchase  agreements  only  with  other 
Ontario  school  boards,  not  with  private  schools.  Under 
legislation  and  policies  related  to  private  schools,  the 
Ministry  deals  directly  with  the  principals  of  those  institu- 
tions; in  the  case  of  the  band-operated  private  schools,  this 
means  that  it  bypasses  the  Native  Education  Authority. 

But  as  aboriginal  educators  point  out,  their  schools  are 
not  privately  funded;  they  receive  public  money  from  the 
federal  government  and  from  bands.  They  are,  therefore,  also 
subject  to  public  scrutiny  from  two  levels  of  government. 

Native  people  believe  that  band-operated  secondary 
schools  should  be  designated  something  other  than  private 
schools;  this  would  allow  the  government  to  amend  legisla- 
tion to  permit  co-operative  and  reciprocal  arrangements 
between  aboriginal  and  other  publicly  funded  schools  in 
Ontario,  without  reference  to  private  schools.  They  also 
want  the  legislation  to  properly  recognize  the  role  of  the 
Native  Education  Authority  in  governing  their  schools. 

In  general,  aboriginal  parents  also  want  to  have  more 
input  into  the  schools  their  children  attend.  Some  Native 
people  feel  this  might  be  achieved  by  having  more  Native 
trustees  on  provincial  Khool  boards,  or  by  being  able  to  vote 
in  Khool  board  elections,  and  others  are  looking  for  more 
direct  involvement  with  their  local  school.  Still  others  are 
more  concerned  about  achieving  full  self-government  and 
controlling  their  own  education  system  from  early  child- 
hood to  post -secondary  and  adult  education  and  training. 


Issues  and  recommendations 

Iciicral- provituuil  lO-operalion 

While  our  mandate  did  not  include  education  of  aboriginal 
children  on  reserves,  the  educational  experiences  of  students 
on  and  otf  reserves  overlap  a  good  deal,  especially  when 
students  on  reseo'es  receive  part  of  their  education  (usually 
elementary)  on  reserves,  and  part  (usually  secondary)  in 
schools  operated  by  provincial  school  boards. 

Ciiven  the  role  of  the  federal  government  in  aboriginal 
education,  our  recommendations  for  improving  education 
for  Ontario's  Native  children  necessarily  include  some 
directed  to  the  federal  government.  We  see  no  reason  why  we 
should  not  remind  the  federal  government  of  its  obligations 
so  that  aboriginal  students  get  excellent  elementary  and 
secondary  education,  regardless  of  where  they  receive  it. 

We  have  also  directed  some  recommendations  jointly  to 
both  levels  of  government;  this  is  in  order  to  promote  co- 
operation rather  than  duplication  of  efforts.  With  more  than 
half  of  Ontario's  aboriginal  students  living  off-reserve  or 
attending  schools  under  provincial  jurisdiction  off-reserve, 
this  is  an  opportunity  for  greater  co-operation  between  the 
federal  and  provincial  governments. 

Recommendations  123.  124 
*We  recommend  that  rather  than  having  the  two  levels  of 
government  work  independently  of  each  other,  and  in  order  to 
avoid  duplication,  the  Government  of  Canada  and  the  Govern- 
ment of  Ontario  jointly  fund,  for  use  in  both  on-reserve 
schools  and  schools  under  provincial  junsdiction,  the  devel 
opment  of  curriculum  guidelines  and  resource  matenals  that 
more  accurately  reflect  the  history  of  Canada's  atxynginal 
people  and  their  contribution  to  Canada  s  literature,  culture, 
history,  and  values,  and  in  other  areas  to  be  incorporated 
throughout  the  curriculum. 

•  We  recommend  the  development  of  assessment  and  teach 
ing  strategies  that  are  more  sensitive  to  the  learning  styles 
identified  by  aboriginal  educators. 

We  also  suggest  that  the  federal  government  work  with 
hirst  Nations  communities  on  reserves  to  provide  additional 
support  for  students  who  have  to  live  away  from  home  in 
order  to  receive  their  elementary  or  secondary  education. 

We  hesitate  to  recommend  specific  models  or  a  great 
increase  in  off-reserve  accommodation  for  students  when,  m 


For  ttw  LOM  of  l<Mm«n( 


i£ 


future,  more  of  their  communities  may  well  be  able  to 
provide  better  educational  opportunities  for  them  on- 
reserve. 

Recommendation  125 

*We  recommend  that  the  federal  and  provincial  governments 
work  with  Native  education  authorities  and  the  First  Nations 
to  provide  better  support  to  students  who  must  live  away 
from  their  communities  to  obtain  elementary  and/or 
secondary  education. 


N 


oivaboriginal  teachers  who  teach 
First  Nations  students  must  be 
trained  in  cross-cultural  awareness, 
e.g.,  an  awareness  of  the  difference 
in  values  between  Native  and  non- 
Native  people;  the  history  of  treaties; 
what  treaty  rights  are;  etc." 

Windigo  Education  Authority 


I. 


Funding 

One  of  the  complaints  we  heard  frequently  is  that  the  variety 
of  services  to  support  students  and  teachers  that  are 
available  in  the  province's  publicly  funded  schools  are  not 
readily  available  in  on-reserve  schools.  Aboriginal  educators 
told  us  that  the  federal  funding  formula  for  on-reserve 
education  does  not  recognize  the  additional  expenditures  for 
support  services  to  the  same  extent  as  the  provincial  funding 
formula  does. 

When  provincial  school  boards  calculate  charges  to  the 
Native  education  authority,  First  Nation,  or  federal  govern- 
ment for  the  students  educated  in  their  schools,  they  use  the 
provincial  formula,  which  includes  provision  for  support 
services.  The  Native  education  authority.  First  Nation,  or  the 
federal  government  may  negotiate  such  additional  services 
for  aboriginal  students  as  Native  counsellors  or  an  animator 
for  Native  culture  in  the  school,  which  will  increase  the  cost 
of  the  tuition  agreement. 

We  were  told  that  the  federal  government  usually 
provides  the  full  amount  to  the  Native  education  authority 
to  cover  the  cost  of  the  tuition  agreement,  and  that  this 
amount  is  often  higher  than  what  it  would  give  the  authority 
if  the  students  were  educated  on-reserve.  It  would  therefore 
appear  that  less  money  is  provided  for  on-reserve  than  for 
off-reserve  education,  and  as  a  result  the  learning  experi- 
ences for  children  in  on-reserve  schools  are  less  effective 
than  they  could  be. 

Recommendation  126 

*We  recommend  that  the  federal  government  review  its 
method  of  funding  education  for  Native  students  in  on- 
reserve  schools  to  ensure  there  are  adequate  funds  to 
provide  any  necessary  special  programs  to  support  aboriginal 
education  and  for  professional  support  of  teachers. 


Teacher  education 

Clearly,  it  is  the  responsibility  of  the  province  to  ensure  that 
teachers  in  Ontario's  publicly  funded  schools  receive  the 
training  they  need  to  gain  a  better  understanding  of  aborigi- 
nal students;  to  implement  new  curriculum,  assessment,  and 
teaching  strategies;  and  to  adapt  existing  programs.  In  the 
past  few  years,  the  province  has  funded  a  number  of 
community-based  demonstration  pilot  projects  that  address 
some  of  these  needs.  Such  projects  could  offer  useful  models 
and  strategies  that  should  be  shared  with  teachers  and 
education  administrators,  and  that  should  help  the  province 
in  implementing  our  following  recommendation. 

Recommendation  127 

*We  recommend  that  the  province  include  in  its  requirements 
for  pre-service  and  in-service  teacher  education  a  component 
related  to  teaching  aboriginal  students  and  teaching  about 
aboriginal  issues  to  both  Native  and  non-Native  students. 

Programs 

There  is  another  group  of  program-related  concerns  that 
First  Nations  communities  share  with  other  small  schools 
and  boards.  They  often  find  that  limited  resources  restrict 
their  ability  to  offer  a  full  range  of  programs  to  their 
students;  this  problem  is  particularly  acute  at  the  secondary 
school  level.  Frequently,  there  are  not  enough  students  in 
any  one  school  to  warrant  setting  up  a  class  in  a  particular 
subject;  even  when  there  are  sufficient  students,  there  may 
not  be  enough  teachers  available  for  highly  specialized 
subjects. 

With  its  Wahsa  Distance  Education  School,  the  Northern 
Nishnawbe  Education  Council  in  Sioux  Lookout  has  made  a 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


4^  Hn  conjunction  with  Lakehead 
■  University,  a  Teacher  Training 
Program  has  been  established  where 
the  university  sends  professors  to 
our  community  and,  in  turn,  the 
students  attend  university  in  Thunder 
Bay.  Currently  17  students  are  taking 
this  course  and  will  receive  their 
OTCs  in  May  of  1994.  After  one  year 
ttMr«  hav»  Immi  no  drop-oiits." 

<ty  Lif-  EouctKX'  Auttionty  and 
i  School 


good  Start  at  addressing  this  problem;  the  program  uses  the 
Ministry's  Independent  Lcarnmg  C^entrc  materials  as  well  as 
those  specifically  developed  by  the  school.  Teachers  in  a 
transmitting  studio  in  Sioux  Lookout  connect  with  students 
in  various  remote  communities  via  radio,  telephone,  and 
computer. 

In  many  ways,  the  program  works  well  and  has  signifi- 
cantly expanded  available  education  opportunities  not  only 
to  learners  of  compulsory  school  age  but  to  adult  learners.  A 
number  of  learners  who  might  otherwise  not  have  been  able 
to  do  so  have  earned  their  Ontario  Secondary  School  Diplo- 
mas through  the  Wahsa  program. 

However,  transmission  problems  are  frequent.  Further- 
more, learning  only  through  textbook  and  audio  contact 
requires  a  lot  of  self-discipline  by  students,  and  it  is  not  the 
most  exciting  way  to  learn.  To  overcome  these  drawbacks,  at 
least  to  some  extent,  each  community  has  an  education  co- 
ordinator to  encourage  and  assist  learners.  Nonetheless,  the 
program  has  its  limitations. 

A  way  to  improve  this  kind  of  learning  has  been  part  of 
one  of  the  previously  mentioned  community-based  demon- 
stration pilot  projects:  a  technological  studies  course  (that 
uses  video)  on  small-motor  theory,  maintenance,  and  repair. 
The  course  was  jointly  developed  by  the  Northern  Nish- 
nawbe  Education  Council,  the  Wahsa  Distance  Education 
Centre,  the  Northern  District  School  Area  Board,  WaWaTay 
Native  Cx>mmunications  Society,  TV'Ontario,  and  the 
Ministry's  Independent  Learning  Centre.  The  visual  dimen- 
sion helps  students  to  understand  the  content  of  the  course 
and  to  relate  to  a  person  they  can  see  as  well  as  hear  on 
Kreen. 


While  it  does  not  have  the  quality  of  interactivity  that  the 
live  audio  programs  from  Wahsa  offer,  the  technology  to  do 
that  is  already  in  limited  use  in  Canada.  Even  though  current 
cable  wiring  does  not  support  interactive  video,  there  is 
technology  that,  when  in  wide  use,  will. 

The  use  of  CD-ROMs  on  computers  will  also  increase  the 
range  of  good  learning  opportunities  available  to  students; 
this  technology  can  also  be  greatly  enhanced  by  computer 
networking,  but  here,  too,  there  are  barriers  to  its  use  in 
northern  Ontario. 

Recommendation  128 

•  We  recommend  that  the  federal  government,  which  has 
responsibility  in  this  field,  give  top  priority  to  ensuring  the 
availability  of  good  telecommunications  throughout  Ontario  in 
order  to  support  education  through  the  use  of  interactive 
video  and  computer  networking. 

Video  would  not  only  help  make  more  courses  available 
to  senior  secondary  students  throughout  Ontario,  including 
those  in  remote  northern  communities,  but  it  could  also  be 
very  useful  in  bringing  together  scarce  resources  to  support 
the  teaching  of  Native  languages,  especially  those  on  the 
verge  of  extinction. 

While  developing  most  secondary  school  courses  is  clear- 
ly a  provincial  obligation,  developing  Native  language 
courses  that  use  videos  and  CD-ROMs,  including  story- 
telling and  Native  culture  units,  some  of  which  could  be 
incorporated  into  the  common  curriculum  for  all  learners, 
would  also  fall  within  the  responsibility  of  the  federal 
government.  Although  fairly  costly  to  develop,  such  courses 
might  mean  long-term  savings  and,  in  any  event,  would  be 
well  worth  the  investment. 

Recommendation  129 

•We  recommend  that  tx>th  the  federal  and  provincial  govern- 
ments provide  resources  to  support  the  development  of 
courses,  initially  video-  and  COROM-based.  that  would  use 
interactive  technology  when  an  adequate  telecommunication 
infrastructure  is  in  place. 

Ahonginal  languago 

Members  of  aboriginal  communities  across  Ontario 
expressed  the  need  for  more  flexibility  and  assistance  in 
teaching  and  using  aboriginal  languages  in  on-reserve  and 
off-reserve  schools.  First  Nations  that  operate  their  own 


Forth*  Lo«*o(  l««m<n( 


schools  do  not  really  need  provincial  approval  to  introduce 
more  Native  language  classes,  and  they  can  decide  to  have 
Native  language  immersion  schools  or  classes.  In  fact,  there 
are  two  immersion  schools  on  the  Six  Nations  Reserve  near 
Brantford,  as  well  as  immersion  classes  in  some  of  northern 
Ontario's  Native  communities. 

However,  the  issue  is  more  complex.  Many  aboriginal 
students  are  still  being  educated  off-reserve  in  schools  oper- 
ated by  provincial  school  boards.  Native  education  authori- 
ties want  to  continue  offering  the  Ontario  Secondary  School 
Diploma,  which  means  they  must  adhere  to  related  provin- 
cial legislation  and  guidelines.  At  this  point,  however,  that 
does  not  give  them  the  flexibility  they  want  in  the  use  of 
Native  languages. 

There  are  other  complicating  factors.  In  Ontario,  there 
are  13  languages  traditionally  spoken  by  aboriginal  people, 
belonging  to  two  linguistic  families:  Algonkian  and 
Iroquoian.  Of  the  Algonkian  languages,  three  -  Ojibwe, 
Cree,  and  Ojibwe-Cree  -  are  stUl  spoken  extensively  across 
northern  Ontario.  In  "You  Took  My  Talk,"  a  report  of  the 
federal  Standing  Committee  on  Aboriginal  Issues,  these 
three  were  identified  as  being  healthy  enough  to  survive. 
However,  they  are  not  equally  well  preserved  in  all  areas  of 
the  province,  and  the  report  describes  the  other  ten 
languages  as  being  on  the  verge  of  extinction."" 

Because  for  the  most  part  aboriginal  languages  have  been 
transmitted  orally,  attempts  are  now  being  made  to  preserve 
them  in  written  form,  but  much  stronger  efforts  are  needed 
while  there  is  still  time.  Aboriginal  people  do  not  have  the 
necessary  resources  for  this  task.  Since  most  of  the  Native 
languages  are  also  spoken  in  other  parts  of  Canada  and  the 
United  States,  the  federal  government  also  has  a  role  to  play 
in  this  area. 

Recommendation  130 

*We  recommend  that  the  federal  government  provide  assis- 
tance to  aboriginal  peoples  to  develop  language  teaching 
resources  co-operatively  with  communities  that  use  the  same 
languages,  in  other  provinces  and  in  the  United  States. 

Just  as,  in  the  Mahe  case,  the  Supreme  Court  of  Canada 
identified  the  French  language  as  an  essential  tool  for  main- 
taining and  nurturing  French-Canadian  culture,  so  aborigi- 
nal people  see  the  preservation  of  their  languages  as  essential 
to  preserving  their  cultures  and  identity.  It  is  understandable 


then  that  Ontario's  aboriginal  people  look  to  the  schools  to 
help  some  of  the  First  Nations  reclaim  already  threatened 
languages  and  to  prevent  current  languages  from  becoming 
extinct. 

This  is  the  reason  that  a  number  of  presenters  asked  us  to 
recommend  that  Native  languages  be  eligible  for  use  as 
languages  of  instruction,  rather  than  just  being  subjects. 
While  there  are  some  classes  of  this  type  available  in  schools 
run  by  First  Nations  Education  Authorities,  it  will  not  be 
easy  to  expand  these  programs,  because  of  the  lack  of  teach- 
ers and  resource  materials. 

However,  there  are  areas  of  the  province  where  resource 
materials  for  some  subjects  already  exist,  especially  at  the 
early-education  and  primary  level. 

Secondary  school  students  might  gain  stronger  language 
experience  if,  for  example,  the  schools  were  permitted  to  use 
the  Native  language  in  such  optional  courses  as  Native  stud- 
ies and  outdoor  education.  If  schools  could  group  these  with 
a  course  in  a  Native  language,  they  could  provide  a  one- 
semester  immersion  experience. 

There  are  other  provinces  and  countries  where  Native 
languages  are  being  used  as  languages  of  instruction.  These 
programs  can  be  used  to  guide  Ontario  in  implementing  the 
following  recommendation. 

Recommendation  131 

*We  recommend  that  the  province,  in  co-operation  with  First 

Nations  communities  and  school  boards,  develop  guidelines 

for  permitting  the  use  of  Native  languages  as  languages  of 

instruction,  where  teachers  and  teaching  resources  are 

available. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


The  province  will  have  to  continue  and,  if  possible, 
increase  efforts  to  train  teachers  of  Native  languages  and 
Native  studies.  This  is  not  simply  a  matter  of  making  more 
places  available  at  faculties  of  education,  but  also  of  assisting 
efforts  to  obtain  qualified  staff  to  teach  such  programs,  and 
helping  aboriginal  students  become  qualified  to  enter  them. 
There  arc  successful  programs  at  Lakehead,  Nipissing.  and 
Queen's  universities.  Where  it  is  appropriate,  the  federal 
government  should  also  support  efforts  to  increase  the 
number  of  teachers  able  to  teach  Native  languages  and 
Native  studies. 

The  federal  and  provincial  governments  have  helped  fund 
various  programs  for  development  of  teacher  in-service  and 
classroom  materials  that  improve  the  teaching  of  Native 
languages  and  Native  culture  throughout  Ontario.  It  is 
important  that  resources  be  widely  shared  by  boards  and 
band-operated  schools  across  the  province,  to  avoid  duplica- 
tion of  effort  and  to  make  best  use  of  scarce  resources. 

Recommendation  132 

*We  recommend  that  the  provincial  and  federal  governments 
continue  their  programs  to  develop  resource  matenals  that 
support  the  teaching  of  Native  languages  and  culture  for 
teacher  irhservice  and  for  classroom  use  m  on  and  off- 
reserve  schools,  providing  such  materials  are  made  available 
to  other  tioards  and  schools. 

Decision  making 

Other  concerns  cxprcs.scd  to  the  Commission  centred  on 
Native  people's  input  into  the  policies  of  schools  that  aborig- 
inal students  attend  and  that  are  under  provincial  jurisdic- 


tion. Some  First  Nation  representatives  suggested  that  this 
can  best  be  done  by  appointing  additional  trustees  to  repre- 
sent the  concerns  of  aboriginal  students,  and  by  permitting 
aboriginal  people  on  reserves  to  vote  in  school  board 
elections.'' 

There  are  other  hirst  Nations  that  do  not  sec  ihc  need  for 
additional  trustee  representation:  rather  than  negotiating 
educational  issues  with  a  school  board,  they  are  more 
concerned  about  pursuing  self-governance  and  negotiating 
educational  issues  on  a  government-to-government  basis. 

We  believe  that  as  long  there  are  school  boards,  the  inter- 
ests of  aboriginal  students  should  probably  be  represented  at 
that  level  in  a  more  on-going  way  than  is  possible  through 
the  annual  negotiation  of  tuition  agreements.  Such  represen- 
tation should  be  equal  to  the  representation  of  electors  of 
the  board;  however,  some  adjustments  could  be  made  where 
the  number  of  aboriginal  students  is  relatively  small,  even  if 
that  means  a  lower  trustee-to-sludent  ratio  for  aboriginal 
students  than  for  other  students. 

Some  agreements  in  this  area  were  reached  as  part  of  the 
negotiation  process  for  the  Declaration  of  Political  Intent 
mentioned,  but  the  Ministry  appears  to  be  reluctant  to 
implement  these  agreements,  pending  the  publication  of  this 
report.  We  acknowledge  that  the  DPI  proposal  may  need  to 
be  revised,  given  our  discussion  on  the  number  of  school 
board  trustees.  (See  Chapter  17.) 

Recommendation  133 

*We  recommend  that  the  Ministry  and  the  representatives  of 
the  First  Nations  review  the  Declaration  of  Political  Intent 
proposal  on  Native  trustee  representation,  taking  into 
account  possible  changes  in  overall  board  structures  that 
could  follow  the  issue  of  this  report,  and  that  at  the  earliest 
opportunity  the  parties  implement  the  agreement  that 
results. 

We  believe,  however,  that  the  really  significant  input  into 
the  education  of  the  aborigindl  learners  can  occur  only  at 
the  local  school  level.  As  with  other  students,  parental  activi- 
ty that  makes  a  difference  to  the  level  of  achievement  of 
aboriginal  children  depends  on  good  communication  and 
interaction  between  the  school  and  the  parent.  We  feel, 
therefore,  that  the  recommendations  wc  make  in  the  next 
chapter,  lonicrning  the  interaction  between  teachers  and 


For  ««•  tOM  of  LMmtng 


parents,  and  between  the  school  and  its  community,  will 
have  a  more  significant  impact  on  the  success  of  aboriginal 
learners  than  will  any  adjustments  made  at  the  board  level. 
The  community  alliances  we  identify  as  one  of  the  four 
levers  for  education  reform  are  as  important  for  improving 
education  for  aboriginal  learners  as  for  any  other  learners  in 
Ontario. 

Self-government 

We  also  support  the  wishes  of  Ontario's  aboriginal  people  to 
govern  their  own  education.  We  recognize  that  there  are 
many  ways  in  which  the  First  Nations  are  now  limited  in 
their  ability  to  set  a  course  for  their  own  education  system. 
Ultimately,  there  is  no  reason  why  First  Nations  could  not 
decide  to  have  their  own  secondary  school  graduation  diplo- 
ma requirements.  It  may  be  that  for  practical  reasons,  they 
will  choose  to  stay  close  to  provincial  requirements;  but  if 
self-government  is  to  mean  anything,  Native  peoples  should 
be  able  to  make  that  choice  for  themselves. 

Recommendation  134 

*We  recommend  that  the  federal  and  provincial  governments 
continue  negotiations  that  lead  to  full  self-governance  of 
education  by  the  First  Nations. 

Recognition  of  band-operated  schools 

Band-operated  schools  should  be  permitted  more  flexibility 
to  interact  with  other  publicly  funded  schools  in  reciprocal 
arrangements,  rather  than  under  the  one-way  arrangement 
that  is  now  the  only  possibility. 

Recommendation  135 

*We  recommend  that  the  province  develop  a  different  way  of 
dealing  with  band-operated  elementary  and  secondary 
schools  than  it  now  has.  Such  a  method  would: 

a)  recognize  that  they  are  publicly  funded  schools  of  a 
First  Nation,  governed  by  a  duly  constituted  education 
authority,  and 

b)  permit  more  reciprocity  and  co-operation  with  provincial 
school  boards. 


Conclusion 

We  believe  that  in  addition  to  our  recommendations  for 
improving  the  learning  experience  of  all  Ontario  learners, 
the  issues  we  address  in  this  chapter  and  the  recommenda- 
tions we  make  will,  when  implemented,  ensure  that  the 
educational  opportunities  for  Roman  Catholic,  Franco- 
Ontarian,  and  aboriginal  children  are  more  equitable  than 
they  are  now.  Not  only  do  our  recommendations  address 
some  specific  program  concerns,  but  they  also  focus  on 
giving  these  communities  a  greater  voice  in  the  governance 
and  management  of  the  education  of  their  children. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


Endnot** 


1  Robert  Choqu«tte,  'L'tcote  des  franco-onuricns:  Une  r^ro- 
sp«ctivv  hiftoriquc*  (Ottawa,  1991,  mimeographrd),  p.  48. 

2  Chad  Ciattlcid,  Lingiuige.  Si/ioo/injj,  and  Cultural  Confhit:  The 
Origins  of  French -Lingutige  Controtrrsy  in  Ontario  (Kingston: 
McGill -Queen's  University  Press,  1987),  prologue. 

3  Chad  Gaffield,  Aux  origirui  de  Videntitt  franco-ontatienne: 
tducation,  culture,  ^onomie  (Ottawa;  University  of  Ottawa 
Press,  1993),  p.  284. 

4  The  Council's  nundaie  has  remained  more  or  less  unchanged 
since  1980,  except  for  the  addition  of  the  skills  development 
component  in  1993.  The  chairmanship  is  now  a  full-time 
position  held  by  a  well-known  figure  in  the  Franco-Ontarian 
education  world,  the  sociologist  Rolande  Faucher. 

5  This  categorization  provides  little  help  when  it  comes  to 
including  "Canadian-born"  francophones  from  other 
provinces,  especially  from  Quebec,  j  province  with  a  fran- 
cophone majority  and  where  the  status  of  minority  at  the 
national  level  is  viewed  quite  differeniiy  than  in  other  Canadi- 
an provinces. 

6  Anne  Gilbert  and  Andr^  Langlois,  Les  rialitts  franco-ontan- 
ennes:  Lei  francophonei  tels  qu'ils  iont.  3rd  edition  (Vanier,  ON: 
Assocution  canadienne-fran(;aise  dc  I'Ontario,  1994),  p.  6-7. 

7  Political  analysts  who  studied  women  in  Scandinavian  politics 
believe  that  a  minority  group  constitutes  a  critical  mass  and 
can,  subsequently,  form  a  balance  of  power  and  influence  the 
agenda  of  the  majority  when  it  consists  of  30  to  33  percent  of 
the  total  number  of  people  in  question.  Among  other  works, 
refer  to: 

Drude  l>ahlerup,  "From  a  Small  to  a  Large  Minority:  Women 
in  Scandinavian  Politics,"  Sc<>n</in<>vt<in  Political  Studies  1 1 ,  no. 
4(l9M):27S-98. 

In  his  own  work  on  language  minorities,  sociologist  lacques 
Leclerc  speaks  of  20  percent  m  being  a  critical  mass.  Sec 
Lederc,  "Language  and  Society."  Mondia.  p.  171. 

8  Gilbert  and  Langlois,  Les  rtaltlts  franco -ontariennn,  p.  20. 

9  Gilbert  and  [.anglois,  Les  rtalitts  franco-ontariennes,  p.  20. 

10  Nonnand  Frcnette  and  Saeed  Quazi,  Ontano  Francophone  and 
hnt-tecontlary  AccetsiMity  (Toronto:  Ontario  Ministry  of 
CoUcgesand  Unn^ersities.  1990). 

1 1  Gilbert  and  Langlois.  La  rtalitts  franco-onlariennes,  p.  50. 

12  For  insiarKe,  there  have  been  only  two  francophone  deputy 
minislert  in  Ontario'*  history:  G^ard  Raymond  and  [)onald 
Oboniawin. 


1 3        Stacy  Churchill.  Normand  Frenette,  and  Saeed  Quazi,  Educa- 
tion and  Franco-Ontanan  Needs:  The  Diagnosis  of  an  Educa- 
tional System  (Highlights)  (Toronto:  Conseil  dc  I'^ucation 
francoontaricnnc,  1986).  p.  2.  This  two-volume  report  is  a 
remarkable  study  of  the  Franco-Ontarian  community  and  its 
educational  needs. 

N         F^ddration  des  associations  dc  parents  francophones  dc  I'On- 
tario, A  Prion  6,  no.  I  (1993 ). 

15  Section  23(3)  of  the  Canadian  Charter  of  Rights  and  Free- 
doms reads: 

The  right  of  citizens  of  Canada  under  subsections  (1)  and  (2) 
to  have  their  children  receive  primary  and  secondary  school 
instruction  in  the  language  of  the  English  or  French  linguistic 
minority  population  of  a  province 

(a)  applies  wherever  in  the  province  the  number  of  children  of 
citizens  who  have  such  a  right  is  sufficient  to  warrant  the 
provision  to  them  out  of  public  fund.s  of  minority  language 
instruction;  and 

(b)  includes,  where  the  number  of  those  children  so  warrants, 
the  right  to  have  them  receive  that  instruction  in  minority 
language  educational  facilities  provided  out  of  public  funds. 

16  Video-forum  for  francophone  cthno-cuitural  minorities. 
Sponsored  by  RCOL,  (Chaired  by  M.  B^in.  Toronto  and 
Ottawa,  April  6,  1994. 

17  Denis  Mach^  and  lulic  Boi.ssonneault,  Ontre  de  Recherches  en 
education  du  Nouvcl-Ontario,  brief  to  the  Ontario  Royal 
Commission  on  Learning,  1991,  p.  I. 

18  Ontario,  Ministry  of  Education,  Report  of  the  French-language 
Education  Governance  Advisory  Group  (Toronto,  1991 ),  p.  5-6. 

19  Sec  in  particular  a  report  presented  to  the  Cx)mmission  enti- 
tled "Aper^u  de  la  probltmatiquc  des  C^imit^s  consultatifs  de 
langue  fran^aisc  dans  les  conseils  scolaires  de  la  province,"  a 
survey  of  the  problems  of  French-language  advisory  commit- 
tees in  the  province's  school  boards  (Ottawa:  Association 
fran^aise  des  conseils  scolaires  de  I'Ontario,  1993.  p.  15). 

20  Hach^  and  Boi.ssonneault,  brief,  p.  9, 

2 1  Conseil  de  I'^ucation  catholique  pour  les  francophones  de 
I'Ontario,  brief  to  the  Ontario  Royal  Commission  on 
Ixarning,  1993,  p.  7. 

22  Ontario,  OfTice  of  the  Provincial  Auditor,  /993  Annual  Report: 
Accounting.  Accountability,  Value  for  Money  [Toronto,  1994), 
p.  71. 


lior  0w  LoM  o(  LMmmg 


23  R.  Bisson  and  G.  Gratton,  "£tude  de  faisabilite:  La  gestion 
dans  le  cadre  de  TArticle  23,"  p.  4.  Prepared  for  the  French- 
language  section  of  the  Simcoe  County  Roman  Catholic  Sepa- 
rate Board,  and  presented  to  Ontario  Royal  Commission  on 
Learning,  1993. 

24  See,  as  an  example,  the  study  entitled,  "Consortium  des 
conseUs  du  Nord,"  prepared  by  J.  Raymond  Chenier  and 
others  for  five  school  boards,  Timmins,  1994. 

25  One  of  the  most  recent  is  the  work  of  four  francophone  direc- 
tors of  education  and  has  since  been  adopted  by  all  of  the 
province's  francophone  directors  of  education,  although  the 
document  is  only  at  the  first-draft  stage.  Andre  Lalonde,  Roger 
Brille,  Paul  St-Cyr,  and  Pierre  MarcU  for  the  Forum  of  Direc- 
tors of  Education,  French  Section,  Toronto,  1994. 

Donald  Dennie  and  Simon  Laflamme,  research  report  present- 
ed to  the  Ontario  Royal  Commission  on  Learning,  1994,  p.  5. 

Federation  des  jeunes  Canadiens-fran(;ais,  L'avenir  devant 
nous:  La  jeunesse,  le  probleme  de  rassimilation  et  le  developpe- 
ment  des  communautes  canadiennes-frarifaises,  vol.  4  (Ottawa, 
1990),  p.  143. 

Make  et  al.  v.  Province  of  Alberta  (1990),  68  D.L.R.  (4th)  82. 

Ford  V.  Quebec  (Solicitor  General)  (1988),  54  D.L.R.  (4th)  604. 

Make  V.  Alberta,  p.  83. 

Quoted  in  La  Vision:  L'ecole  franfaise  en  Ontario  pour  I'actuali- 
sation  de  la  culture  (Ottawa:  Association  fran(;aise  des  conseils 
scolaires  de  I'Ontario,  1991),  p.  16,  and  quoted  in  Ontario, 
Ministry  of  Education,  Report  of  the  French-language  Educa- 
tion Governance  Advisory  Group,  p.  4. 

It  is  difficult  to  get  completely  accurate  statistical  information 
on  aboriginal  populations.  Statistics  Canada  data  do  not 
include  those  who  live  on  reserves  and  refuse  to  be  enumerat- 
ed, or  those  who  resided  in  institutions  at  the  time  of  the 
census.  Data  from  the  Indian  Registration  Program,  Indian 
and  Northern  Affairs  Canada  (INAC),  tend  to  be  more  accu- 
rate as  far  as  aboriginal  people  living  on  reserves  is  concerned. 
Data  given  here  on  the  general  population  comes  from  the 
1991  Canadian  census,  while  the  information  on  First  Nations 
and  bands  comes  from  INAC  1991  data. 

33  Canada,  Department  of  Indian  Affairs  and  Northern  Develop- 
ment, MacPherson  Report  on  Tradition  and  Education: 
Towards  a  Vision  of  Our  Future  (Ottawa,  1991),  p.  3. 

34  Assembly  of  First  Nations,  Tradition  and  Education, 
vol.  1  (1988),  p.  1,  as  quoted  in  Macpherson  Report,  p.  4. 


26 


27 


32 


35  Assembly  of  First  Nations,  Tradition  and  Education,  p.  82. 

36  Canada,  Standing  Committee  on  Aboriginal  Affairs,  "You  Took 
My  Talk":  Aboriginal  Literacy  and  Empowerment:  Fourth  Report 
(Ottawa,  1990). 

37  Under  current  legislation,  where  aboriginal  students  taught 
under  tuition  agreements  number  100  or  more,  or  make  up  10 
percent  or  more  of  the  total  enrolment  in  a  school  board's 
jurisdiction,  the  board  must  appoint  a  Native  trustee  named 
by  the  council  of  the  band  or  bands.  A  second  trustee  must  be 
appointed  if  the  number  is  more  than  25  percent  of  the  total 
enrolment  of  the  board's  jurisdiction.  If  the  number  is  fewer 
than  100  (or  10  percent  of  the  total  enrolment),  then  the 
appointment  is  at  the  discretion  of  the  board.  This  is  the  main 
area  of  contention.  Another  problem  arises  when  there  are 
several  bands  involved  who  each  want  their  own  trustee  to 
represent  them.  Except  for  the  lack  of  representation  when 
there  are  fewer  than  100  aboriginal  students  enrolled,  and  a 
few  situations  where  the  majority  of  students  enrolled  are 
Native,  the  proportion  of  Native  trustees  on  school  boards  in 
Ontario  tends  to  reflect  fairly  closely  the  proportion  of 
aboriginal  students  enrolled  in  the  board. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Constitutional  Issues 


^n'n.fx  •">  ■  f  jf  ■ 


Equity 
Considerations 


In  Chapter  15  we  dealt  with  the  concerns  of ' 
comnnunities  that  have  special  constitutional 
status;  however,  there  are  some  minority 
communities  without  special  constitutional  or 
historic  status  who  also  raised  issues  concerning 
governance,  funding,  and  special  programs  to 
support  academic  achievement.  Therefore,  in  this 
chapter  we  address  certain  concerns  of  religious, 
racial,  and  language  minorities,  and  make  a  variety 
of  recommendations. 


Ontario's  rich  diversity  is  not  limited  to  Toronto: 
people  from  many  backgrounds  have  settled  in 
communities  large  and  small.  Whether  born  here  or 
elsewhere,  Ontarians  share  one  home  but  have  different  reli- 
gions and  languages,  ethno-cultural  and  racial  back- 
grounds.* 

We  can  expect  this  diversity  to  increase,  as  we  continue  to 
have  relatively  high  rates  of  immigration  from  parts  of  the 
world  that,  in  the  Canadian  context,  produce  religious, 
hnguistic,  ethno-cultural,  and  racial  minorities.  For  example. 
Statistics  Canada  estimated  that,  in  Ontario  in  1992,  there 
were  1,297,605  "visible  minorities"-  13  percent  of  the 
provincial  population.'  Although  it  is  always  dangerous  to 
make  population  projections,  we  think  it  safe  to  say  that  the 
proportion  and  number  of  racial  minorities  are,  at  the  very 
least,  likely  to  rise,  at  least  for  the  next  decade.' 

The  Canadian  Charter  of  Rights  and  Freedoms  provides 
all  Canadians  with  basic  protection  from  discrimination 
"based  on  race,  national  or  ethnic  origin,  colour,  religion, 
sex,  age,  or  mental  or  physical  disability,"  while  also  allowing 
for  "affirmative  action  programs."  The  Charter  requires  that 
it  be  "interpreted  in  a  manner  consistent  with  the  preserva- 
tion and  enhancement  of  the  multicultural  heritage  of 
Canadians";  this  is  an  extension  of  the  federal  government's 
announcement  in  1971  of  a  policy  of  multiculturalism  with- 


*FroiTi  a  scientific  perspective,  there  is  only  one  "race."  However,  socially,  people 
categorize  themselves  and  others  on  the  basis  of  race.  This  social  construct  means 
that  some  people  may  be  treated  differently,  purely  on  the  basis  of  the  perception 
of  one's  race. 


in  a  bilingual  framework;  later,  a  Canadian  Multiculturalism 
Act  was  passed  into  law. 

The  Commission  takes  with  utmost  seriousness  the 
school  system's  mandate  to  serve  all  students.  It  means  that 
the  system  needs  to  ensure  that  every  school  is  welcoming  to 
students  of  every  faith,  first  language,  ethnocultural  back- 
ground, or  colour.  Ontario  must  not  only  build  inclusive 
schools  and  curricula  but,  because  a  student  can  be  formally 
included  but  still  marginalized,  the  province  must  also  create 
schools  and  curricula  that  place  the  views,  concerns,  and 
needs  of  all  students  and  communities  at  the  very  centre  of 
the  teacher's  work. 

We  believe  the  Commission  has  done  this  throughout  our 
report  when  dealing  with  issues  such  as  those  related  to 
curriculum,  teacher  staffing,  training,  and  parental  and 
community  involvement. 

At  the  same  time,  we  recognize  that  it  may  be  necessary 
to  include  a  section  dealing  with  matters  related  to  specific 
communities,  based  on  data  that  indicate  the  children  of 
those  communities  are  collectively  performing  "below  the 
norm,"  at  least  as  compared  to  students  from  other  commu- 
nities or  to  the  board  average. 

A  small  number  of  school  boards  have  compiled  data  that 
allows  these  types  of  comparisons;  for  example,  they  have 
analyzed  the  proportions  of  students  found  in  the  advanced, 
general,  and  basic  streams  in  secondary  school.  They  have 
also  looked  at  drop-out  rates  and  various  indicators  of 
"risk":  we  know,  for  instance,  that  if  students  fall  significant- 
ly behind  in  the  number  of  credits  they  earn,  they  are  more 
"at  risk"  of  dropping  out. 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Equity  Considerations 


FIGURE  1 

Immigration  Trends  In  Ontario  -  1962-1992 


Pefceni 
50 

40 


.l.Mi.jI 


20 
10 
0 


II 


Asia 
No<th  &  Caolral  Am«rica 
C«ribb«an 
South  America 
•Mtddle  East 
Other/not  statad 


'Figures  are  available  (or  1992  only. 
Source:  Cmploynwnt  and  lnvni(rallon  Cviada 
ComplM  t>r  Onlafto  Mmwtry  01  ClUnnthlp 


1962 


1972 


1982 


1992 


These  data  arc  broken  down  according  to  gender,  class, 
ethnic,  and  racial  categories,  so  that  it  is  possible  to  see 
which  groups  are  better  represented  in,  for  example,  the 
advanced  level  that  leads  to  university,  and  which  groups 
have  higher  drop-out  rates.  It  is  clear  from  the  data  that 
there  are  substantial  differences  identifiable  for  somc 
groups.' 

In  a  paper  prepared  for  this  Commission,  University  of 
Western  Ontario  Professor  Jerry  Paquette  makes  a  very 
strong  case  for  monitoring  the  educational  benefits  derived 
by  various  sub-populations.'  As  he  points  out.  it  is  not  possi- 
ble to  assume  that  all  individual  students  arc  equal  and  thai 
all  will  achieve  at  the  same  high  degree.  Rather,  "the  equality 
dimension  of  public  education  should  take  aim  ...  at  an 
equitable  distribution  of  educational  excellence  across  lines 
of  demographic  difference.  That  is  the  real  and  singular 
challenge  of  equality  of  educational  opportunity..."  In  other 
words,  we  can  expect  that,  in  a  truly  equitable  system, 
roughly  the  same  proportions  of  each  community  will  excel, 
do  satisfactorily,  or  do  poorly,  as  in  the  total  student  popula- 
tion. If,  as  IS  currently  true,  they  do  not,  the  system  needs  to 
be  fixed. 

Wc  believe  that  the  benefits  of  learning  from  and  about 
each  other  more  than  justify  meeting  the  challenges  of 
providing  an  educational  system  that  is  sensitive  to  diversity. 

We  heard  from  minority  groups  who  feel  their  religious 
beliefs  are  not  sufficiently  accommodated  in  the  publicly 
funded  school  system.  Some  of  them  asked  for  more  consid- 
eration and  support  for  their  differences  so  that  their  chil- 


dren can  be  educated  in  the  public  school  system  in  a 
manner  that  recogni/.es  and  respects  their  needs. 

Others  do  not  feel  that  they  can  expect  the  public  system 
to  provide  an  education  that  is  consistent  with  their  values 
and  beliefs,  and  have  therefore  established  their  own  private 
education  systems.  They  asked  for  various  degrees  of  finan- 
cial support  to  alleviate  the  financial  burden  of  maintaining 
their  own  schools,  and  want  the  government  to  recognize 
their  different  needs  when  it  develops  and  implements 
education  policies. 

Religious  minorities 

Members  ul  itli^ious  inmorities  expressed  two  major 
concerns.  First,  they  argued  they  should  be  in  the  same  posi- 
tion as  Roman  (Catholics,  whose  children  are  educated  with 
in  a  Roman  (Catholic  framework  through  the  publicly  fund- 
ed system.  Sikhs,  Jews,  Christians,  Muslims,  and  members  of 
other  groups  asked  for  public  financial  support  for  separate 
schools  or  school  systems  based  on  their  religions. 

Second,  they  said  that  religious  minorities  are  not  under- 
stood and  respected,  either  because  of  negative  or  inade- 
quate representation  in  the  curriculum  or  even  because  of 
curriculum  content;  they  believe  that  all  students  should 
receive  more  information  about  a  range  of  religions. 

Public  funding  for  religious  schools  is  a  thorny  issue  in 
Ontario.  There  is  no  consensus  and  there  are  rather  convinc- 
ing arguments  on  both  sides.  Although,  in  1986,  the  Shapiro 
(Commission  looked  at  public  funding  for  Ontario's  private 
schools  in  Ontario,  including  those  that  arc  religion  based, 
and  proposed  funding  them  through  a  public  board  with 


For  ttte  Lo««  of  L»amir>g 


which  the  school  would  be  associated.  The  model  was  not 
accepted  by  government;  moreover,  support  for  it  by 
members  of  religious  minorities  has  been  mixed,  on  the 
grounds  that  it  does  not  create  autonomous  systems,  with 
taxation  powers  and  control  over  their  own  schools. 

In  1990,  the  ruling  of  the  Ontario  Court  of  Appeal  in  the 
Elgin  case  prohibiting  the  teaching  of  a  single  religious  tradi- 
tion as  if  it  were  the  exclusive  means  through  which  to  devel- 
op moral  thinking  and  behaviour-  left  some  doubt  about  the 
possible  legality  of  the  Shapiro  model.  A  court  challenge  is 
outstanding  on  this  issue. 

Early  in  1994,  as  we  were  in  the  midst  of  our  delibera- 
tions, the  Ontario  Court  of  Appeal  ruled  unanimously 
against  a  coalition  of  Jewish  and  Christian  schools  requesting 
provincial  funding.  The  judgment  held  that,  because  public 
funding  of  Ontario's  Roman  Catholic  school  system  (as  of 
Quebec's  Protestant  school  system)  was  agreed  to  at  the  time 
of  Confederation  and  was  part  of  the  Constitution  Act,  1867, 
non-funding  of  other  denominational  schools  does  not 
constitute  discrimination  against  them.  Because  the  issue  is 
not  one  of  contravening  the  Charter  of  Rights  and  Freedoms, 
funding  of  other  schools  was  a  matter  for  political  decision. 

After  considerable  discussion  and  debate,  the  Commission 
decided  to  leave  the  question  there.  We  are  conscious  that 
our  report  argues  forcefully  in  several  places,  either  explicitly 
or  implicitly,  in  favour  of  schools  that  respect  the  diversity  of 
learners  in  Ontario's  pluralistic  society.  We  insist  elsewhere 
that  ethnic  heritage  and  traditions  must  be  explicitly  includ- 
ed in  the  school  curriculum.  We  argue  for  schools  that  are 
inclusive. 

We  realize  as  well  -  and  several  times  mention  this  in  our 
report  -  that  curriculum  includes  both  what  is  said  and  what 
is  unsaid,  what  is  supported  and  what  is  not  supported,  what 
is  dealt  with  and  what  is  ignored  in  school  programs.  It  has 
been  argued  that  the  silence  of  the  public  school  curriculum 
on  matters  of  religion  runs  the  risk  of  devaluing  students' 
beliefs  and  of  conveying  the  idea  that  religion  is  alien  to  the 
wonder  and  the  task  of  learning. 

But,  whatever  our  personal  opinions,  and  despite  presen- 
tations from  individuals  and  representatives  of  minority 
groups  at  our  public  hearings,  we  do  not  find  ourselves  able 
to  recommend  changes  we  consider  beyond  our  terms  of 
reference.  In  keeping  with  our  mandate,  our  analysis  and 
recommendations  are  based  on  the  existing  collective  minor- 


A^iVhe  main  issue  is  not  whether  the 
I  curriculum  will  include  information 
about  different  religions,  although 
that  is  an  important  question,  but 
how  we  will  develop  ways  of  defining 
and  sharing  the  values  and  principles 
that  should  guide  education  in  a 
multicultural,  multlfaith  society.  A 
multifaith  program  of  education  about 
religion  will  contribute  to  the  more 
basic  goal  of  a  school  system  that 
equips  students  for  life  in  an  increas- 
ingly pluralistic  society." 

Ecumenical  Study  Commission 


ity  rights  and  privileges  enshrined  in  the  Constitution:  the 
right  of  Roman  Catholics  (and  of  the  Franco-Ontarians)  to 
management  and  public  funding  of  their  education  systems. 

While  the  Elgin  decision  prohibits  religious  instruction  of 
a  doctrinal  nature,  it  permits  teaching  about  religion.  We 
believe  it  makes  sense  for  all  schools,  including  Roman 
Catholic  schools,  to  include  more  about  religion,  using  a 
multifaith  approach:  a  program  that  educates  students  about 
a  range  of  religions  and  faiths,  their  basic  tenets,  and  the  way 
they  organize  themselves  is  quite  appropriate. 

The  Ministry  has  recently  released  a  curriculum  resource 
guide  for  school  boards  to  use  in  developing  courses  about 
religion  for  the  elementary  level."  Some  schools  might 
include  education  about  religion  in  the  10  percent  of  the 
curriculum  which  is  to  be  determined  locally  in  our  propos- 
al for  curriculum  in  Grades  1  to  9. 

Although  not  mandatory,  education  about  religion  might 
be  offered  at  the  secondary  level  through  the  world  religions 
course  already  available.  We  note,  however,  that  the  recent 
curriculum  resource  guide  for  elementary  public  schools 
provides  a  stronger  multifaith  focus  that  could  be  used  as  a 
model  for  revising  the  world  religions  course. 

We  recognize  that  a  course  about  religions  must  be  deliv- 
ered sensitively,  with  respect  and  generosity  in  discussions 
and  descriptions  of  diverse  religious  traditions.  We  do  not 
minimize  the  challenge  in  doing  so;  there  are,  after  all, 
people  in  other  parts  of  the  world  killing  each  other  over 
matters  of  religious  belief.  Nonetheless,  we  feel  that  courses 
on  religion,  taught  at  some  depth,  rather  than  treating  the 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Equity  Considerations 


Members  of  several  Unguage,  cthno-culiural,  and 
racul  mirtority  communilies  came  lo  the  Commission 
concerned  about  lost  opportunities:  too  many  of  their 
children  are  failing,  are  in  special  education  or 
non-university  streams,  or  are  dropping  out  of  school. 


subject  superficially  in  the  hope  of  avoiding  school  or 
community  clashes,  arc  important. 

Finally,  wc  take  seriously  the  concerns  of  members  of 
religious  and  other  minorities  who  believe  they  are 
portrayed  inaccurately  or  who  have  concerns  about  curricu- 
lum content;  the  latter  may  come  from  a  difference  between 
values  held  by  the  newcomers  and  by  members  of  the  society 
they  have  come  to  -  for  example,  in  relation  to  the  role  and 
status  of  females  in  Canadian  society. 

The  Commission  feels  that  taking  the  time  to  explain 
different  views  is  the  best  way  to  bridge  gaps  in  cultural 
understanding,  including  religious  differences.  Strategies 
designed  for  better  understanding  and  acceptance  would 
include  pre-service  and  in-service  education  of  teachers,  to 
ensure  they  are  better  informed  about  the  differences  within 
and  among  religions,  as  well  as  improved  partnerships  with 
the  community  and  more  sensitive  leadership  at  all  levels. 

Lan^ua^a,  athno-cuKural,  and  racial  minorftias 

Mtiiil'tr^  III  scvcr.il  laii^iii.i^i.-.  ittun'  i.iiltiir.il.  .ind  r.Ki.il 
minority  communities  came  to  the  Commission  concerned 
about  lost  opportunities:  loo  many  of  their  children  are  fail- 
ing, are  in  special  education  or  non- university  streams,  or 
are  dropping  out  of  school. 

Schools  can  and  must  serve  all  students.  As  we  have 
already  said,  while  some  of  our  recommendations  will  bene- 
fit all  students  directly,  some  groups  of  students  have  special 
needs  that  deserve  attention.  We  have  proposed  improve- 
ments in  language  acquisition  support  for  members  of 
linguutic  or  ethno-cullural  minorities. 


We  have  argued  that,  in  serving  the  needs  of  students 
from  ethno-cultural  and  racial  minorities,  there  must  be 
significant  changes  in  curriculum,  initial  teacher  education, 
and  on-going  professional  development;  there  must  also  be 
fair  testing  and  strengthened  partnerships  with  the  commu- 
nity. However,  we  are  concerned  that  even  this  may  not  be 
sufficient,  and  wc  are  suggesting  interventions  that,  we 
believe,  would  more  fully  respond  to  the  needs  we  heard. 

Because  it  is  important  to  keep  track  of  the  educational 
attainment  of  different  groups  in  society,  we  have  already 
recommended  that  this  be  done.  Given  that  we  know  that 
children  of  single  parents,  children  whose  parents  are  poor, 
or  children  from  some  minority  groups  do  not  do  as  well  as 
others,  the  school  system  has  a  responsibility  to  identify 
barriers  to  success  and,  where  it  can,  take  action  to  remove 
those  barriers.'  This  means  conducting  studies  and  audits,  in 
partnership  with  communities,  to  identify'  problems  that 
exist.  Then,  schools  and  school  boards  (and  the  Ministry) 
must  develop  action  plans  and  implement  them  -  once 
more,  of  course,  in  partnership  with  parents  and  the 
communities  concerned. 

Finally,  the  circle  would  be  closed  by  monitoring  achieve- 
ment levels  for  improvement,  and  by  taking  further  remedial 
action  if  necessary. 

In  his  report  on  race  relations,  Stephen  Lewis  was  moved 
by  what  he  heard  concerning  education.  As  he  said, 

...  it's  as  if  virtually  nothing  has  changed  for  visible  minority  kids  in 
the  school  system  over  the  last  ten  years  ...  The  lack  of  real  progress 
is  shocking.  And  I  believe  it  signals  the  most  inlraclabie  dilemma, 
around  race  relations,  in  contemporary  education:  hlow  do  you  gel 
the  best  of  policies  and  programs  mto  the  individual  classrooms?  h 
raises  searching  questions  of  communications  and  accountability.' 

The  Lewis  report  recommended  that  the  Ministry  moni- 
tor the  implementation  of  employment  equity  in  schools 
and  in  the  Ministry,  and  that  faculties  of  education  review 
their  admissions  criteria  to  attract  and  enrol  more  qualified 
members  of  minority  groups.  In  our  discussion  of  teacher 
professionalism  and  development  in  Chapter  12,  we  discuss 
the  need  for  faculties  of  education  and  other  partners  to 
ensure  the  existence  of  a  pool  of  qualified  teachers  from  a 
variety  of  backgrounds. 

Less  than  two  years  ago,  an  Anti-Racism,  Equity  and 
Access  Division  was  created  in  the  newly  restructured 


For  Uw  Um*  of  LMmmg 


opi 


Ministry  of  Education  and  Training;  representatives  of  many 
groups  told  us  they  have  high  expectations  for  this  initiative. 
The  division,  led  by  an  Assistant  Deputy  Minister,  has 
responsibility  for  responding  to  the  recommendations  of 
Stephen  Lewis's  report,  and  for  implementing  the  anti- 
racism  and  ethno-cultural  equity  provisions  of  Bill  21.* 

In  Chapter  17,  we  return  to  the  issue  of  the  best  way  to 
represent  the  interests  of  particular  communities  in  the 
Ministry. 

Recommendation  136 

*\Ne  strongly  recommend  that  the  Ministry  of  Education  and 
Training  always  have  an  Assistant  Deputy  Minister  responsi- 
ble, in  addition  to  other  duties,  for  advocacy  on  behalf  of 
anglophones,  francophones,  and  ethno-cultural  and  racial 
minorities. 

Other  government  initiatives,  such  as  the  recent  procla- 
mation of  Bill  79,  the  Employment  Equity  Act,  should  also 
have  an  impact  on  the  education  of  children  of  minority 
groups.  It  is  expected  that,  as  a  result  of  this  legislation, 
boards  will  employ  a  more  representative  workforce  at  all 
levels,  and  that,  therefore,  more  children  will  be  able  to  find 
role  models  from  their  own  background  in  the  adults  who 
are  part  of  their  school  communities,  and  interact  with  more 
adults  who  have  an  in-depth  understanding  of  their  cultural 
background. 

We  want  to  ensure  that  all  these  local  people  have  the 
capacity  to  implement  the  anti-racism  education  agenda. 

Recommendation  137 

*We  recommend  that  trustees,  educators,  and  support  staff 

be  provided  with  professional  development  In  anti-racism 

education. 

We  also  believe  it  is  imperative  that  performance  evalua- 
tion for  supervisory  officers,  principals,  and  teachers  should 
explicitly  make  implementation  of  anti-racism  policies  an 
important  criterion.  This  would  ensure  that  professionals  at 
all  levels  are  involved  in  the  implementation  of  anti-racism 
initiatives;  it  would  also  ensure  that  all  students  in  the 
province  receive  the  education  they  deserve. 


"Everywhere  the  refrain  of  the 

Toronto  students,  however 

starkly  amended  by  different 

schools  and  different 

locations,  was  essentially  the 

refrain  of  all  students.  Where 

are  the  courses  in  black 

history?  Where  are  the  visible 

minority  teachers?  Why  are 

there  so  few  role  models?  Why 

do  our  white  guidance 

counsellors  know  so  little  of 

different  cultural 

backgrounds?  Why  are  racist 

incidents  and  epithets 

tolerated?  Why  are  there 

double  standards  of 

discipline?  Why  are  minority 

students  streamed?  Why  do 

they  discourage  us  from 

university? ...  How  long  does  it 

take  to  change  the 

curriculum  so  that  we're 

part  of  it?" 

Stephen  Lewis,  "Report  on  Race  Relations " 


*  Bill  2 1 ,  an  amendment  to  the  Education  Act,  required  Boards  of  Education  to 
develop  and  implement  anti-racism  and  ethno-cultural  equity  plans,  subject  to 
Ministerial  approval. 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Equity  Considerations 


m 


Ai  Vhe  Black  Educators'  Working 
I  Group  (BEWG)  is  experiencing 
frustration  in  ensuring  that  the 
needs  of  black  students  are  deatt 
with  province-wide.  Too  often  prob- 
lems specifically  related  to  black 
students  remain  unaddressed,  or 
they  are  left  to  the  good  will  of 
Indtvidual  teachers,  schodft,  or 
local  boards  of  education." 


Recommendation  138 

'We  recommend  that  the  performance  management  process 
for  supervisory  officers.  pnrKipals,  and  teachers  specifically 
include  measurable  outcomes  related  directly  to  anti-racism 
policies  and  plans  of  the  Ministry  and  the  school  t>oards. 

In  our  view,  part  of  the  solution  to  ensuring  that  poHcy 
becomes  classroom  reality  is  to  involve  the  community  in 
the  implementation  and  monitoring  process:  schools  and 
boards  should  seek  input  from  the  community  to  decide  on 
the  measurable  outcomes  of  anti-racism  policies  and  plans. 

As  part  of  the  monitoring  process,  schools  and  boards 
should  receive  feedback  on  whether  these  outcomes  had 
been  achieved,  and  should  make  the  report  public  and  easily 
accessible  to  parents  and  other  members  of  the  community. 

In  Chapter  17,  we  deal  with  the  improvement  plans 
schools  should  be  required  to  develop,  and  in  (Chapter  19,  we 
describe  the  kind  of  public  report  the  Ministry  should 
require  Khool  boards  to  make  annually.  These  accountabili- 
ty measures  should  include  a  full  report,  not  only  on  imple- 
mentation of  the  anti-racism  policies  and  plans,  but  also  on 
the  way  parents  and  the  community  were  involved  in  the 
process. 

Recommendation  139 

*We  recommend  that,  for  the  purposes  of  the  anti-racism 
and  ethrnxultural  equity  provisions  of  Bill  21,  the  Ministry  of 
Education  arnJ  Training  require  tMards  and  schools  to  seek 
input  from  parents  and  community  memt>ers  in  implementing 
and  monitonng  the  plans.  This  process  should  be  linked  to 
the  overall  school  and  board  accountability  mechanisms. 


Farlier  in  this  report,  we  discussed  the  need  for  teachers 
to  have  curriculum  and  assessment  tools,  including  texts, 
tests,  software,  and  audio-visual  materials  that  arc  unbiased 
-  not  just  in  terms  of  race  and  ethnicity,  but  also  on  the 
basis  of  class,  gender,  sexual  orientation,  and  religion. 

Recommendation  140 

'We  further  recommend  that  the  Ministry  and  school  boards 
systematically  review  and  monitor  teaching  matenals  of  all 
types  (texts,  reading  matenals.  videos,  software,  etc.).  as 
well  as  teaching  practices,  educational  programs  (curricu- 
lum), and  assessment  tools  to  ensure  that  they  are  free  of 
racism  and  meet  the  spirit  and  letter  of  anti-racism  policies. 

Our  hearings  also  alerted  us  to  educational  issues  related 
to  particular  communities  -  especially  the  black  and  the 
Spanish-  and  Portuguese-language  communities.  Of  course, 
the  previous  recommendations  apply  to  all  groups,  and 
should  lead  to  great  improvement  in  the  learning  experi- 
ences of  their  children;  but  we  want  to  examine  the  particu- 
lar needs  of  the  three  groups,  and  make  recommendations 
designed  to  ensure  that  children  from  all  minority  groups 
are  able  to  achieve  as  successfully  as  other  students. 

Black  students,  teachers,  parents,  and  community  leaders 
came  to  the  Commission  and  expressed  serious  concerns 
about  the  achievement  levels  of  their  young  people.  They 
expressed  frustration  over  a  lack  of  improvement  over  the 
years,  during  which  time  they  have  voiced  their  concerns  to 
school  boards  and  to  the  Ministry.  They  are  concerned  about 
the  future  of  young  blacks  who,  without  a  secondary  school 
diploma  (let  alone  a  college  diploma  or  university  degree), 
face  limited  job  prospects,  social  marginalization,  and 
personal  defeat.  These  presenters  argued  forcefully  that  the 
education  system  is  failing  black  students,  and  that  there  is 
an  education  crisis  in  their  community. 

While  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  does  not 
have  province-wide  data  on  the  achievement  patterns  of 
students  according  to  sub-population,  there  are  a  variety  of 
good,  reliable  data  from  individual  boards.  Provincial  analy- 
ses, such  as  that  conducted  by  the  Child,  Youth  and  Family 
Policy  Research  Centre  for  the  Ministry  of  Citizenship  in 
1989,'  use  reports  from  individual  school  boards. 

Probably  the  most  comprehensive  data  arc  those  available 
from  the  Toronto  Board  of  Education.  These  indicate  that  9 
percent  of  its  secondary  school  students  in  1991-92  were 


For  lh«  Lovi  of  LMmtng 


black;  in  that  year,  they  made  up  only  seven  percent  of 
students  in  the  advanced  level,  but  16  and  18  percent  of  the 
general  and  basic  levels  respectively.  Between  1987  and  1991, 
there  was  a  slight  increase  in  the  proportion  of  black 
students  studying  at  the  advanced  level. 

Data  showed  that  36  percent  of  black  secondary  school 
students  were  "at  risk,"  based  on  their  grades  in  English  and 
math  courses;  this  pattern  was  repeated  when  only  students 
in  the  advanced  level  were  considered  and  when  the  black 
student  category  was  broken  down  into  those  born  in  Cana- 
da, in  Caribbean  countries,  and  in  Africa.  Even  black 
students  who  have  university-educated  parents,  or  parents  in 
professional  occupations,  or  who  live  with  both  parents, 
continue  to  do  disappointingly,  according  to  the  Toronto 
data.  On  the  other  hand,  compared  to  1987  data,  there  has 
been  a  statistically  important  improvement,  mostly  by  Cana- 
dian-born and  African-born  black  students,  although  black 
students  still  remain  significantly  behind  their  peers.'" 

In  a  separate  analysis,  the  Toronto  board  tracked  students 
who  were  in  Grade  9  in  1987  and  analyzed  their  record  of 
achievement,  based  on  results  at  the  end  of  1992.  It  found 
that  42  percent  of  the  black,  1987,  Grade  9  students  had  left 
the  system  by  the  end  of  1992  without  graduating.  Even 
among  those  whose  parents  were  in  semi-professional  occu- 
pations, black  students  were  more  likely  to  drop  out." 

Black  parents  are  concerned  that  the  large  proportion  of 
black  students  in  the  general-  and  basic-level  courses  (as 
opposed  to  advanced-level  courses)  not  only  limits  their 
opportunities  to  enter  post-secondary  education  programs, 
it  also  increases  the  risk  that  they  will  drop  out.  This  is 
confirmed, by  the  Toronto  board  data,  which  indicate  that 
the  non-completion  (or  drop-out)  rate  of  all  students  is:  21 
percent  from  the  advanced  level,  48  percent  from  the  gener- 
al, and  64  percent  from  the  basic. 

The  Board  of  Education  for  the  City  of  York  has  also 
compiled  comprehensive  data  on  the  achievement  levels  of 
various  sub-populations.'-  Their  data  also  found  that  black 
students  are  less  likely  to  be  taking  advanced-level  English 
and,  in  particular,  are  less  likely  to  take  math  courses.  Only 
44  percent  of  black  students  were  in  the  advanced  math 
course,  compared  to  a  significantly  greater  percentage  of 
other  students. 

When  the  place  of  birth  is  considered  for  racial  groups 
(where  numbers  are  large  enough  to  permit  analyses). 


Each  One,  Teach  One 

Another  example  of  a 
community  partnership  that 
is  focusing  on  assisting 
black  youth  is  the  Each 
One,  Teach  One  mentor 
program.  It  matches  young 
blacks,  one  on  one,  with 
successful  black  adults 
who  provide  career  advice, 
support,  and  motivation. 
Each  One,  Teach  One, 


established  in  February 
1992,  also  promotes  litera- 
cy and  cultural  awareness 
by  providing  free,  black- 
focused  books  to  youth, 
and  by  hosting  an  annual 
career-oriented  Youth  Day. 
With  more  than  200 
mentors,  it  still  cannot 
meet  the  demand,  a  sign 
that  the  program  is  popular 
and  effective. 


Canadian-born  black  students  of  Caribbean  descent  are 
over-represented  in  basic-  and  general-level  math  courses, 
but  equitably  represented  in  the  various  English  course 
levels.  Foreign-born  black  students  of  Caribbean  descent  are 
over-represented  in  basic-  and  general-level  English  and 
math  programs.  On  the  other  hand,  foreign-born  black 
students  of  African  descent  are  more  equitably  represented 
at  each  level. 

The  North  York  Board  of  Education  collected  data  on  the 
basis  of  country  of  origin,  and  is  now  planning  to  do  so 
based  on  racial  backgrounds.  Thus  the  information  base  to 
help  identify  the  needs  of  students  from  different  communi- 
ties is  widening. 

Although  we  know  that  a  good  number  of  black  students 
do  very  well  indeed  -  and  we  heard  from  and  worked  with 
some  of  them  -  the  overall  situation  is  hardly  in  dispute. 

Based  on  the  strong,  even  passionate,  presentations  from 
the  black  community,  and  on  the  available  data,  we  agree 
that  "there  is  a  crisis  among  black  youth  with  respect  to 
education  and  achievement.""  Our  sense  is  that  this  problem 
is  not  limited  to  the  Greater  Toronto  Area,  but  that  the  data 
could  likely  be  extrapolated  to  other  communities  in 
Ontario,  perhaps  more  so  in  such  urban  areas  as  Hamilton 
and  Ottawa  than  elsewhere. 

[Black]  parents  see  the  "drop-out"  problem  as  a  major  issue  for  the 
black/ African-Canadian  community.  They  are  concerned  about  their 
kids  making  the  grade,  and  particularly  about  the  youth  who  no 
longer  see  education  as  a  tool  to  achieve  their  life  ambitions  and 
dreams.'" 

George  Dei 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Equity  Considerations 


ii  ^%ur  belief  is  that  children  of 
^^ African  herttage  can  learn  and 
achieve  excellence  in  all  <icademic 
areas  where  appropriate  attitudes, 
programs 


^HjHU^F**  ^  support,  and  educational  prof 
^^^^H[        aro  est^MiahML" 


Others  have  been  similarly  convinced.  We  have  already 
mentioned  Stephen  Lewis's  "Report  on  Race  Relations." 
In  Towards  a  New  Beginning,  the  report  of  the  African- 
Canadian/Four  Levels  of  Government  Committee,  the 
authors  found  that  "virtually  every  facet  of  Ontario's  educa- 
tion system  needs  to  be  examined  critically,  if  it  is  to  be 
made  more  responsive  to  the  needs  of  those  who  fall  outside 
the  mainstream.  Teacher  training  and  recruitment,  curricu- 
lum revision,  employment  equity,  anti-racism  education:  all 
these  must  be  the  subject  of  closest  scrutiny.'* 

Though  almost  every  submission  and  presentation  to  the 
Commission  from  the  black  community  included  recom- 
mendations directed  to  existing  schools  and  school  boards,  a 
number  also  called  for  the  establishment  of  what  have  been 
called  Black  Focused  Schools  (BFS),  or  more  recently, 
African-Centred  Schools  (ACS),  and  Inclusive  Schools.  (We 
use  BFS  to  refer  to  all  three.)'* 

Smce  1992,  when  Black  Focused  Schools  (the  terminology 
used)  were  publicly  recommended  in  the  Towards  a  New 
Beginning  report,  there  has  been  considerable  debate  on  the 
subject,  both  within  the  black  community  and  outside  it. 
Our  public  hearings  and  submissions  became  yet  another 
forum  for  that  discussion. 

Lennox  Farrell.  one  of  our  presenters,  speaking  on  behalf 
of  the  Black  Action  Defence  Committee,  described  Black 
Focused  Schools  as  not  necessarily  black  schools  -  any 
student  could  attend.  Nor  would  all  the  staff  have  to  be 
black,  but  they  would  have  to  have  an  interest  in  or  be  expe- 
rienced in  leaching  black  students,  and  be  willing  to  ensure 
they  succeed.  He  went  on  to  say  that  BFSs  are  "defined  by 
the  staff  who  will  be  empowered  themselves  to  empower 


black  students.  |They  are|  not  to  teach  black  history,  but  to 
teach  realistic  history  ...  in  essence,  to  do  what  education 
should  already  be  doing:  to  be  realistic,  not  huro-centric  or 
Afro-centric  in  that  sense."' 

The  arguments  in  favour  of  BFSs  are  centred  on  building 
the  prerequisites  for  academic  achievement.  Parents  and 
teachers  argue  that,  despite  their  attempts  to  bring  about 
systemic  change,  not  enough  has  been  done  or  accom- 
plished, and  there  is  a  need  tor  more  draiiutic,  potentially 
faster,  action. 

However,  we  recognize  that  wc  arc  in  the  middle  of  an 
on-going  debate  that  raises  fundamental  issues  about  our 
values  as  a  society.  To  some,  the  notion  of  Black  Focused 
Schools  smacks  of  a  return  to  segregation,  to  a  time  when, 
unbelievably  even  in  Ontario,"  black  students  were  not 
allowed  to  attend  "regular"  schools. 

Others  are  not  only  concerned  about  the  divisivencss 
such  a  proposal  creates  between  groups,  they  arc  of  the 
opinion  that  a  policy  based  on  race,  whatever  its  intent,  can 
become  a  racist  policy.  They  believe  as  well  that,  in  practical 
terms,  because  blacks  in  Canada  must  operate  in  a  mixed 
society,  moving  from  mixed  schools  would  be  a  mistake. 
Don't  separate  the  black  students,  they  argue:  fix  the  schools. 

Opponents  also  accuse  supporters  of  BFSs  of  seeking  a 
segregated  school  system.  This  is  a  very  difficult  issue  for 
members  of  this  Commission,  each  of  whom  has  spent  a 
lifetime  working  towards  a  genuinely  multiracial  (.anada. 

There  must  not  be  the  slightest  doubt  that  this  (ximmis- 
sion  shares  the  great  concern,  the  desperation  even,  of  the 
black  community,  about  the  under-achievement  of  black 
students  as  a  group.  We  can  hardly  stress  too  strongly  our 
conviction  that  the  school  system  must  better  accommodate 
the  needs  of  black  children  and  young  black  men  and 
women.  Schools  must  become  more  inclusive,  staff  must 
become  more  representative  of  our  society  as  a  whole,  cours- 
es must  reflect  the  perspectives  and  contributions  of  minori- 
ty groups. 

But  even  that  is  n<it  enough.  We  must,  as  a  matter  of 
great  urgency,  mobilize  the  best  talent  available  throughout 
Ontario  to  develop  innovative  strategies  for  improving  the 
academic  performance  of  black  students,  * 

The  idea  of  a  "demonstration  sch<»or'  is  one  that  we  see 
as  having  great  promise.  In  this  context,  a  demonstration 
Khool  is  a  Khool  in  which  particular  interventions  are 


Fo(  ttM  IjOwi  of  l«arntng 


op: 


planned  and  carried  out  to  boost  the  achievement  of 
students.  The  hope  is  that  lessons  from  successful  models 
would  then  be  replicated  in  other  schools:  challenging  and 
relevant  curriculum,  innovative  and  engaging  teaching 
methods,  and  stronger  and  mutually  sustaining  links 
between  the  school  and  its  parents  and  community. 

Recommendation  141 

*We  recommend  that  in  jurisdictions  witli  large  numbers  of 
black  students,  school  boards,  academic  authorities,  facul- 
ties of  education  and  representatives  of  the  black  community 
collaborate  to  establish  demonstration  schools  and  innova- 
tive programs  based  on  best  practices  in  bringing  about  acad- 
emic success  for  black  students. 

Finally,  as  we  noted  earlier,  concerns  were  expressed 
about  the  success  levels  of  children,  particularly  those  from 
Portuguese  and  Hispanic/Latin  American  communities.  And, 
as  we  noted,  the  most  important  measure  of  educational 
equity  is  the  level  of  academic  success  being  earned  (and 
enjoyed)  by  students  from  various  communities. 

When  data  indicate  a  collective  problem  of  underachieve- 
ment  among  the  children  of  a  particular  group,  it  behooves 
schools  and  boards  to  pay  attention  and  take  steps  to 
improve  the  situation. 

Analyzing  the  data  on  Spanish-  and  Portuguese-speaking 
students  requires  care.  In  the  former  case,  current  reports  do 
not  distinguish  adequately  or  at  all  between  Central  Ameri- 
can and  South  American  students;  there  is  a  similar  lack  of 
specificity  between  Portuguese-speaking  students  from  the 
mainland  and  those  from  the  Azores. 

We  do  know,  however,  that,  as  the  result  of  changing 
immigration  and  refugee  patterns,  more  recent  Spanish- 
speaking  immigrants  have  been  predominantly  from  Central 
America;  we  believe,  as  well,  that  most  Portuguese  immi- 
grants to  Ontario  come  from  the  Azores. 

Clearly,  the  data  on  Hispanic/Latin  American  students 
and  on  Portuguese  students  should  be  interpreted  to  reflect 
diverse  and  continuously  changing  immigration  sources, 
including  changes  in  the  original  socio-economic  levels  of 
the  immigrants  and  refugees. 

We  turn  once  again  to  data  on  the  academic  achievement 
of  students  in  Ontario  schools.  The  Toronto  Board's  reports 
are  the  only  data  we  have  that  clearly  identify  Portuguese 
and  Hispanic/Latin  American  students.™  They  show  that,  in 


"If  we  really  believe  in  ideas 

like  equality  of  opportunity 

and  helping  children  reach 

their  full  potential,  then  we 

must  ask  serious  questions 

about  a  system  that  puts 

students  into  narrow  streams 

from  which  they  have  little 

chance  of  escaping." 

streaming  in  our  Schools. 
a  kit  prepared  by  the  Portuguese  Parent  Association, 
in  liaison  witli  the  Toronto  Board  of  Education,  page  3 


1991,  while  74  percent  of  all  Grade  9  students  were  taking 
courses  at  the  advanced  level,  only  53  percent  of  Portuguese 
students  and  61  percent  of  Hispanic  students  were  doing  so. 

Like  aboriginal  students,  Portuguese  students  had  the 
second  highest  proportion  of  learners  in  the  basic  level.  The 
Toronto  Board  data  also  identifies  students  "at  risk"  of  fail- 
ing, as  indicated  by  low  marks,  and  the  slow  pace  at  which 
they  are  accumulating  secondary  school  credits:  Hispanic 
students,  at  38  percent,  and  Portuguese,  at  33  percent,  were 
among  the  most  at  risk. 

Based  on  "home  language,"  it  was  also  found  that 
Portuguese-speaking  students  have  a  high  drop-out  rate:  in 

1992,  using  the  same  study  described  earlier,  48  percent  of 
Portuguese-speaking  students  who  had  been  in  Grade  9  in 
1987  had  graduated,  and  another  1 1  percent  were  still  in 
Toronto  schools.  In  other  words,  41  percent  of  Portuguese- 
speaking  students  had  left  school  without  graduating 
(compared  to  a  third  of  the  overall  population),  among  the 
highest  of  any  group  the  board  analyzed. 

When  the  family's  socio-economic  status  was  factored  in, 
the  pattern  remained  the  same:  in  comparisons  of  children 
of  semi-professional  parents,  Portuguese  students  were  still 
more  likely  than  others  to  drop  out.  Comparing  Portuguese- 
speaking  students  born  in  Canada  with  those  born  outside 
this  country,  those  who  are  Canadian-born  had  slightly 
higher  levels  of  achievement  but,  in  the  measures  we  have 
discussed,  even  they  were  below  the  average  for  the  system. 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Equity  Considerations 


u 


U 


nfoftunatety  this  faith  has  been 
betrayed.  Our  young  people  are 
feeling  marginalized  by  the  same 
educational  system  that  we  have 
entrusted  our  futures  to.  The  educa- 
tional system  has  judged  us  before 
we  as  young  people  have  had  a 
chance  to  develop  our  true  potential. 
Some  teachers  are  failing  to  encour- 

our  youth  to  stay  in  school  ... 
Portuguese  young  people  are  stereo- 
typed as  having  low  levels  of 
j«xpectatk>n  and  therefore  have 
been  streamed  into  low  levels  of 
achievement."  '^m^^ 

Hju  ,1  ^'  frs   HoftugjvseCanadian  National  Congress 


Alerted  by  the  student  achievement  data,  we  attended  a 
Portuguese  community  meeting,  in  addition,  of  course,  to 
welcoming  representation  from  that  community  at  the 
public  hearings.  Speakers  expressed  frustration  with  the 
percentage  of  their  students  being  streamed  into  non- 
university  courses  and/or  droppmg  out,  the  perceived  status 
of  Portuguese  as  a  "heritage,"  rather  than  a  useful  interna- 
tional language,  and  the  low  expectations  teachers  have  of 
their  children  and  young  adults. 

They  called  for  more  Portuguese-speaking  teachers,  a 
curriculum  that  better  reflects  the  presence  of  Portuguese- 
speaking  people  in  the  classroom  and  in  the  world,  support 
for  students  in  need  of  assistance,  and  active  attempts  to 
reach  out  to  parents. 

Presenters  argued  that  some  students  need  support  in 
English  land  Portuguese)  language  development,  but  that 
withdrawing  them  from  the  regular  class  to  attend  special 
classes  in  these  areas  is  not  necessarily  the  best  solution. 
Some  also  asked  for  more  analysis  of  the  situation  of 
Portuguese  students,  so  that  the  community  has  information 
on  which  It  can  monitor  improvement  and  interact  with 
Khool  boards  and  the  Ministry.'' 

We  will  indicate  ways  of  meeting  these  issues  as  well  as 
those  of  all  other  concerned  communities  in  our  conclusion. 


Conclusion 

As  IS  clear  troni  the  discusMon  s«)  lar,  it  is  important  that 
boards  collect  data  thai  will  indicate  when  children  of  a 
particular  group  are  not  achieving  at  the  same  rate  as  other 
students.  Equally,  it  is  clearly  unacceptable  to  allow  such  a 
situation  to  continue;  therefore,  information  needs  to  result 
in  action. 

There  are  various  strategies  that  teachers  can  use  to  help 
students  improve,  just  as  there  arc  ways  the  school  commu- 
nity can  assist  the  teachers,  and  the  teachers  can  aid  parents 
in  helping  and  encouraging  their  children  to  learn. 

Elsewhere  in  this  report,  we  have  described  some  strate- 
gies, such  as  the  transitional  use  of  the  student's  first 
language  or  peer  tutoring,  and  there  may  well  be  other 
methods  for  helping  these  students,  which  are  being  used 
successfully  by  teachers  and  principals. 

There  arc,  as  well,  strategics  that  involve  the  entire  school, 
such  as  the  Accelerated  Schools  Project  developed  by  Henry 
M.  Levin,  professor  of  education  and  of  economics  at  Stan- 
ford University.  The  program  was  established  there  in  1986 
after  an  exhaustive  five-year  study  on  the  status  of  at-risk 
students  in  the  United  States.  The  study  found  that  these 
students  are  academically  behind  from  the  day  they  start 
school,  and  fall  further  and  further  behind  the  longer  they 
are  in  school.  Therefore,  the  basic  premise  of  the  Accelerated 
Schools  Project  is  that  "at-risk  students  must  learn  at  a  faster 
rate  -  not  a  slower  rate  that  drags  them  further  and  further 
behind.  An  enrichment  strategy  is  called  for  rather  than  a 
remedial  one.""  Dr.  Levin  contends  that,  typically,  schools 
have  had  low  expectations  of  at-risk  students. 

To  counteract  that,  the  accelerated  schools  are  built  on 
three  central  principles:  unity  of  purpose,  empowerment 
coupled  with  responsibility,  and  building  on  strengths.  Unity 
of  purpose  refers  to  an  active  collaboration  among  members 
of  the  entire  school  community,  including  parents,  in  setting 
and  achieving  a  common  set  of  goals  for  the  school. 
Empowerment  coupled  with  responsibility  refers  to  the  abil- 
ity of  the  participants  in  the  school  community  to  make 
important  educational  decisions  and  take  responsibility  for 
implementing  them,  and  for  the  outcome  of  those  decisions. 
Finally,  accelerated  schools  look  for  the  strengths  that  all 
members  of  the  school  community  can  bring  to  the  school, 
rather  than  trying  to  identify  weaknesses  in  some  partici- 
pants that  others  have  to  help  them  overcome. 


foi  t^•  Low*  of  Learning 


"S 


These  school  communities  wori<  together  to  create 
powerful  learning  experiences  actively  involving  children  in 
higher-order  thinking  and  complex  reasoning  in  the  context 
of  a  relevant  curriculum.  Working  together  and  using  all 
available  human  and  other  resources  -  for  example,  the 
active  participation  of  parents  and  the  use  of  information 
technology  -  they  integrate  the  curriculum  content,  teaching 
strategies,  and  supports. 

Dr.  Levin  does  not  believe  that  the  concept  involves  a 
large  infusion  of  additional  funds  or  new  instructional  pack- 
ages. Instead,  he  concludes  that 

the  ability  to  energize  a  school  and  to  get  it  to  focus  productively  on 
a  common  set  of  objectives,  using  the  talents  of  staff,  parents,  and 
students,  is  far  more  important  than  any  particular  curriculum 
package  or  teaching  method. 

We  strongly  believe  that  implementing  the  recommenda- 
tions of  our  report  will  move  every  school  to  becoming  an 
accelerated  school.  We  would  expect  that,  over  time,  fewer 
and  fewer  groups  of  children  would  be  identified  as  being  at 
risk  of  having  significantly  lower  levels  of  achievement. 
However,  there  are  such  groups  at  present,  and  there  may 
continue  to  be  as  a  result  of  future  demographic  changes. 

We  believe  that  school  boards  are  responsible  for  identi- 
fying successful  methods  of  helping  at-risk  children  learn, 
and  ensuring  that  their  teachers  and  principals  get  needed 
professional  development  to  acquire  the  skills  and  informa- 
tion to  use  these  methods.  Having  done  that,  boards  are  in  a 
position  to  insist  that  teachers  and  principals  apply  these 
methode  to  help  all  children  achieve  excellence. 

Recommendation  142 

*We  therefore  recommend  that  whenever  there  are  indica- 
tions of  collective  underachievement  in  any  particular  group 
of  students,  school  boards  ensure  that  teachers  and  princi- 
pals have  the  necessary  strategies  and  human  and  financial 
resources  to  help  these  students  improve. 

Our  recommendations  in  this  chapter  are  intended  to 
remove  barriers  that  prevent  some  students  from  being  as 
successful  as  they  could  be,  and  to  create  conditions  that  will 
have  a  positive  impact  on  them.  We  repeat  what  wc  have  said 
elsewhere:  people  have  to  set  high  expectations  for  all 
students,  and  mobilize  the  strengths  of  all  our  communities 
to  build  the  kinds  of  learning  environments  in  which  all 
students  can  attain  higher  levels  of  achievement. 


panish-speaking  students  face  a 
system  of  education  that  all  too 
frequently  does  not  comprehend  their 
values  and  needs.  As  a  result,  racist 
attitudes  and  discrimination  constrain 
their  learning  and  growth  ...  the 
educational  system  needs  to  address 
the  systemic  barriers  to  equity  which 
exist  in  our  schools." 


Organization  of  Spanish  Speaking  Educators  of  Ontario,  the 
Spanish-Speaking  Parents'  Liaison  Committee,  and  the 
Education  Committee  of  the  Hispanic  Council 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Equity  Considerations 


Endnotes 


1991  census  cUu,  quoted  in  Association  of  Colleges  of  Applied 
Arts  and  Technology.  "Environmental  Scan*  (Toronto,  1994). 

Using  a  medium  population  growth  scenario,  another  Statis- 
lia  Canada  report  protected  the  visible  minority  population  to 
increase  to  2Ji5.400  by  the  year  2001,  and  to  3.773.100  by 
2016.  See  Statistics  Canada,  ft>/>uJ<in(7n  Profttnons  of  Vistble 
Mtnonty  Group*.  Canada,  Provmcn  and  Regions.  I99I-20I&, 
no.  4.17  ( 1993).  appendix  table.  Prepared  by  Warren  E. 
Kalbach  and  others. 

Part  3  of  the  /99/  Evrry  Secondary  Student  Survey,  when  disag- 
gregating data  by  race  and  parental  occupation  or  parent  level 
of  education  or  parental  presence  still  found  significant  under- 
achievement  of  black  student!>  compared  to  white  and  Asian 
students  (Toronto  Board  of  Education  Research  Services, 
report  205  1 1993),  p.  30).  However,  an  "unapproved  final 
copy"  of  the  "Teenage  School  Dropout  and  Young  Adult 
Unemployment  Report."  based  on  findings  of  the  Ontario 
Health  Supplement,  found  that  neither  immigrant  nor  cultural 
minority  status  distinguished  dropouts  from  non-dropouts  (p. 
24).  Howrver.  as  Patricia  Daenzer  and  George  Dei  note,  "many 
of  these  studies  arc  methodologically  limited  for  our  purposes 
since  the  sample  categories  are  'visible  minorities'  or  'racial 
minorities.'  This  conflating  of  the  exf>eriences  of  students  from 
a  MTule  range  of  cultures  and  ethno-sp>ecific  groupings 
obKures  scientific  specificity"  See  Daenzer  and  Dei,  "Issues  of 
School  Completion/  Dropout:  A  Focus  on  Black  Youth  in 
Ontario  Schools  and  Other  Relevant  Studies,"  p.  1.  Paper 
commissioned  by  the  Ontario  Royal  Commission  on  Learning, 
1994 

lerry  Paquette,"Maior  Trends  in  Recent  Educational  Policy- 
making in  Canada:  Refocusing  and  Renewing  in  Challenging 
Times,"  p.  22,  23,  28,  3 1 ,  and  32.  Paper  commissioned  by  the 
Ontario  Rxiyal  Commission  on  Learning,  1993. 

Ontario,  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  Education  about 
Religion  in  Ontarw  Public  Elementary  Schools:  Resource  Guule 
(Toronto,  1994),  p.  7. 

Ontario,  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training.  Education  about 
Religion. 


7  For  one  school  board's  analyses  of  these  phenomena,  see 
Maisy  Cheng,  Maria  Yau,  and  Suzanne  Zieglcr,  The  1991  Every 
Secondary  Student  Survey,  part  2,  lietailed  Profilei  of  Toronto's 
Secondary  School  Students,  and  part  3,  h^ogram  Level  and 
Student  Achievement,  reports  204  and  205  (Toronto  Board  of 
Education  Research  Services,  1993);  and  Robert  S.  Brown,  A 
Follow-  up  of  the  Grade  9  Cohort  of  1 987  Every  Secondary 
Student  Survey  Participants,  report  207  (Toronto  Board  of 
Education  Research  Services,  1993). 

8  Stephen  Lewis,  "Report  on  Race  Relations"  (1992).  p.  20. 

9  Child,  Youth  and  Family  Policy  Research  Centre,  Visible 
Minority  Youth  Project  (Toronto:  Ontario  Ministry  of  Citizen- 
ship, 1989).  See  "Education  and  Visible  Minority  Youth"  in 
this  report,  p.  33-34. 

10  Cheng,  Yau,  and  Zieglcr,  /99;  Every  Secondary  Student  Survey, 
part  3. 

1 1  Brown,  Follow-up  of  the  Grade  9  Cohort. 

1 2  Board  of  Education  for  the  City  of  York,  Planning  and 
Research  Department,  Report  to  the  Standing  Committee  on 
Race  Relations  (Newmarket,  ON,  1994). 

13  Scarborough  Board  of  FUlucation,  Report  on  the  Consultation 
with  the  Black  and  Caribbean  Community  (Scarborough,  ON, 
1991).  p.  23. 

1 4  Ontario,  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  Learning  or 
Leaving?  The  "Dropout"  Dilemma  among  Black  Students  in 
Ontario  Public  Sc/iooii  (Toronto,  1994),  p.  5.  Prepared  by 
George  Dei. 

1 5  The  Four- Level  Working  Group  on  Metropolitan  Toronto 
Black  Canadian  Cximmunity  Concerns,  Towards  a  Nrw  Begin- 
ning {Toronto,  1992). 

16  See  George  Dei.  "Beware  of  False  Dichotomies:  Examining  the 
Case  for  'Black  Focused'  Schools  in  Canada."  no  date. 

17  Lennox  Farrcll.  for  the  Black  Action  Defence  (ximmittec. 
Presentation  to  the  Ontario  Royal  Q)mmission  on  Learning, 
1993. 


the  I  ov«  of  LCWntnC 


18  In  Ontario,  separate  schools  were  established  for  black 
students  under  provincial  legislation  (The  Common  Schools 
Act,  1850).  Separate  publicly  funded  schools  for  black  children 
were  located  in  Amherstburg,  Brantford,  Chatham,  London, 
Niagara-on-the-Lake,  and  St.  Catharines  in  the  19th  century, 
although  the  legislation  was  not  repealed  until  1964. 

For  more  on  the  history  of  black  education,  see: 

Keren  Brathwaite,  "The  Black  Student  and  the  School:  A  Cana- 
dian Dilemma,"  in  African  Continuities/L'Heritage  africain,  ed. 
Simeon  W.  ChUunga  and  Saida  Niang  (Toronto:  Terebi,  1989). 

Daniel  G.  Hill,  The  Freedom  Seekers:  Blacks  in  Early  Canada 
(Toronto:  Stoddart,  1981). 

19  For  a  discussion  on  this  issue,  see  Dei,  "Beware  of  False 
Dichotomies,"  p.  21. 

20  For  an  analysis  of  student  performance  on  the  basis  of  ethnici- 
ty, language  background,  race,  class,  and  parental  presence, 
see,  for  example,  Cheng,  Yau,  and  Ziegler,  1991  Every 
Secondary  Student  Survey. 

21  For  further  discussion  of  issues  facing  Portuguese  students,  see 
Ilda  Januario,  "A  Happy  Little  Guy?  Case  Study  of  a 
Portuguese-Canadian  Child  in  the  Primary  Grades,"  Orbit  25, 
no.  2  (1994):  44-45. 

22  Henry  M.  Levin,  "Learning  from  Accelerated  Schools"  (1993), 
p.  2,  a  paper  adapted  from  his  chapter  in  Selecting  and  Inte- 
grating School  Improvement  Programs,  ed.  James  H.  Block, 
Susan  T.  Everson,  and  Thomas  R.  Guskey  (New  York:  Scholas- 
tic, forthcoming). 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      equity  Considerations 


^'t 


rlH 


Organizing  Education 
Power  and 
Decision-Maicing 


In  earlier  chapters  we  articulated  the  basis  of  our 
vision  of  the  school  system  and  described  the  kind 
of  schools  we  want  for  Ontario's  young  people.  We 
now  address  the  question  of  how  the  education 
system  should  be  organized.  Our  recommendations 
are  intended  to  strike  an  appropriate  balance  of 
power  among  the  various  groups  and  institutions  in 
the  education  system,  keeping  in  mind  that  the 
overall  goal  is  to  increase  student  learning.  The 
system  should  therefore  be  organized  to  support 
the  teacher-student  relationship.  The  aim  Is  to  have 
an  organizational  design  that  furthers  educational 
objectives,  makes  effective  use  of  resources, 
redresses  inequities,  and  gives  all  stakeholders  a 
voice  in  important  decisions  about  education. 


stakeholders  and  power 

As  with  so  many  other  educational  issues,  there  are 
no  simple  or  obvious  answers  to  questions  about 
who  should  make  various  decisions,  what  gover- 
nance structures  make  most  sense,  how  authority  ought  to 
be  exercised,  or  even  what  criteria  should  be  used  in  coming 
to  conclusions.  As  well,  there  is  surprisingly  little  research  in 
the  area  of  school  governance  that  could  direct  us  to  firm 
conclusions. 

Over  the  course  of  our  work,  we  came  to  believe  that  the 
main  organizational  issues  are,  first,  the  high  degree  of 
uncertainty  and  confusion  about  who  is  in  charge;  second, 
the  sense  of  imbalance  in  the  sharing  of  power  between  the 
key  players,  with  parents  and  students  playing  a  very  minor 
role.  There  is  also  a  commonly  held  perception  that  the 
organization  of  the  system  is  not  furthering  its  goals,  accom- 
panied by  a  belief  that  drastic  changes  in  governance  are 
required.  We  carefully  considered  these  concerns,  and 
designed  our  recommendations  to  address  the  problems  we 
identified. 

The  organizational  changes  we  recommend  are  all  aimed 
at  supporting  teachers  and  students  in  schools.  We  recom- 
mend giving  a  stronger  voice  to  students,  strengthening  the 
relationship  between  parents  and  schools,  and  ensuring  that 
principals  and  teachers  have  greater  autonomy  in  the 
management  of  their  schools.  At  the  school  board  level,  we 
stress  the  need  to  clarify  the  roles  of  trustees  as  distinguished 
from  supervisory  officers,  and  outline  what  we  see  as  the 
school  board's  appropriate  role  to  support  schools  in 
improving  student  learning. 


We  also  stress  the  need  for  the  Ministry  of  Education  and 
Training  to  play  a  strong  leadership  role,  setting  overall 
direction  for  the  province's  education  policy,  and  connecting 
education  with  other  areas  of  public  and  social  policy.  We 
also  explain  why  we  reject  some  commonly  suggested  solu- 
tions, such  as  giving  parents  a  direct  role  in  managing 
schools,  or  drastically  reducing  the  number  of  school  boards 
in  Ontario,  or  even  eliminating  school  boards  entirely. 

Although  we  propose  some  changes,  we  found  no  reason 
to  alter  drastically  the  basic  organization  structure  of  the 
Ontario  education  system,  comprising  a  Ministry  of  Educa- 
tion and  Training,  school  boards,  and  schools.  Although  this 
system  is  not  perfect,  there  is  no  evidence  that  any  alterna- 
tive system  would  be  preferable  in  balancing  competing 
interests,  improving  student  learning,  or  being  more  democ- 
ratic. Therefore,  rather  than  radically  changing  the  way 
education  is  organized,  we  recommend  improvements  that 
should  make  a  significant  difference  for  the  future. 

The  ultimate  stakeholder  in  publicly  funded  education  is 
the  public,  whose  interests  must  be  taken  into  account. 
Publicly  funded  schools  belong  to  everyone,  and  must  serve 
society's  needs.  The  best  case  for  public  education  has  always 
been  that  it  is  a  common  good  -  that  everyone,  ultimately, 
has  a  stake  in  education.  Therefore,  any  organizational 
design  must  protect  and  promote  public  interests. 

The  players 

Much  of  the  history  of  schooling  has  been  an  account  of 
how  each  of  the  many  stakeholders  tried  to  influence  the 
direction  and  shape  of  the  system.  The  key  players  have  their 
formal  roles  and  responsibilities  set  down  in  various  statutes 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Organizing  Education 


£^   ML  t  the  present  time  tt>e  system 
^^appears  to  be  caught  up  in  ttie 
midst  of  a  flood  of  contradictory 
expectations  and  notions  of 
entitlement.  Statements  of  presumed 
rights  are  much  more  common  than 
assumptions  of  responsibility.  Son>e 
effort  to  ciartfy,  or  to  put  in  place  a 
mechanism  for  dartfying,  wtiat  each 
of  the  parties  might  reasonably 
expect  from  the  other  would 
be  salutary.' 


and  regulations.  The  Minister  of  Education,  for  instance,  is 
authorized  to  set  diploma  requirements  and  curriculum 
guidelmes,  certify  teachers,  and  require  school  boards  to 
have  policies  in  specific  areas.  School  boards  must  operate 
schoob  according  to  provincial  legislation,  provide  educa- 
tional programs  for  all  students  in  their  jurisdictions,  and 
hire  staff. 

Principals,  as  we  noted  in  Chapter  12,  are  responsible  for 
managing  their  schools,  particularly  with  regard  to  the 
content  and  quality  of  instruction  and  the  disciphne  of 
students.  Teachers  are  to  develop  courses  of  study,  instruct 
and  evaluate  their  students,  and  report  on  student  progress. 
Parents  and  guardians  must  ensure  that  children  of  compul- 
sory school  age  attend  school,  while  students  themselves  are 
required  to  attend  classes  regularly,  learn  diligently,  and  act 
sensibly.  Under  the  School  Boards  and  Teachers  Collective 
Negotiations  Act,  teachers'  federations  arc  mandated  to 
conduct  negotiations  with  school  boards  about  their 
members'  working  conditions  and  pay. 

It  is  obvious  that  some  of  the  language  of  the  Act,  espe- 
cially that  referring  to  the  Minister,  to  boards,  and  to  princi- 
pals, is  often  vague,  and  that  a  number  of  key  functions 
(developing  curriculum,  for  instance)  overlap.  This  lack  of 
clarity  allows  perpetual  manoeuvcring  among  players  - 
including  the  Ministry,  school  board  trustees,  school  board 
administratorv  univenities,  principals,  teachers,  teacher  feder- 
ations, parents,  the  business  community,  even  students  them- 
selves -  to  increase  their  own  power.  Although  some  ambigui 
ty  «  inherent  in  the  system,  we  have  tried  to  clarify  somewhat 
the  various  roles  and  respotuibtiities. 


Allocating  and  exercising  decision-making  powers 

.\i  a  prai.in.al  level,  ihc  orj;ani/aiion  ot  the  s«.lii)i)l  system  is  .1 
question  of  how  decision  making  powers  arc  allocated  and 
exercised.  I  inding  an  appropriate  balance  is  a  critical  theme 
in  our  proposals  lor  organizing  the  school  system. 

Ontario  schools  were  originally  established  and 
controlled  by  local  citizens.  With  an  eye  on  efficiency  and 
equality  of  opportunity,  ht)wcvcr,  successive  governments 
slowly  developed  larger  units,  culminating  in  1969  with  the 
amalgamation  of  more  than  two  thousand  small  boards  into 
less  than  200  larger  school  boards,  most  based  on  the 
provincial  county  as  the  administrative  unit.  Today  there  arc 
172  Ontario  school  boards. 

All  through  the  20th  century,  there  have  been  conflicting 
pressures  toward  centralization  and  decentralization.  In 
Ontario,  the  1969  consolidation  of  school  boards  not  only 
concentrated  authority  in  a  smaller  number  of  larger  boards, 
it  also  moved  authority  from  the  Ministry  to  these  larger 
boards  through  the  transfer  of  such  functions  as  supervising 
and  inspecting  teachers. 

The  main  arguments  in  favour  of  centralization  are  that  a 
central  authority  can  work  out  common  solutions  to  educa- 
tional problems,  ensuring  program  quality  across  the 
province;  that  efficiency  and  economics  of  scale  are  possible 
with  central  control;  and  that  central  authorities  are  needed 
to  ensure  social  justice  and  equity. 

The  main  argument  in  favour  of  decentralization  is  that 
local  communities  should  be  able  to  control  their  own 
schools,  and  that  they  know  best  what  policies  and  programs 
suit  the  community. 

There  are  problems  with  taking  either  of  these  arguments 
to  extremes.  The  challenge  is  to  find  an  appropriate  balance 
of  power  and  control  at  the  school,  community,  Ministry, 
and  provincial  levels.  In  the  following  sections  we  indicate 
how  we  believe  authority  and  power  should  be  reallocated 
in  the  Ontario  school  system.  In  brief,  we  are  recommending 
a  stronger  voice  for  students  and  parents;  greater  decision- 
making authority  for  principals,  with  involvement  of  teach- 
ers as  well;  clarifying  the  role  of  school  boards;  and  articu- 
lating a  strong  policy  leadership  role  for  the  Ministry  of 
hdutalion  and  Training. 


For  nw  U>«*  of  l«amln( 


£i 


w: 


Schools 

Because  schools  are  the  heart  of  the  education  system  they 
must  be  the  centre  of  change  in  education.  Change  can  only 
occur  through  a  re-alignment  of  roles  and  responsibilities  of 
the  key  players  at  the  school  level. 

Students 

In  presentations  to  the  Commission,  students  provided 
insight  and  perspective,  making  common-sense  suggestions 
for  improving  schools.  We  believe  the  school  system  will 
benefit  substantially  by  systematically  seeking  their  views  and 
taking  their  opinions  seriously.  While  it  makes  sense  to  do 
this  on  an  informal  basis  for  students  in  Grade  6  and 
younger,  we  believe  it  should  be  formalized  for  those  in 
Grade  7  and  up. 

There  are  three  forums  in  which  this  should  happen. 
First,  all  boards  should  include  at  least  one  student  member, 
elected  by  fellow  students.  Student  trustees  should  have 
input  into  and  a  vote  on  all  board  deliberations,  subject  to 
the  usual  conflict-of-interest  and  legal  requirements.  Several 
Ontario  boards,  for  instance,  the  Kenora  Board  of  Education 
and  the  Stormont,  Dundas,  and  Glengarry  Board  of  Educa- 
tion, have  student  trustees,  although  under  the  current 
provisions  of  the  Education  Act,  they  cannot  be  regular 
voting  trustees.  Evaluations  to  date  suggest  that  having 
student  trustees  has  been  successful  and  meaningful. 

Second,  student  councils  should,  in  addition  to  organizing 
social  events,  be  responsible  for  gathering  and  presenting 
student  views  on  schooling  in  a  regular  and  systematic 
manner,  'fhis  might  be  done  through  regular  forums  or 
surveys  or  other  means,  depending  on  what  the  student 
council  decides.  They  should  also  provide  on-going  advice  to 
student  trustees. 

Third,  there  should  be  a  Student  and  Youth  Council  simi- 
lar to  the  Ontario  Parent  Council  which  the  Minister  recently 
created.  The  membership  would  include  representatives  of 
the  three  provincial  student  organizations,  a  representative  of 
recent  graduates,  and  a  representative  of  young  people  not  in 
school.  Its  mandate,  like  that  of  the  OPC,  would  be  to  advise 
on  all  educational  matters,  and  to  seek  further  ways  to 
involve  students  in  decisions  that  affect  their  lives.  A  formal 
training  program  should  be  instituted  for  all  students  who 
are  elected  to  be  representatives,  while  part  of  the  profession- 
al development  of  teachers  and  principals  would  include 


e  encourage  student  input  into 
curriculum  content.. .[and]  the 
concept  that  all  students  should  be 
respected  and  given  an  opportunity  to 
express  themselves... 

Parents,  students  and  administration 
should  participate  in  teacher 
evaluation." 

London  and  Middlesex  County  Roman  Catholic  Secondary 
Schools,  Student  Council  Prime  Ministers 


training  to  work  closely  with  the  new  student  leadership. 

Additionally,  we  also  suggest  that  a  Students'  Charter  of 
Rights  and  Responsibilities,  setting  out  clearly  the  kinds  of 
roles  outlined  above,  be  distributed  each  year  to  every 
student  in  the  province,  and  that  school  time  be  made  avail- 
able for  the  student  council  to  ensure  that  all  students  are 
fully  aware  of  the  contents  and  implications  of  the  charter. 
Although  students  already  formally  have  rights  beyond 
merely  the  right  to  a  good  education,  such  as  the  secondary 
school  students'  right  to  be  told  in  advance  about  the 
content  of  course  work  and  methods  of  evaluation,  we 
understand  these  are  often  ignored.  Students  need  clear 
statements  and  explanations  of  their  rights  and  responsibili- 
ties, and  of  the  school's  code  of  behaviour  and  discipline 
policies. 

Recommenciatlons  143,  144,  145,  146,  147,  148 
*We  recommend  that  all  boards  have  at  least  one  student 
member,  entitled  to  vote  on  all  board  matters,  subject  to  the 
usual  conflict-of-interest  and  legal  requirements. 

*We  recommend  that  student  councils  be  given  the  responsi- 
bility for  organizing  students '  viev/s  on  all  aspects  of  school 
life,  and  for  transmitting  these  views  to  teachers  and  princi- 
pals Vi/ith  responses  sent  back  to  students  in  a  systematic 
vi/ay,  and  that  they  provide  advice  to  student  trustees. 

*We  recommend  that  the  Minister  of  Education  and  Training 
establish  a  Student  and  Youth  Council,  to  advise  on  all 
educational  matters,  to  seek  further  vi/ays  to  involve  students 
in  decisions  that  affect  their  lives,  and  to  sponsor  research 
about  what  students  can  do  to  improve  learning  in  schools. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Organizing  Education 


At  Ht  is  possible  that  ttte  voice  of  the 
I  principal  is  muffled,  albeit  not 
intentionally,  by  several  existing 
institutions,  which  include  (1)  the 
affiliates  of  ttte  Ontario  Teachers' 
Federations,  who  speak  for  their 
nvstiorrty  stakeholders,  the  teachers 
of  Ontario;  (2)  the  supervisory 
officers,  who  speak  from  a  more 
gftibti  point  of  view;  (3)  the  parents 
and  their  respective  interest  groups, 
who  have  specific  interests  for  their 
children;  and  (4)  trustees,  wtto  have 
their  own  perspectives  on  their 
potttical  responsibilities."  ^ 


*We  recommend  that  the  Ministry  organize  a  collaborative 
process  for  developing  a  Students'  Charter  of  Rights  and 
Responsibilities,  and  that  the  process  include  a  significant 
role  for  students.  The  essential  elements  of  such  a  charter 
must  irKlude  a  descnption  of  the  kind  of  information  a 
student  is  entitled  to  receive,  the  programs  and  services  to 
which  a  student  is  entitled,  the  responsibilities  a  student  is 
expected  to  accept,  the  role  that  students  are  entitled  to  play 
in  the  decisions  made  in  the  system,  and  the  recourse  avail- 
able if  students  feel  that  their  rights  have  not  been  upheld. 

'We  recommend  that  students  be  involved  in  developing  and 
regularly  reviewing  codes  of  behaviour  and  other  selected 
policies  ar)d  procedures  that  flow  from  the  Students '  Charter 
of  Rights  and  Responsibilities  at  both  tx>ard  and  school 
levels.  These  policies  and  procedures  may  not  take  away 
from  the  rights  and  responsibilities  specified  in  the  charter. 

'We  recommerni  that  information  atjout  the  students'  charter 
and  all  policies  and  procedures  that  directly  affect  students 
be  made  available  to  all  students  in  a  way  most  students  can 
readily  urKierstand. 

Teachert  and  Principal 

ChtpXen  7  through  10  provide  the  CximmiiMon'*  viiion  of 
kHooU  and  of  the  program  for  students.  In  Chapter  12,  we 
outline  our  pcripectivc  on  the  role  of  principals  and  teachers 


in  the  operation  of  schools,  stressing  the  responsibilities  of 
principals  to  stimulate  and  support  improved  teaching  and 
learning  in  their  schools.  If  principals  are  respt)nsible  for 
creating  and  sustaining  the  conditions  for  effective  teaching 
and  learning  in  school,  they  need  to  have  the  power,  within 
guidelines  set  by  the  school  board,  to  make  decisions  about 
certain  central  issues,  such  as  staffing  and  how  funds  are  to 
be  allocated. 

Teachers,  as  professionals  on  whom  the  success  of  the 
school  depends,  should  also  be  involved  in  areas  of  school 
management,  particularly  those  relating  to  curriculum, 
instruction,  and  assessment  of  learning,  as  well  as  to  parents 
and  the  community.  If  teachers'  professiimalism  is  enhanced 
through  stronger  preparation  and  on-going  development,  as 
we  suggest  in  Chapter  12.  then  their  professional  compe- 
tence should  be  recognized  through  their  participation  in 
school  decisions. 

We  believe  that,  in  their  schools,  teachers  and  school 
administrators  should  have  considerable  professional  auton- 
omy to  judge  which  school  organization  and  teaching  strate- 
gies are  most  likely  to  lead  to  high  levels  of  student  learning. 
At  the  same  time,  they  must  be  held  accountable  for  student 
achievement  in  the  school  and  for  reporting  regularly  to 
parents. 

Throughout  the  developed  world  there  have  been,  over 
the  past  decade  or  more,  experiments  with  what  is  usually 
termed  school-based  management  or  site-based  manage- 
ment, in  which  significant  authority  is  delegated  from  the 
central  authority,  usually  the  .school  board,  to  the  school. 
Various  models  have  been  established  in  countries  such  as 
Australia,  New  Zealand,  Sweden,  and  Britain,  as  well  as  in 
Utah  and  in  Florida's  Dade  (bounty. 

It  is  important  to  note  that  the  term  school-based 
management  might  refer  to  delegation  of  authority  either  to 
the  principal  and  teachers,  or,  in  other  cases,  to  school  coun- 
cils in  which  much  or  even  most  of  the  authority  is  vested  in 
parents.  At  this  point,  we  refer  only  to  models  in  which  staff 
have  increased  authority.  1  he  decision-making  power  may 
be  vested  primarily  in  the  principal  or  he  shared  between 
principal  and  teachers. 

In  Canada,  the  most  well-known  example  is  Edmonton, 
which  in  1976  became  one  of  the  first  boards  to  shift  some 
decisionmaking  authority  to  the  school.  Many  school 
boards,  including  some  in  Ontario,  have  since  moved  at  least 


For  ttw  Low*  of  iMmtnt 


minimally  in  this  direction.  The  Carleton  Board  of  Educa- 
tion, for  instance,  expects  schools  to  make  many  decisions 
about  curriculum,  evaluation,  reporting,  and  school  struc- 
tures, as  well  as  determine  to  some  extent  how  the  school 
operations  budget  will  be  allocated. 

The  arguments  advanced  for  such  a  shift  in  responsibility 
vary  somewhat,  but  are  often  framed  in  terms  of  freeing 
schools  from  the  constraints  of  bureaucracy,  so  that  they  will 
be  more  successful.  In  Dade  County,  for  example,  schools 
request  waivers  to  exempt  them  from  various  school  board 
regulations  and  collective  agreement  provisions. 

What  has  been  the  result  of  all  this  shifting  of  responsi- 
bility? Has  it  made  a  difference  to  students?  In  assessing  site- 
based  management,  it  is  important  to  realize  that,  for  the 
most  part,  the  shift  has  taken  place  for  political  rather  than 
educational  reasons.'  Joyce  Scane,  of  the  Ontario  Institute  of 
Studies  in  Education,  has  concluded  that  decentralization 
does  not  have  substantial  effects  on  school  programs: 

Looking  at  the  research  as  a  whole,  there  is  no  evidence  that  decen- 
tralization to  the  school  level,  per  se,  will  lead  to  improvement  in 
classroom  practice  and  student  achievement...' 

The  important  words  here  are  "per  se."  In  other  words, 
just  because  decisions  are  made  at  the  school  level  rather 
than  the  board  level  does  not  necessarily  mean  they  are 
better.  Sometimes  principals  and  teachers  may  focus  on 
areas  that  have  no  payoff  at  all  in  terms  of  student  learning, 
or  may  get  so  caught  up  in  the  day-to-day  school  manage- 
ment and  administration  that  they  are  distracted  from  what 
should  be  their  main  activity:  providing  meaningful  educa- 
tional programs  to  their  students. 

This  is  why,  although  we  recommend  that  principals  have 
considerable  autonomy  within  their  schools,  we  stress  their 
responsibility  to  keep  student  learning  as  the  top  priority.  Of 
course,  with  autonomy  and  responsibility  comes  account- 
ability. Principals  must  not  be  diverted  into  focusing  on 
issues  that  are  only  incidentally  related  to  improving  teach- 
ing and  learning.  Clear  expectations  from  the  Ministry  and 
the  school  board  set  the  overall  priorities  within  which 
schools  decide  how  to  proceed. 

Simply  sharing  power  is  not  enough:  schools  and  school 
systems  must  also  be  redesigned  to  ensure  that  teachers  and 
principals  actually  have  the  knowledge  and  skills  to  make 
changes,  that  they  get  accurate  and  regular  feedback  about 


AA^^ommunity  support  and  input  are 
\^  necessary  and  welcomed. 
However,  educational  decisions,  in 
our  view,  must  uitimateiy  be  made  by 
the  educators.  When  the  school 
community  is  assured  that  their  input 
is  welcome  and  will  be  considered,  a 
mutual  trust  between  the  public  and 
educators  can  be  built  up. 

The  autonomy  created  through  site- 
based  mam^ement  allows  principals, 
teachers  and  students  the  opportuni- 
ties to  create  change,  develop 
programs  and  to  make  decisions  that 
are  of  value  and  meaningful  to  their 
individual  schools." 

Stormont,  Dundas  and  Glengarry  Elementary  Principals' 
and  Vice-Principals'  Association 


school  performance,  and  that  there  is  a  clear  focus  on 
instructional  improvement.'  Staff,  under  the  leadership  of 
the  principal,  must  work  together  within  a  framework  of 
agreed-upon  goals  and  standards,  to  develop  and  implement 
their  plans  for  moving  toward  their  goals. 

Principals  and  teachers  must  use  their  leadership  skills  to 
build  and  sustain  school  cultures  that  focus  on  student 
learning.  Requiring  each  school  to  develop  a  school  growth 
or  improvement  plan,  articulating  school  objectives  and 
plans  for  achieving  them,  can  be  an  important  tool  in 
achieving  this.  Such  school  growth  plans  would  be  devel- 
oped within  the  overall  framework  of  MET  and  school 
board  guidelines. 

We  have  stressed  the  importance  of  linking  more  closely 
schools  and  community,  and  here  too,  we  believe  that  prin- 
cipals should  have  considerable  autonomy,  deciding  how  to 
allocate  school  funds  and  design  school  initiatives  to  better 
meet  local  needs.  To  do  this  effectively,  school  staff  must 
understand  the  community  served  by  the  school.  With  the 
help  of  the  school-community  councils  we  propose  in  Chap- 
ter 14,  schools  should  be  better  able  to  meet  unique  local 
needs.  Principals  and  teachers  must  reach  out  to  the 
community  to  forge  strong  relationships  and  partnerships 
that  will  relieve  some  of  the  non-academic  burdens  that 
schools  are  increasingly  shouldering. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Organizing  Education 


parents  and  community  alliances,  principals  need  to  be  able 
to  rely  on  a  capable  group  of  department  heads  to  assist 
them  in  all  these  areas.  Third,  department  heads  must  take 
on  a  strong  leadership  role  in  developing  and  implementing 
the  new  curriculum  we  are  recommending.  Department 
heads  together  should  encourage  teachers  to  work  co- 
operatively across  grade  levels  and  broader  program  areas. 
At  the  same  time,  their  subiect  expertise  will  help  them  to 
ensure  that  the  essential  elements  of  each  subject  are 
strengthened,  not  lost,  in  the  more  collaborative  and  inte- 
grated approach  to  curriculum. 


As  well,  we  believe  that  school  boards  must  recognize 
principals  as  key  members  of  the  senior  management  team, 
with  a  major  role  in  policy  development  as  well  as  imple- 
mentation. 

Recommendation  149 

*We  recommend  that  the  Ministry  phase  in  a  policy  requiring 
school  boards  to  turn  over  an  increasingly  significant  portion 
of  the  school  budget  to  principals,  on  the  condition  that  the 
school  have  a  school  growth  plan:  that  this  plan  be  moni- 
tored by  the  txiard;  that  teachers  participate  in  decision- 
making concerning  curriculum,  assessment,  professional 
development,  and  staffing;  and  that  the  school  demonstrate 
how  It  reaches  out  to  students,  parents,  and  the  community. 

One  more  staff  role  that  is  relevant  in  secondary  schools 
should  be  addressed.  The  departmental  structure  could  be 
altered  to  help  the  principal  meet  new  responsibilities  in 
running  the  school.  We  heard  stiff  criticisms  of  some  depart- 
ments for  their  insularity  and  territorial  mentality,  a  situa- 
tion that  can  hardly  be  tolerated.  Department  heads  are 
needed  to  provide  leadership,  both  in  the  school  as  a  whole 
and  within  their  departments  to  create  a  collegial  profes- 
sional culture  that  is  especially  helpful  to  new  teachers. 

As  we  said  in  Chapter  12,  we  see  three  important  new 
roles  for  department  heads.  In  the  first  place,  because  of 
their  subject  expertise,  we  want  them  to  assi.st  the  principal 
by  helping  to  evaluate  teaching  performance  as  well  as  help- 
ing teachers  improve.  Second,  they  should  assist  the  princi- 
pal m  managing  the  school.  With  many  new  responsibilities 
for  budget  management.  tchool-ba.sed  as  well  as  board-wide 
policy  development,  promoting  better  relationships  with 


Parents 

We  believe  that  it  is  crucial  for  schools  to  work  more  collab- 
oratively with  parents.  As  we  have  stressed  throughout  this 
report,  parents  have  a  central  role  to  play  in  the  education  of 
their  children.  In  recognition  of  this  role,  we  recjimmcnd  the 
development  of  a  Parents'  C'harter  of  Rights  and  Responsi- 
bilities. 

The  Ministry  should  develop  such  a  charter,  in  consulta- 
tion with  the  regular  stakeholders,  to  be  distributed  annually 
to  each  student's  family.  The  charter  shciuld  clearly  set  out 
the  rights  of  parents  to  be  made  welcome  in  the  school,  the 
kind  of  regular,  personal  contact  they  can  expect  from  teach- 
ers, and  the  kind  of  support  they  can  expect  to  enable  them 
to  be  more  helpful  to  their  youngsters'  school  life. 

Recommendations  150.  151,  152 
•We  recommend  that  a  Parents'  Charter  of  Rights  and 
Responsibilities  be  developed  at  the  provincial  level  as  a 
result  of  collaboration  among  parents,  teachers,  administra- 
tors, and  political  decisionmakers. 

*We  recommend  that  parents  be  involved  in  developing 
student  codes  of  behaviour,  and  other  policies  and  proce- 
dures that  flow  from  the  Students'  and  Parents'  Charter  of 
Rights  and  Responsibilities  at  both  board  and  school  levels. 

*We  recommend  that  information  about  the  students'  and 
parents'  charters  and  all  policies  and  procedures  that  direct- 
ly affect  students  and  parents  be  readily  available  to  parents. 

Parents  vary  in  the  degree  to  which  they  want  to  be 
involved  in  their  children's  schools,  and  also  differ  in  the 
type  of  involvement  they  want  to  have.  On  balance,  it 
appears  that  only  a  small  minority  of  parents  want  to  partic- 


For  tt«*  Low  of  L«aming 


ii 


w: 


ipate  in  school  governance  or  decision-making.  Most  parents 
want  to  be  able  to  communicate  their  concerns  and  aspira- 
tions, and  to  have  schools  respond  in  a  respectful  and  help- 
ful manner.  Parents  want,  and  are  entitled  to,  information 
about  the  policies  and  goals  of  their  child's  school  and 
board,  and  about  their  child's  progress.  If  there  are  learning 
problems,  they  want  to  be  informed  and  want  the  school  to 
address  such  problems. 

There  are  several  kinds  of  problems  that  may  arise 
between  parents  and  the  school.  Some  parents  may  be  intim- 
idated by  unwelcoming  or  unresponsive  staff  members; 
some  may  be  concerned  about  their  own  levels  of  education 
or  their  imperfect  English  or  French.  Some  may  have  only 
small  amounts  of  time  because  they  work  long  hours.  Many 
just  want  a  meaningful  relationship  with  their  children's 
school.  Whatever  the  circumstances,  there  is  much  that  can 
and  must  be  done  to  make  schools  more  welcoming.  Schools 
must  continue  to  reach  out  to  parents  who,  for  whatever 
reason,  are  uninvolved  or  uninterested  in  their  children's 
school  life. 

We  believe  all  principals  and  teachers  must  become  aware 
of  the  research  on  the  value  of  parent  involvement  with  their 
children's  school  life,  and  act  upon  it.  Principals  and  teachers 
must  learn  and  practice  the  many  effective  strategies  for 
successfully  reaching  out  to  parents,  particularly  those  who 
are  unlikely  to  become  involved  on  their  own. 

Certain  kinds  of  parent  involvement  pay  handsome  divi- 
dends: higher  student  achievement,  higher  aspirations,  better 
attendance,  improved  classroom  and  school  climate,  and 
more  positive  relationships  between  parents  and  teachers  -  a 
welcome  list  of  benefits  indeed.  The  key  activities  that 
appear  to  lead  to  these  happy  results  are,  first,  following  the 
child's  progress  at  school  and  helping  at  home  with  home- 
work and  projects;  second,  attending  various  school  perfor- 
mances and  sports  events;  and  third,  acting  as  a  volunteer  in 
the  classroom.  Research  strongly  suggests  that  such  activities 
have  a  more  direct  and  positive  impact  on  the  student's 
progress  than  does  active  participation  in  parent  organiza- 
tions, valuable  though  this  may  be  for  the  school  in  general.' 

We  believe  it  is  crucial  for  schools  to  seek  out  parental 
opinion  on  important  issues.  Well  beyond  the  occasional 
meet-the-teacher  sessions,  parents  need  regular  mechanisms 
through  which  they  can  give  input  and  raise  concerns,  not 
only  in  relation  to  their  own  children,  but  also  in  relation  to 


e  see  greater  participation  for 
parents  at  the  school  level  in 
an  advisory  capacity.  The  establish- 
ment of  school  sidvlsory  councils 
could  help  facilitate  this.  A  Ministry 
which  sets  standards  and  monitors. 
School  boards,  representing  their 
communities,  but  with  redefined  roles 
and  probably  fewer  trustees  and 
supervisory  officers." 

Council  of  Ontario  Separate  Schools 


education  and  other  school  issues.  For  instance,  when  choic- 
es are  being  made  about  the  use  of  multi-age  groupings,  or 
about  smaller  class  sizes  as  opposed  to  specialist  teachers, 
parents  should  have  a  chance  to  give  their  views. 

Although  we  believe  that  the  school's  teachers  and  princi- 
pal should  make  decisions  about  staffing  and  instruction, 
their  judgments  should  be  informed  by  knowledge  of 
parental  preferences  and  concerns.  In  Chapter  12,  we  also 
recommend  that  schools  and  school  boards  develop  ways  of 
systematically  eliciting  parental  opinion  about  teaching  and 
school  climate. 

In  Chapter  14,  we  recommend  the  formation  of  school- 
community  councils,  in  which  we  see  parents  playing  a  vital 
role.  But,  because  their  mandate  is  primarily  to  forge 
community  alliances,  we  do  not  see  these  councils  as  having 
a  decision-making  role  in  relation  to  school  management, 
although  we  would  expect  them  to  participate  and  be 
consulted  in  many  aspects  of  the  life  of  the  school. 

We  noted  earlier  that  many  recent  education  reforms 
have  included  a  transfer  of  decision-making  authority  from 
the  school  board  to  the  school.  In  some,  but  by  no  means  all, 
of  these  jurisdictions,  parents  and  community  representa- 
tives are  given  significant  decision-making  power,  usually 
through  a  parent  or  community  council  for  each  school. 
Education  reforms  in  New  Zealand  and  Chicago,  for 
instance,  have  resulted  in  strong  parental  roles  in  gover- 
nance, with  significant  decision-making  powers  vested  in 
parent  councils.  In  Canada,  Quebec  has  legislated  parent 
councils  in  every  school,  but  in  an  advisory  capacity  only. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Organizing  Education 


parents  arc  involved  in  the  life  of  the  school,  and  to  seek  out 
parental  concerns  and  advice. 

Recommendation  153 

•  We  recommend  that  all  schools  in  Ontario  be  accountable 
for  demonstrating  the  ways  in  which  they  have  strengthened 
parents '  involvement  in  their  children  s  school  learning. 

The  school  growth  plan  described  earlier  in  this  chapter 
is  the  most  likely  vehicle  for  ensuring  that  schools  do  this;  at 
the  next  level  of  accountability,  annual  board  reports  will 
disseminate  the  information. 


In  terms  of  student  achievement, 

then  a  little  evidence  lo  suggest  thai  parent  involvement  in  govcr- 
lunce  affecu  sludenl  learning  in  the  school,  although  there  may  be 
other  benefits  and  indirect  effccu.' 

This  conclusion  leaves  a  number  of  unanswered  ques- 
tions; for  example,  would  the  results  be  different  if  parent 
councils  operated  differently,  or  if  parents  and  teachers  were 
better  trained  for  their  new  roles,  or  if  other  changes  were 
made?  Nevertheless,  we  have  concluded  that,  at  present, 
there  is  no  solid  basis  for  establishing  parent  councils  as 
governing  bodies  for  all  schools  in  the  province." 

In  reaching  this  decision,  we  carefully  considered  many 
factors.  Only  a  small  minority  of  parents  seem  to  want 
greater  decision-making  powers  in  their  children's  schools, 
as  suggested  by  the  very  small  number  who  now  are  active  in 
home-and-school  associations  and  the  relatively  small 
number  who  indicated  a  desire  for  such  active  involvement. 
Also,  there  is  little  or  no  evidence  that  local  parent  councils 
improve  learning  -  the  touchstone  for  all  our  deliberations. 
The  professional  qualifications  of  the  school  staff  suggest 
they  are  in  the  best  position  to  know  what  constitutes  good 
teaching  and  learning.  Such  councils  would  place  an 
unneeded  additional  burden  on  principals.  Furthermore. 
given  all  this,  we  feel  that  a  parent  council  with  a  mandate  to 
manage  schools  and  make  decisions  would  constitute  a  seri- 
ous  i  f  resources  and  energy  from  the  real  priori - 
lle^  °                  ''  mark  greater  parental  involvement  in 
schoob.  ihat  being  said,  wise  principals  and  interested 
parents  can.  and  indeed  must,  find  many  ways  lo  rn<.iirr  th.ii 


The  cotrittiunity 

The  relationship  between  school  and  community  is  so 
central  to  our  vision  of  reforming  the  education  system  that 
we  have  made  it  one  of  our  four  engines  driving  the  change 
process.  The  school-community  councils  we  recommend  are 
new  institutions  that  we  believe  will  be  absolutely  essential  if 
Ontario  schools  are  to  create  an  improved  learning  environ- 
ment for  all  students. 

In  Chapter  4,  on  the  purposes  of  schooling,  we  distin- 
guished between  primary  and  shared  school  responsibilities. 
While  academic  learning  is  the  primary  purpose  of  the 
school  system,  meeting  the  varied  non-academic  needs  of 
children  is  a  responsibility  the  school  shares  with  the  broad- 
er community.  Teachers  and  schools  can  fulfil  these  social 
responsibilities  only  if  they  are  supported  by  appropriate 
resources  from  the  community  outside  the  school.  Helping 
to  organize  and  mobilize  those  resources  is  the  general  func- 
tion of  these  new  school-community  councils. 

In  a  real  sense  they  would  be  the  eyes  and  ears  of  the 
school  in  the  world  outside.  Led  by  the  principal,  and 
comprising  teachers,  parents,  students,  and  community 
members,  they  would  identify  the  needs  of  the  school  and  of 
the  community.  They  would  create  the  alliances  that  serve 
the  non-academic  needs  of  the  students,  so  that  teachers 
could  concentrate  on  better  leaching.  They  would  help  tarry 
out  career-day  programs,  as  well  as  help  find  students  more 
opportunities  and  placements  in  co-operative  education 
schemes. 

School-community  councils  might  recommend  to  the 
principal  certain  community  themes  for  the  school's  locally 
determined  curriculum  content.  We  see  these  councils  as 
monitoring  the  charters  of  rights  and  responsibilities  for 


Foe  Vm  Lov«  of  Laamint 


i£ 


both  parents  and  students.  Inevitably  they  would  want  to 
advise  the  principal,  in  general  terms,  on  ideas  for  school 
improvement.  And  finally,  it  only  makes  sense,  given  their 
mandate,  that  they  would  have  the  right  to  be  consulted  by 
the  school  board  when  a  new  principal  was  being  chosen. 
But  we  stress  that  their  role  in  relation  to  the  management 
of  the  school  is  only  advisory. 

There  are  many  benefits  of  collaborative  links  with  the 
community.  They 

•  strengthen  school  programs  by  drawing  on  new  pools  of 
expertise; 

•  build  public  support  for  schools  by  giving  non-educators 
direct  knowledge  and  experience  of  schools; 

•  show  students  their  school  is  important  enough  to  moti- 
vate other  adults  to  take  time  to  contribute  to  it; 

•  contribute  to  a  culture  that  encourages  mutual  concern 
about  quality  of  life.' 

For  these  reasons,  among  others,  we  identified  school- 
community  alliances  as  one  of  the  levers  of  change,  and 
recommended  in  Chapter  14  that  school-community  coun- 
cils be  created  in  all  schools. 

School  boards 

Between  the  province's  schools  and  its  Ministry  of  Education 
and  Training  stand  the  school  boards.  As  in  so  many  other 
parts  of  the  education  system,  dealing  in  depth  with  boards 
is  more  complex  than  most  Ontarians  might  expect.  To 
begin  with,  depending  on  how  they  are  counted,  the 
province  is  divided  into  172,  169  or  168  school  board  juris- 
dictions; of  these,  128  operate  more  than  one  school.  A 
board  jurisdiction  may  be  a  municipality,  a  county,  a  region, 
or  even  a  hospital  treatment  centre.  Depending  on  the  size 
of  the  total  population  it  represents,  a  board  can  have  from 
three  to  more  than  twenty  elected  trustees. 

Boards  range  in  size  from  the  few  that  operate  no  schools 
at  all  (purchasing  educational  services  for  the  few  students 
in  their  jurisdiction)  and  boards  such  as  the  Murchison  and 
Lyell  District  School  Area  Board  with  fewer  than  twenty 
students,  to  the  Metropolitan  Separate  School  Board  with 
approximately  100,000  students,  the  largest  in  Canada.  Some 
boards  have  no  administrative  staff  beyond  the  school  level, 
while  others  have  large  and  highly  sophisticated  bureaucra- 


overnment  continues  to  initiate 
provincial  policy  on  one  hand  and 
to  reduce  the  financial  resources  on 
the  other;  the  range  of  services  and 
programs  required  are  continuously 
increasing  but  never  decreasing... 
the  imbalance  creates  incredible 
pressures  for  trustees  and  staff." 


NIpissing  Board  of  Education 


cies.'  Most  of  the  discussion  that  follows  refers  primarily  to 
the  128  Ontario  boards  that  have  more  than  one  school. 

School  boards,  governed  by  locally  elected  trustees, 
decide  on  the  facilities,  programs,  services,  and  resources 
that  will  be  made  available  in  a  locality,  and  they  also  set  the 
level  of  local  education  taxes.  Their  responsibilities  are 
outlined  in  the  Education  Act,  as  well  as  in  relevant  Ministry 
regulations.  School  boards  also  hire  teachers  and  other  staff, 
and  negotiate  collective  agreements.  They  develop  and  deliv- 
er programs  and  curricula  for  all  students,  including  those 
with  special  needs.  By  setting  budgets  and  requisitioning 
taxes,  boards  share  with  the  province  the  responsibility  for 
financing  education. 

School  boards  occupy  a  somewhat  precarious  place  in  the 
public  consciousness.  We  suspect  that  few  people  know 
either  the  name  of  their  local  trustee  or  the  nature  of  the 
trustee's  role.  In  most  urban  areas,  the  media  give  little 
attention  to  the  day-to-day  operations  of  the  school  board, 
although  they  may  publicize  crises  of  various  sorts.  The 
voter  turnout  for  school-board  elections  is  notoriously  low 
(even  less  than  for  other  local  offices),  and,  as  an  apparent 
reflection  of  public  interest,  many  trustees  across  the 
province  are  not  challenged  in  elections  but  are  acclaimed 
with  no  opposition.  These  unfortunate  realities  may  well  call 
into  question  the  legitimacy  of  the  trustee  role.  This  lack  of 
public  awareness  seems  particularly  inauspicious,  given  that 
such  a  large  proportion  of  taxes  at  the  municipal  level  go 
directly  to  support  education. 

The  term  school  board  may  refer  to  trustees,  who  are 
elected  to  represent  local  constituents  for  three-year  terms. 
When  the  term  is  used  more  inclusively,  it  refers  to  the 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Organizing  Education 


ii  ^Educational  research  indicates  that 
^H successful  schools  have  a  degree 
of  autonomy  and  that  tttey  involve 
tt>eir  immediate  community,  particu- 
larty  parents,  in  tt>e  exercise  of  ttiat 
autonomy.  The  partners  in  the  commu- 
nrty  are  involved  in  the  setting  of 
goals,  the  development  of  policies 
aiKl  tt>e  creation  of  a  basic  philosophi- 
cal approach. 

At  the  same  time,  the  complexity  of 
our  society  is  such  that  schools  on 
their  own  would  find  K  dKflcutt  and 
prohibitively  expensive  to  provide  ^^ 
many  of  the  services  they  need. 
School  boards  can  provide  to  schools 
sophisticated  services  in  such  areas 
as  curriculum  development,  supervi- 
sion of  instruction,  equitable  distribu- 
tion of  resources,  computer  services, 
and  economical  purchasing." 

CouncM  of  OnUfio  OirecKxs  ol  Education 


trustees  and  the  staff  in  a  given  )urisdiction.  In  addition  to 
the  elected  trustees,  the  other  key  people  in  the  central 
ofTices  of  the  school  boards  are  the  supervisory  officers, 
including  the  director  of  education,  who  are  the  senior 
administrative  staff. 

There  are  a  number  of  contentious  issues  relating  to 
school  boards.  They  are: 

•  establishing  whether  school  boards  are  needed,  and  if  so, 
what  their  roles  should  be; 

•  the  relationship  between  trustees  and  administrators; 

•  the  remuneration  of  trustees; 

•  the  number  of  trustees; 

•  the  way  school  boards  relate  to  Khools;  and 

•  the  number  of  Khool  boards. 

Tlir  need  for  school  boards 

In  many  jurisdictions,  school  reform  has  involved  eliminat- 
ing or  sharply  curtailing  the  power  of  boards,  regional 
decuion-makmg.  or  administrative  bodies  in  education. 


This  has  been  the  case  in  Britain,  with  its  local  hducation 
Authorities  (LKAs),  in  New  Zealand,  as  well  as  in  the  C^ity  of 
c;hicago.  The  justification  has  been  that  eliminaling  a  layer 
of  bureaucracy  increases  efficiency  and  accountability  and 
strengthens  local  control  of  schools.  The  effects  of  such 
changes  are  not  always  clear,  but  there  is  no  compelling 
evidence  to  suggest  that  they  are  positive.  It  must  also  be 
noted  that  generalizing  from  one  country  or  educational 
context  to  an  entirely  different  one  is  dangerous  indeed. 

We  do  not  support  elimination  of  school  boards  in 
Ontario.  Particularly  in  such  a  large  and  diverse  province,  we 
see  no  wav  in  which  five  thousand  schools  could  be  adminis- 
tered cither  individually  or  by  the  Ministry  of  Hducation  and 
Training.  We  regard  boards  as  having  an  important  democ- 
ratic function;  moreover,  education  is  a  significant  enough 
public  activity  to  merit  its  own  locally  elected  representatives, 
with  responsibilities  that  neither  municipal  councillors  nor 
members  of  the  provincial  legislature  can  handle  properly. 

While  we  describe  it  in  more  detail  later  in  this  section, 
the  relationship  between  school  boards  and  their  schools  can 
briefly  be  de.scribed  as  crucial  for  creating  and  sustaining  the 
kinds  of  schools  we  need.  Wc  also  believe  that  local  control 
of  education  is  best  exercised  by  the  public  election  of 
trustees,  who  are  expected  to  be  knowledgeable  about 
community  priorities  and  local  conditions. 

Nonetheless,  wc  believe  it  is  important  to  clarify  what  the 
school  boards'  role  should  be,  as  distinct  from  that  of  the 
Ministry  on  one  hand  and  individual  schools  on  the  other. 
We  have  recommended  that  more  responsibility  for  deter- 
mining school  budget  allocations  be  delegated  to  principals, 
and  we  see  a  strong  policy  leadership  role  for  the  Ministry. 
Therefore,  school  boards  are  necessary  for  translating 
provincial  policy  into  local  contexts,  for  setting  local  priori- 
ties, and  for  providing  co-ordination  and  support  for  their 
schools. 

Clarifying  roles  of  trustees  and  itdminislrators 
Like  so  many  elected  office  holders  and  civil  servants, 
trustees  and  administrators  co-exist  in  a  state  of  almost 
permanent  tension  and  mutual  dependence.  Trustees  rely  to 
a  great  extent  on  the  advice  and  expertise  of  the  supervisory 
officers,  who  are  senior  educators  with  board-wide  manage 
ment  responsibilities.  Although  tru.slees  are  responsible  for 
overall  policy,  and  supervi<kory  officers  for  administration, 
the  line  between  the  two  functions  is  not  always  clear. 


ror  the  Lov«  of  Learrunf 


Key  responsibilities  of  trustees  and  senior  administrators 

Trustees  Director  and  Supervisory  Officers 


Over  the  last  few  years,  the  distinction  has  become 
increasingly  blurred,  and  senior  administrators  frequently 
find  their  time  taken  up  carrying  out  unimportant  tasks  for 
trustees,  tasks  that  seem  unrelated  to  educational  issues. 
Overlaps,  gaps,  and  competing  obligations  in  both  groups 
may  detract  from  the  main  teaching  and  learning  purposes 
of  schools. 

The  difficulty  for  most  school  boards,  therefore,  is  distin- 
guishing between  policy-making  and  policy  implementation. 
Obviously,  the  two  parties  will  disagree  about  what  exactly 
policy  is  and  what  is  administration.  We  were  told  that 
trustees  tend  to  get  too  involved  in  the  micro-management 
of  operational  details  that  are  better  left  to  supervisory  staff. 
Moreover,  the  problem  seems  to  be  made  worse  by  Ministry 
regulations  that  require  school  boards  to  ratify  many  deci- 
sions that  staff  could  handle. 

For  instance,  boards  must  now  ratify  all  teacher  hirings.  It 
would  seem  to  make  more  sense  for  them  to  develop  and 
approve  hiring  policy,  leaving  staff  responsible  for  hiring 
teachers  within  such  policy  guidelines.  In  turn,  staff  believe 
they  often  spend  too  much  time  preparing  material  for 
trustees,  rather  than  concentrating  on  supporting  education 
in  schools. 

It  is  time  to  clarify  the  roles  and  responsibilities  of  both 
the  elected  trustees  and  their  administrations;  therefore, 
drawing  on  considerable  recent  research  and  writing,  we 
suggest  a  clearer  distinction  between  them.' 

In  brief,  trustees  should  not  interfere  in  operational 
matters,  but  ought  to  set  the  broad  parameters,  and  then  let 
staff  get  on, with  managing  the  system  within  them.  This 
includes  articulating  the  mission  or  vision  of  the  board, 
which  usually  includes  some  indication  of  the  values  the 
board  wishes  to  infuse  throughout  the  system.  Good  policy 
development  does  not  prescribe  how  a  policy  is  to  be  imple- 
mented, but  does  set  some  limits;  for  example,  a  board  will 
specify  a  cost  figure  that  is  not  to  be  exceeded,  conflict-of- 
interest  guidelines  that  are  not  to  be  breached,  or  ethical 
frameworks  that  are  not  to  be  disregarded.  It  is  then  up  to 
senior  administrators  to  find  the  best  way  to  achieve  the 
required  results  in  different  circumstances.  Administrators 
can  then  be  held  accountable  for  the  results  they  achieve. 

Given  that  current  regulations  do  not  always  support  a 
clear  division  between  the  roles  of  elected  and  appointed 
officials,  and  in  view  of  the  complex  issues  trustees  must 


1.  Articulate  and  support  board 
mission/vision  to  guide  planning  and 
decisions. 

2.  Represent  the  interests  of  the 
public,  and  of  constituents. 


3.  Establish  board  policies  within  the 
provincial  framework  that  are  flexible 
and  appropriate  to  local  connmunities. 


1.  Provide  leadership,  clarify  board 
vision  for  schools,  and  connmunicate 
clear  goals  to  schools. 

2.  Within  board  policies,  set  criteria 
for  staff  recruitment,  selection,  and 
training,  in  order  to  ensure  high- 
quality  staff. 

3.  Provide  co-ordination  for  school- 
community  linkages  across 
organizations. 


4.  Appoint,  support,  and  monitor  the 

4.  Help  schools  develop  human 

Director  of  Education  (the  chief. 

capacity  and  get  needed  financial 

executive  officer). 

resources,  including  re-allocating 

resources  as  necessary. 

5.  Provide  direct  lines  of  communica- 

5. Ensure  that  schools  are  operated 

tion  between  the  school  system  and 

according  to  provincial  acts  and 

the  general  public. 

regulations,  and  that  these  regula- 

tions serve  the  needs  of  students. 

6.  Ensure  the  development  and 

6.  Assess  and  approve  budgets  to 

implementation  of  educational 

ensure  resources  and  requisition 

programs  in  the  schools. 

taxes. 

7.  Are  accountable  for  student 

learning  and  system  monitoring  and 

ensure  that  schools  use  assessment 

results  to  improve  learning. 

face,  we  suggest  that  they  be  offered  well-developed  profes- 
sional development  programs,  as  is  already  the  case  in  many 
school  boards.  We  note  the  helpful  Handbook  for  School 
Trustees  in  Ontario,  published  jointly  by  the  province's 
school  trustees'  associations  and  the  Ministry  of  Education 
and  Training.'" 

Recommendation  154 

*We  recommend  that  the  Minister  of  Education  and  Training, 

in  consultation  with  the  provincial  trustees'  associations, 

review  and  revise  the  legislation  and  regulations  governing 

education,  in  order  to  clarify  the  policy-making,  as  distinct 

from  the  operational,  responsibilities  of  school  board 

trustees. 

Trustee  remuneration 

Our  recommendation  on  clarifying  trustee  responsibilities 
has  implications  for  trustee  remuneration,  a  topic  that  has 
been  a  matter  of  public  controversy  for  the  past  few  years. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Organizing  Education 


111 


Although  elected  school  board  trustees  have  frequently  been 
accused  of  living  high  off  the  public  purse,  the  facts,  for  the 
most  part,  paint  a  quite  different  picture. 

VN'hile  most  media  attention  has  focused  on  a  relatively 
few  boards  whose  trustees  suddenly  proposed  to  greatly 
increase  their  own  stipends,  in  fact,  in  1992  about  half  of  all 
Ontario  boards  paid  themselves  less  than  $10,000  a  year  per 
trustee,  and  in  many  cases,  far  less. 

In  only  17  boards  did  trustees  receive  more  than  $15,000. 
And  only  in  the  following  seven  boards  did  they  pay  them- 
selves as  much  as  $20,000:  Etobicoke,  Scarborough,  Peel, 
Metro  Roman  Catholic  Separate,  Metro  French-language 
Board  (all  between  $20,500  and  $30,000),  North  York 
($32,000),  and  the  City  of  Toronto,  far  ahead  of  the  field  at 
$49,383. 

The  incomplete  data  available  for  1994  indicate  only 
small  province-wide  changes  from  the  1992  figures,  includ- 
ing North  York,  where  trustee  pay  has  risen  to  $33,330,  and 
Scarborough.  Scarborough  trustees  decided  to  raise  their  pay 
from  $22,000  m  1991  to  $30,000  in  1992,  which  was  then  to 
have  increased  to  533,000  in  1993  and  to  $36,000  in  1994. 
When  these  decisions  caused  a  media  and  public  uproar,  the 
trustees  revisited  their  original  decision  and  settled  for 
$30,000. 

In  the  midst  of  recent  generalized  attacks  agamst  high- 
priced  tmstees,  too  little  attention  has  been  paid  to  the  fact 
that  this  province  is  blessed  with  hundreds  of  dedicated 
trustees  who  spend  many  hours  a  month  carrying  out  their 
board  duties,  often  for  distinctly  modest  reimbursements. 

Our  view  is  that  our  recommendation  that  the  Ministry 
clarify  and  distinguish  more  clearly  between  the  functions 
and  responsibilities  of  trustees  and  administrators  will  mean 


that  the  role  of  the  trustee  can  be  defined  as  part  time.  If 
trustees  focus  on  their  responsibility  to  articulate  a  vision  or 
mission  to  guide  the  board  and  its  schools  to  set  overall  poli- 
cy, and  focus  on  results  rather  than  on  process  and  manage- 
ment, there  would  seem  to  be  little  justification  for  treating 
their  responsibilities  as  a  full-time  job. 

Therefore,  we  believe  that,  as  part-timers,  all  trustees 
should  be  paid  accordingly.  While  most  boards  actually  do 
provide  remuneration  consistent  with  the  part-time  nature 
of  the  position,  we  believe  that  other  boards  should  follow 
suit;  in  our  view,  a  reasonable  maximum  would  be  $20,000. 
To  gain  a  perspective  on  this  figure,  we  note  that  95  percent 
of  all  trustees  in  Ontario  fall  below  it  -  many  of  them  well 
below. 

Recommendation  155 

*We  recommend  that  the  Ministry  set  a  scale  of  honorana 

for  trustees,  with  a  maximum  of  $20,000  per  annum. 

Numbers  of  trustees 

What  should  be  the  maximum  number  of  trustees  elected 

for  each  board?  At  the  moment  the  numbers  range  between 

8  and  23.  Some  research  on  effective  boards  suggests  that, 

because  large  boards  can  become  unwieldy,  caution  should 

be  exercised  in  deciding  on  boards  of  more  than  seven 

people." 

However,  Commission  members  are  not  of  one  mind  on 
the  right  size  of  a  board;  some  of  us  feel  strongly  that 
between  8  and  12  trustees  is  the  optimum,  while  others 
believe  that  any  number  is  bound  to  be  arbitrary.  Ortainly, 
two  relevant  factors  in  determining  board  size  should  be  its 
geographic  location  and  the  population  it  serves.  We 
conclude  only  that  there  should  be  continuing  efforts  to 
reduce  the  number  of  trustees,  once  consistent  criteria  have 
been  developed. 

School  hoards  and  schools 

Important  as  it  is  to  clarify  the  rcspcttivc  roles  o(  trustees 
and  administrators,  there  is  still  the  question  of  the  role  of 
school  boards  in  relation  to  the  schools  they  administer. 
Aside  from  the  obvious  personnel  and  finance  functions, 
including  collective  bargaining,  what  part  do  boards  play  in 
developing  and  implementing  programs  and  instruction? 

We  noted  earlier  thai,  on  ihcir  own,  schools  would  find  it 
difficult  tr)  sustain  excellence  and  continue  to  improve;  most 


For  thu  Low  at  lammm^ 


need  significant  support  from  outside  the  school.  In  a 
province  as  large  as  Ontario  with  5000  schools,  it  is  not 
realistic  to  expect  that  such  support  can  be  directly  provided 
by  a  provincial  agency.  This  is  where  the  school  board, 
through  its  supervisory  officers  and  other  professional  staff, 
has  a  role. 

Some  research  suggests  that  school  boards  can  be  a 
significant  factor  in  how  successfully  schools  in  their  juris- 
diction manage  student  learning.  In  general,  the  strategy 
seems  to  involve  frequent  communication  between  schools 
and  the  central  office  (as  well  as  among  schools),  with  little 
reliance  on  bureaucratic  rules  and  structures.'^ 

Through  their  supervisory  officers  and  other  professional 
staff,  boards  can  provide  direction  and  focus  for  schools, 
communicating  clear  policy  guidelines  and  helping  them  set 
priorities,  often  among  a  multitude  of  conflicting  demands. 
School  boards  can  assist  principals  and  teachers  to  establish 
professional  networks  outside  their  own  schools,  and  can 
mediate  in  school-community  conflicts.  The  increased 
emphasis  on  monitoring  and  reporting  on  student  learning 
and  on  other  indicators  (as  recommended  in  Chapter  19) 
will  make  it  particularly  important  for  boards  to  help 
schools  act  on  the  results  of  board-wide  program  reviews 
and  student-testing  programs.  Schools  will  need  assistance 
in  using  the  results  of  such  monitoring  to  improve  their 
programs  and  teaching.  Supervisory  officers,  as  well  as  prin- 
cipals, may  need  to  develop!  their  own  skills  and  understand- 
ing of  these  new  roles. 

Within  Ministry  and  board  guidelines,  we  believe  that 
school  boards  should  give  principals  maximum  flexibility  to 
organize  and  operate  their  schools  as  they  see  fit,  with  the 
considerable  involvement  of  teachers,  and  always  consider- 
ing input  from  parents,  students,  and  the  community. 

A  commonly  raised  criticism  of  school  boards  and  of  the 
education  system  in  general  is  that  the  system  is  top  heavy, 
that  too  much  money  is  spent  outside  the  classroom  and  too 
high  a  proportion  of  staff  are  in  non-teaching  positions." 
The  validity  of  this  criticism  is  difficult  to  establish,  partly 
because  the  data  on  staffing  allocations  across  school  boards 
are  rarely  comparable.  School  boards  do  not  always  classify 
staff  with  similar  functions  in  the  same  way. 

Although  making  judgments  about  available  data  is  not 
easy,  the  information  we  have  suggests  that  the  problem  is 
not  as  serious  as  has  been  commonly  claimed.  In  some 


boards,  for  instance,  staff  classified  as  non-teaching  are  class- 
room teaching  assistants.  Although  such  staff  do  not  have 
teaching  certificates,  they  work  directly  with  students  under 
the  general  direction  of  teachers. 

We  have  already  pointed  out  in  Chapter  12  that  the 
responsibilities  of  supervisory  officers  will  have  to  be 
reviewed  in  light  of  our  recommendations.  Staffing  decisions 
must  be  made  with  a  view  to  strengthening  teaching  and 
learning  functions,  and  there  may  well  be  room  for  further 
reductions  in  central  office  staff 

The  number  of  school  boards 

Throughout  our  public  hearing  process,  we  were  often  told 
that  there  are  too  many  school  boards  in  Ontario.  Many, 
including  the  Minister  of  Education,  have  suggested  that 
some  boards  should  be  consolidated  to  provide  more  effi- 
cient delivery  of  educational  services.  Other  provinces  -  for 
example.  New  Brunswick,  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  Alberta 
-  recently  have  drastically  reduced  the  number  of  school 
boards.  Given  the  frequency  of  the  suggestion  and  the  vigour 
with  which  it  was  usually  made,  we  examined  this  issue  care- 
fully. 

At  one  time  Ontario  had  more  than  four  thousand  small 
school  boards,  many  responsible  for  only  one  school. 
Following  a  series  of  consolidations,  the  1969  amalgamation 
reduced  what  were  more  than  two  thousand  school  boards 
to  fewer  than  two  hundred.  Since  then  there  have  been 
further  reductions  in  the  number.  Many  people  may  be 
surprised  to  learn  that,  on  average,  school  boards  in  Ontario 
are  already  larger  than  those  in  any  other  province.  As 
shown  in  Table  1,  Ontario  has  more  schools  per  board  and 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Organizing  Education 


more  students  per  board  than  other  provinces.  In  a  1986 
report  on  trustee  apportionment,  a  research  team  from  the 
Ontario  Institute  for  Studies  in  Education  warned  that  large 
boards,  those  with  more  than  40,000  students,  may  be  in 
danger  of  losing  their  connection  to  the  community." 
Ontario  already  has  13  boards  in  that  category  (see  Table  2). 

TABLE  1 

tllioet  Board*  In  CanMflan  Provino*** 


Pra^rtr*.*- 

t)0«f<J» 

v:rvx)*» 

■«u 

Schoot* 

V  tXMrd 

E/volfTKnt 
pec  board 

Enrolcnent 

UK 

school 

NfkJ. 

27 

515 

120.460 

19 

4.461 

234 

PEI 

5 

72 

24.280 

14 

4.856 

33 

N.S. 

22 

524 

168.430 

24 

7.656 

321 

N.B 

18 

453 

138.840 

25 

7.713 

306 

2.977        1.047.260        19        6.628        352 
5.539       2.036.130       33      12.048       368 


M«n 

57 

831 

209.430 

15 

3.674 

252 

Saak. 

111 

978 

204.650 

9 

1.844 

209 

m» 

141" 

1.727 

529.175 

12 

3.753 

30 

BC 

7C 

\    OCT 

598.780 

26 

7  984 

307 

Total 

793 

15.568 

5.077.43S 

20 

6.4as 

326"- 

*V)V(a  C«na*ap  Hmtmi*  f^O-mtan.  'CcanonMC  S*r«m  BuaMn.'  Hfbnmy  1994 
•TTw  >«f**>  of  KXooi  baar«t  «i  MbvU  mm  raducad  m  1W4  to  S7. 

pkM  ipvaa  Awflc^ona  fi#iadMMna 


The  recent  consolidation  of  school  boards  in  other 
provinces  has  still  resulted  in  boards  considerably  smaller 
than  most  of  those  in  Ontario.  Because  of  the  sue  and 
complexity  of  this  province,  there  is  no  reason  to  assume 
that  the  move  to  more  centralized  control  elsewhere  would 
be  appropriate  here.  Ontario  has  40  percent  of  the  elemen- 
tary and  secondary  students  in  C.anadian  schools,  located  in 
an  enormous  geographic  area  and  in  communities  that  are 
remarkably  diverse. 

Table  2  shows  the  size  distribution  of  those  128  Ontario 
boards  that  have  more  than  one  school  (as  opposed  to 
schools  that  purchase  services  from  other  boards,  or  boards 
that  operate  only  one  school,  or  special  boards  that  run 
classes  only  in  care  and  treatment  centres). 

TABU  2: 

Mz*  of  School  Board*  in  Ontario 


Student  enrolment 

Numl)er  of  twards 

Fewer  than  3,000 

33 

3.000-9.999 

35 

10.000-39.999 

47 

40.00a74.999 

9 

75.000  or  more 

4 

There  is  no  formula,  nor  do  there  seem  to  be  any  objec- 
tive criteria,  that  would  allow  us  to  conclude  that  there  are 
too  many  school  boards  in  Ontario.  It  is  true  that  removing 
the  French-language  sections  to  form  separate  French- 
language  school  boards,  as  we  recommend  in  Chapter  15, 
would  result  in  some  boards  so  small  that  their  viability 
would  be  dubious,  and  we  encourage  such  boards  to  amalga- 
mate with  those  adjacent  to  them.  In  fact,  the  same  may  be 
true  of  some  other  very  small  boards.  Here,  as  everywhere  in 
this  report,  we  encourage  communities  to  use  local  strategies 
and  solutions  to  fit  local  situations.  Any  more  general 
consideration  of  amalgamation  of  school  boards  must  take 
into  account  their  incredibly  varied  nature  and  size,  and 
must  also  consider  mechanisms  for  sharing  services,  as  well 
as  for  dealing  with  political  representation. 


tar  «M  LOM  of  LMmmi 


Service  delivery  organizations 

There  are  a  significant  number  of  areas  where  all  boards 
should  be  seeking  greater  efficiency;  indeed,  many  already 
do  so.  For  example,  a  number  of  smaller  school  boards  are 
not  in  a  position  to  provide  the  kind  of  support  teachers  and 
schools  need  to  provide  good  programs  to  all  their  students. 
Nor  do  they  have  the  critical  mass  to  deal  efficiently  with 
transportation,  purchasing,  payroll,  and  other  business  func- 
tions. In  those  same  geographic  areas,  health  and  social 
services  agencies  also  often  lack  the  numbers  needed  to 
provide  good  services  to  school  children  in  every  school 
area.  Recognizing  this  problem,  some  boards  have  already 
banded  together  in  co-operative  efforts,  and  in  one  project 
the  Ministries  of  Community  and  Social  Services,  Education 
and  Training,  and  Health  have  jointly  set  up  a  program  to 
provide  integrated  services  to  children  in  the  North. 

Whatever  their  size,  many  school  boards  in  Ontario  and 
elsewhere  are  turning  to  co-operative  alliances  through 
which  they  can  develop  curriculum  resources,  co-ordinate 
services  with  other  ministries,  purchase  such  services  as 
transportation  or  supplies,  provide  professional  develop- 
ment, or  focus  on  a  range  of  other  areas.  We  see  this  as  a 
desirable  development,  and  strongly  urge  school  boards 
across  the  province  to  increase  such  joint  ventures.  We 
believe  that  in  many  boards  there  is  scope  for  even  greater 
efficiency  through  sharing  such  important  but  costly 
services,  and  by  achieving  economies  of  scale  through  joint 
purchasing.  Such  co-operative  arrangements  may  make 
more  sense  than  amalgamation.  Money  is  saved,  while  local 
representation  and  control  of  schools  is  maintained. 

Although  such  partnerships  and  alliances  will  be  essential 
in  meeting  varied  student  and  community  needs  in  the  years 
ahead  -  especially  given  the  remote  possibility  of  any 
increase  in  financial  resources  -  they  are  not  problem  free. 
Territoriality  is  a  powerful  force;  sometimes  a  neutral  third 
party  is  necessary  to  establish  and  maintain  working 
alliances.  As  well,  unless  the  responsibility  for  these  alliances 
is  specifically  assigned  to  particular  positions,  they  may 
remain  reliant  on  the  interest  and  good  will  of  individuals, 
and  thus  become  vulnerable  to  staff  changes.  Nonetheless, 
we  strongly  support  the  continued  growth  of  a  range  of  co- 
operative initiatives  among  boards,  and  between  boards  and 
other  agencies. 


Co-operative  Programs 
in  the  North 

A  review  of  education 
needs  in  the  North, 
conducted  in  1992-93  by 
the  Ministry  of  Education 
and  Training,  found  that 
recent  co-operative  initia- 
tives are  successful  in 
addressing  student  needs, 
but  because  these  initia- 
tives tend  to  be  limited  to 
a  specific  geographic  area 
or  to  a  particular  level  of 


education,  significant  gaps 
remain. 

The  Integrated  Services  for 
Northern  Children  program 
is  considered  by  most 
boards  in  northern  Ontario 
to  be  very  effective.  We 
believe  other  ministries 
should  be  involved,  as 
appropriate,  in  developing 
a  more  comprehensive 
netvi^ork  of  co-operative 
services. 


The  case  of  the  Metropolitan  Toronto  (Public)  School  Board 
The  structure  of  education  at  the  local  level  in  Metro  Toron- 
to is  quite  different  from  other  urban  centres  and  was 
brought  to  our  attention  as  an  issue  of  concern.  Metro 
public  schools  have  a  two-tiered  system  of  governance:  the 
Metro  Board  with  representatives  from  seven  area  boards  - 
Etobicoke,  York,  East  York,  North  York,  Scarborough,  Toron- 
to, and  the  Conseil  des  ficoles  Fran^aises  de  la  communaute 
urbaine  de  Toronto  (the  French-language  board).  Separate 
schools  for  the  whole  of  Metropolitan  Toronto  are  governed 
by  the  Metro  Separate  School  Board.  Our  comments  here 
relate  to  the  public  school  boards. 

The  Metropolitan  Toronto  School  Board  was  established 
in  1953  to  provide  co-ordination  of  activities  across  all  the 
public  school  boards  in  Metropolitan  Toronto.  Much  of  the 
justification  related  to  the  unequal  bases  for  assessment  in 
the  different  boards,  with  some  capable  of  raising  tax 
revenues  much  more  readily  than  others.  In  order  to  equal- 
ize services  across  Metro,  a  decision  was  made  to  have  a 
super-ordinate  umbrella  board,  with  trustees  from  each  of 
the  member  boards,  to  apportion  resources  equitably  and  to 
provide  a  common  level  of  educational  service.  Although  the 
individual  boards  continued  to  make  decisions  about  many 
areas  of  policy,  the  Metro  Board  made  decisions  about 
apportioning  tax  revenues. 

The  Metro  Board  is  a  steering  committee  of  all  seven 
boards,  with  legislated  responsibility  for  teacher  collective 
bargaining  in  relation  to  salaries  and  working  conditions. 
Such  an  arrangement  precludes  local  boards  agreeing  to 
quite  different  contract  provisions  for  their  teachers.  The 
individual  boards  continue  to  have  separate  negotiations  to 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Organizing  Education 


Co-09«ratl«a  Mo<l«l» 
In  Ontario 

There    I  ■■  f.     ■:    ■      !••  •.  in 
Ontdfiu  a-  J  f  bCA'tr'f  l(X 

coooefativ«  organuMions 
to  provKie  a  range  of 
Mfv«c«4  10  acftods.  For 
•tampte.  in  Onmra  and  m 
K«nt  arxj  Wellir^on  courv 
ties,  noi  only  are  sct¥>oi 
boards  wortung  together  in 
many  business  areas,  txjt 
they  are  coopefating  «»ith 
the  muntcipainies  and  such 
irtsututiora  as  hosprtals 
artd  libranes  in  an  effort  to 
get  the  most  for  their 
administrative  dollars. 

Some  school  boards  have 
developed  partnerships 
(Mith  busirwss  ar>d  with 
other  agerKies  to  take 
better  advantage  of  infor- 
mauon  techrwiogy.  For 


of  EducatKyi  has  formed  a 
cooperative  venture  tvith 
regional  libranes  to  facili 
tate  better  access  to  the 
new  information  superhlg^■ 
way. 

The  Ministry  provided  start 
up  fur¥ls  for  a  cooperative 
venture  of  the  Ontario 
Teacfiers'  Federation, 
public  and  Roman  Catholic 
trustees'  associations,  and 
public  arvJ  Roman  Catholic 
supervisory  ofricers'  asso- 
ciations, to  establish  the 
Ontario  Cumculum  Clear- 
irighouse.  an  organisation 
to  help  boards  buy  curncu- 
lum  matenals  from  each 
other,  rather  than  develop 
all  their  own  matenals  inde- 
perKlently. 


deal  with  various  local  issues,  as  Vkrcll  as  bargaining  with 
non-teaching  staff. 

Currently,  the  Metro  Board  continues  to  collect  and 
distribute  tax  revenue  to  achieve  greater  per-pupil  equity 
across  Metro,  and  also  deals  with  capital  grant  allocations 
for  building  and  renovating  school  facilities.  As  well,  Metro 
continues  to  deal  with  collective  bargaining.  Although  the 
board  operated  schools  for  the  dcvclopmcntally  challenged, 
responsibility  for  these  schools  is  being  divested  to  local 
boards.  The  other  function  it  serves  is  a  co-ordinating  one;  a 
variety  of  co-operative  initiatives  are  carried  out  through  the 
Metro  Board,  including  producing  some  curriculum  materi- 
als and  offering  the  Supervisory  Officer  Qualification 
Program  for  aspiring  supervisory  officers  on  a  cost-recovery 
basis. 

Although  the  proportion  of  Metro  education  costs  for  the 
additional  tier  of  the  Metro  Ekiard  is  not  large,  the  yearly 
administrative  costs  are  still  considerable.  Given  the  current 
financial  constraints,  as  well  as  the  public  concern  about 
value  for  money,  is  the  continued  existence  of  the  Metro 
Toronto  School  Board  justified?  If  the  present  funding  situa- 
tion continues,  it  would  probably  make  sense  for  the  Metro 
Board  to  continue  as  well,  since  it  serves  a  valuable  function 
in  redistributing  tax  revenues  across  the  Irxal  hoards,  and 
thus  ensures  greater  equity.  The  fact  that  the  local  boards  are 


part  of  the  Metro  Board  lessens  any  feelings  that  redistribu- 
tion is  being  imposed  on  them. 

However,  we  are  recommending  significant  changes  to 
the  funding  structures  in  the  province.  If  theses  changes  are 
implemented,  many  of  the  Metro  Board's  functions  would 
no  longer  be  required.  In  Chapter  18,  we  recommend  a  shift 
in  education  financing  so  that  funding  would  be  determined 
by  the  Ministry,  with  very  limited  additional  revenue  raising 
permitted  at  the  local  level.  With  regard  to  capital  allocation 
for  building  and  renovating  schools,  the  Ministry  would  also 
determine  and  distribute  these  funds.  We  have  already  noted 
that  with  the  transfer  of  schools  for  the  developmentally 
challenged,  the  Metro  Board  no  longer  has  any  direct 
program  responsibilities. 

With  the  removal  of  these  responsibilities,  it  would  seem 
both  logical  and  efficient  to  gradually  move  to  one  level  of 
public  school  board  in  Metropolitan  Toronto.  We  believe 
there  is  every  reason  for  the  individual  boards  to  co-operate 
as  much  as  possible,  but  through  a  consolidation  and  shar- 
ing of  resources  and  services,  rather  than  through  another 
layer  of  political  decision-making. 

In  the  preceding  section,  we  note  and  give  our  strong 
support  to  current  initiatives  in  cost  sharing  among  school 
boards.  Co-operative  arrangements  are  applicable  to  small 
and  large  boards.  The  Metro  Task  Force  on  Cost  Savings 
Through  Co-operative  Activities,  established  by  the  Ministry 
in  1994,  is  intended  to  create  such  institutionalized  co- 
operative arrangements.  The  task  force  -  which  includes  the 
Metro  Separate  School  Board,  in  addition  to  the  public 
school  boards  -  is  currently  investigating  ways  for  the  area 
boards  to  cut  costs  without  cutting  levels  of  service,  by 
collectively  purchasing  resources  and  services,  by  centraliz- 
ing some  functions,  and  by  sharing  and  co-operatively  devel- 
oping others.  We  fully  support  this  work,  which  is  an  excel- 
lent example  of  the  kind  of  service-sharing  arrangement 
discussed  above. 

As  well,  we  arc  particularly  concerned  that  the  advantages 
of  collective  bargaining  with  teachers  should  not  be  lost.  If 
boards  bargain  individually,  negotiation  costs  are  higher  for 
both  boards  and  federations.  If  Metro  is  eliminated,  provin- 
cial legislation  should  ensure  that  combined  collective 
bargaining  is  retained. 

On  balance,  then,  we  believe  the  two-tiered  system  of 
political  governance  will  no  longer  be  necessary,  following 


For  l»w  Love  of  LaarnkV 


the  proposed  changes  in  educational  funding.  In  our  view, 
an  administrative  consortium,  rather  than  another  layer  of 
political  decision-making,  would  better  meet  the  needs  of 
the  public  schools  and  school  boards  in  Metropolitan 
Toronto. 

Recommendation  156 

*We  recommend  that  following  the  proposed  shift  to  the 
provincial  government  of  the  responsibility  for  determining 
the  funding  of  education,  the  two-tiered  governance  structure 
of  the  public  schools  in  Metropolitan  Toronto  be  phased  out, 
with  the  Metropolitan  Toronto  School  Board  being  replaced  by 
an  administrative  consortium  of  school  boards  in  the  Metro- 
politan Toronto  area. 

The  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training 

Role  of  the  Ministry 

Considerable  dissatisfaction  has  been  expressed  about  the 
role  of  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training.  Both  the 
public  and  the  education  community  seem  somewhat 
confused  and  uncertain  about  what  part  the  Ministry  plays 
and  what  part  it  should  play,  not  only  in  relation  to  elemen- 
tary and  secondary  education,  but  in  relation  to  the  other 
elements  of  its  mandate:  colleges  and  universities  and  work- 
place training.  As  well,  there  is  uncertainty  about  the 
Ministry's  responsibilities  vis-a-vis  other  ministries  that  deal 
with  children  and  youth. 

Elementary  and  secondary  education: 
Much  of-the  confusion  about  the  Ministry's  relationship  to 
elementary  and  secondary  education  centres  on  control  and 
the  way  it  is  exercised.  The  Ministry,  like  other  government 
agencies,  has  traditionally  exercised  highly  centralized 
control  over  Ontario  education,  relying  primarily  on  regula- 
tion and  monitoring  to  ensure  compliance  from  boards  and 
schools.  In  the  1960s  and  1970s,  however,  control  was  so 
decentralized  that  school  boards  had  a  high  degree  of  auton- 
omy in  the  way  they  organized,  set  programs,  and  made  a 
host  of  other  educational  decisions.  Consolidating  school 
boards,  eliminating  provincial  school  inspectors,  and  aban- 
doning provincial  Grade  13  examinations  contributed  to  a 
shift  of  the  balance  of  power  toward  school  boards. 

In  addition,  the  Ministry  no  longer  discharges  all  the 
responsibilities  granted  by  legislation;  for  example,  certifica- 
tion of  teachers  now  seems  to  be  semi-automatic,  de- 


£i  ^^uc  schools,  Commissioners,  are 
\#at  the  'beck  and  call'  of 
ministry  and  governmental  changes. 
Whenever  there  is  a  change  in 
Toronto,  we  experience  policy 
swings  soon  afterwards.  Each 
government  has  an  answer  for  all 
our  problems  but  what  is  happening 
is  lack  of  specific  goals,  direction 
and  standards." 

Waterloo  County  Principals'  Association 


certification  of  teachers  is  almost  non-existent,  and  there  is  a 
lack  of  follow-through  on  monitoring  policy  implementa- 
tion in  some  areas. 

In  recent  years,  some  large  urban  boards,  especially  in 
Metropolitan  Toronto  and  Ottawa,  have  become  financially 
independent  of  the  Ministry,  leading  to  further  confusion 
about  leadership  in  the  education  system.  Because  of  educa- 
tional funding  provisions  in  Ontario,  these  boards  raise 
money  through  local  property  taxes,  and  thus  do  not  rely  on 
funds  from  the  province.  This  enables  them  to  act  on  their 
own  to  some  extent,  without  getting  Ministry  approval  for 
all  projects,  or  even  to  ignore  Ministry  policy  directives. 
Some  of  these  boards  developed  innovative  educational 
programs,  such  as  schools  for  the  arts  and  for  sciences,  alter- 
native schools,  and  other  special  programs  which  make  them 
leaders  in  the  province's  education  system.  Although  policy 
autonomy  was  not  officially  sanctioned,  the  Ministry  seemed 
unable,  or  unwilling,  to  ensure  compliance  with  many  of  its 
directives. 

The  result  has  been  a  considerable  diversity  of  education- 
al programs  and  experiences  across  the  province.  Although 
such  diversity  can  be  positive,  if  carried  to  extremes  it  has 
certain  costs.  In  the  opinion  of  many,  there  is  too  much  vari- 
ation in  program  and  quality,  and  costs  are  not  easily 
controlled. 

During  the  '80s  and  early  '90s,  the  Ministry  also  mounted 
a  series  of  initiatives,  such  as  destreaming  and  the  Learning 
Program  Secretariat,  which  seemed  to  further  erode  its  cred- 
ibility among  various  stakeholders.  In  the  early  '90s,  many 
educators  saw  provincial  policy  as  characterized  by  fragmen- 
tation, lack  of  coherence,  lack  of  consistency,  and  probably 
most  crucial,  lack  of  accountability. 


Vol.  iV    Making  It  Happen      Organizing  Education 


-*  ^ Jiiai  Ssrvic*  A^«ncy  Networks 


Thc'L  j'e  a  large  number  of  Educational 
Service  Agency  Networks  operating  in  nnany 
states  in  the  United  States,  some  of  wtiich 
have  been  established  for  a  considerable 
time   Reports  on  their  operation  and  effec 
ttveness  provide  valuable  information  for  co- 
operative efforts  in  Ontano. 


Although  the  Ministry  has  produced  some  excellent 
resource  materials,  these  have  less  impact  than  might  be 
expected.  We  were  told  that  over  the  past  decade  the 
Ministry  has  prepared  some  remarkable  documents:  guide- 
lines, resource  guides,  curriculum  supports,  and  the  like.  The 
problem  is  that,  reflecting  the  tensions  between  the  Ministry 
and  the  school  boards,  the  boards  often  pay  little  attention 
to  the  Ministry.  As  a  result,  few  classroom  teachers  even 
know  that  this  material  is  available,  and  students  are  denied 
the  benefit  of  its  existence. 

We  believe  that  in  a  province  with  the  scale  and  diversity 
of  Ontario,  and  especially  in  such  uncertain  times,  there 
must  be  a  dear  and  consistent  direction  for  education, 
achieved  through  common  learning  outcomes,  a  common 
curriculum,  and  standards  across  the  province.  Therefore, 
the  Ministry  must  play  a  clearer  role. 

However,  it  must  exercise  its  authority  thoughtfully  and 
systematically,  using  the  power  and  influence  of  a  central 
authority  to  generate  a  sense  of  common  purpose  in  the 
educational  community.  This  will  reduce  the  fragmentation 
of  many  local  school  boards  and  schools  "doing  their  own 
thing,'  and  ensure  that  there  is  some  shared  understanding 
throughout  the  province.  The  Ministry  must  strengthen  the 
links  between  elementary  and  secondary  education  and  the 
broader  community. 

The  challenge  for  the  Ministry  is  to  respond  to  the  need 
for  local  diffcrentution,  while  providing  the  necessary  direc 
lion  and  clear  expectations.  It  must  set  general  policy  guide- 
lines to  be  followed  by  the  system;  setting  the  direction 
means  setting  the  agenda  for  the  province's  education 
lystcm.  The  Minutry  must  set  the  priorities  for  Ontario 


education,  clarify  goals,  and  define  the  desired  outcomes. 
That  would  give  everyone  in  the  system  targets  to  work 
towards,  and  criteria  by  which  to  decide  among  the  many 
competing  priorities. 

The  Ministry  must  also  be  responsible  tor  providing 
equitable  funding  for  all  students  across  the  province,  setting 
guidelines  to  ensure  that  students'  voices  receive  serious 
attention.  They  must  ensure  that  teachers  play  a  central  role 
in  running  schools,  that  parents  are  welcomed  into  schools, 
that  the  common  curriculum  is  followed,  and  that  the 
system  is  truly  accountable  to  the  public. 

By  setting  guidelines  in  these  different  areas,  the  Ministry 
can  divest  itself  of  direct  control  and  the  need  to  over- 
regulate.  It  also  gives  principals  and  teachers  the  mandate  to 
make  schools  work  better,  and  makes  the  proposed  College 
of  Teachers  responsible  for  teacher  education  and  profes- 
sional development.  Furthermore,  by  taking  seriously  the 
advice  of  advisory  councils,  such  as  the  Ontario  Parents 
Council  and  the  student  and  youth  council  we  recommend, 
the  Ministry  would  demonstrate  that  real  influence  can  be 
exerted  on  the  system  through  consultation  and  without 
formal  powers. 

The  Ministry's  accountability  for  elementary 
and  secondary  education: 

In  our  view,  the  Ministry  must  work  in  a  more  systematic 
and  collaborative  way  than  it  has  done  in  the  past,  with  both 
old  and  new  stakeholders.  Right  now,  it  often  seems  to  oper- 
ate in  isolation  from  its  clients  and  other  stakeholders.  It  is 
seen  as  placing  demands  on  the  school  system  in  a  confused 
and  disorganized  fashion,  with  constant  reorganization  and 
major  policy  shifts,  many  of  which  are  delivered  without  an 
adequate  and  compelling  rationale. 

Throughout  the  course  of  our  work,  we  heard  complaints 
about  the  many  changes  of  direction  made  by  the  Ministry 
of  Education  and  Training,  and  the  additional  demands  it 
has  placed  on  schools  and  school  boards  in  the  past  few 
years.  Hducators  are  particularly  concerned  about  the  lack  of 
professional  expertise  in  the  Ministry  to  ensure  expert  input 
into  the  Ministry's  decision-making  process  and  to  help 
boards  when  they  need  assistance. 

We  sympathize  with  these  concerns,  and  believe  that  the 
Ministry  needs  to  pay  attention  to  its  constituencies  and,  as 
we  have  stres.sed,  communicate  clearly  the  overall  direction 


For  ttw  tOM  o(  LMiming 


of  education  in  Ontario,  as  well  as  the  intended  outcomes  of 
policies.  At  the  same  time,  the  Ministry  has  to  take  a  leader- 
ship role,  knowing  full  well  that  policy  may  have  to  come 
before  consensus  has  been  reached. 

The  Ministry  must  be  more  accountable  to  the  public  and 
to  the  education  community.  In  Chapter  19,  we  propose  a 
format  for  an  annual  report  from  the  Minister  that  we 
believe  will  be  an  effective  way  for  the  public  to  get  enough 
information  to  make  informed  judgments  about  elementary 
and  secondary  education  in  the  province. 

We  caution  educators  and  the  public  that  they  may  be 
hoping  for  the  impossible  if  they  believe  that  the  Ministry 
can  issue  a  complete  and  unambiguous  educational  plan  for 
the  whole  province  that  will  receive  universal  acclaim. 

In  Chapter  20,  when  we  discuss  implementing  reforms, 
we  stress  that  although  the  Ministry  must  be  clear  and  firm 
about  the  general  principles  of  its  educational  vision,  people 
on  school  boards  and  in  schools  will  have  to  apply  these 
principles  in  ways  that  make  sense  in  the  local  context.  And 
because  the  situation  is  dynamic  it  is  difficult  -  if  not 
impossible  -  to  predict  in  advance  just  what  circumstances 
will  arise. 

Teachers'  unions  in  Ontario  also  belong  in  this  discus- 
sion. Through  collective  agreements,  negotiated  locally  with 
each  school  board,  the  federations  have  a  significant  influ- 
ence on  education  practice  at  both  the  elementary  and 
secondary  levels.  They  affect  policy  in  many  ways  and  are 
actively  involved  in  professional  development  for  teachers. 

The  relationship  between  the  Ministry  and  the  federa- 
tions is  important  but  difficult.  It  seems  obvious  to  us  that, 
if  the  education  system  is  to  improve  in  the  many  ways  we 
have  prescribed,  it  is  essential  that  both  sectors  must  focus 
on  building  collaboration  within  the  system.  The  Ministry, 
boards,  and  the  federations  must  work  together  in  the 
service  of  better  learning  for  students. 

Recommendation  157 

*We  recommend  that  the  Ministry  clearly  set  out  its  leader- 
ship and  management  role,  especially  in  relation  to  school 
boards,  teacher  federations,  and  faculties  of  education,  and 
that  it  develop  a  plan  for  more  complete  communication  with 
all  those  interested  in  elementary  and  secondary  education. 


££  ^Phere  appears  to  be  a  growing  frus- 
I  tration  among,  not  only  school 
personnel,  but  society  in  general, 
resulting  in  a  breakdown  of  confi- 
dence in  the  ability  of  the  Ministry  of 
Education  and  Training  to  provide  the 
'strategic'  leadership  required  at  this 
time.  The  fact  that  there  have  been 
five  Ministers  of  Education  in  the  past 
five  years  and  that  key  civil  servants 
have  either  left  or  been  transferred 
must  be  seriously  questioned,  not 
only  the  reason  for  the  constant 
change  of  office,  but  also  the  impact 
of  the  changes  upon  the  Ministry 
itself  and  the  educational  system  in 
general.  It  is  obvious  that  the  educa- 
tional system  of  Ontario  needs  the 
immediate  attention  at  the  Ministry 
of  Education  and  Training  level  to 
avoid  a  crisis.  Indeed,  many  people 
would  say  we  already  have  a  crisis 
on  our  hands." 

Scarborough  Board  of  Education: 
Secondary  School  Principals'  Association 


Beyond  elementary  and  secondary  education: 
In  addition  to  schools  and  school  boards,  there  are  several 
other  partners  in  the  broader  education  community.  All  have 
interests  in,  and  power  over,  some  aspects  of  elementary  and 
secondary  education.  None  can  be  ignored. 

In  this  regard  it  is  important  to  note  that  in  1992  the 
Ministry  of  Education  became  the  Ministry  of  Education 
and  Training,  incorporating  the  three  former  Ministries  of 
Education,  Colleges  and  Universities,  and  Skills  Develop- 
ment. It  now  has  responsibility  for  post-secondary  education 
and,  through  the  Ontario  Training  Adjustment  Board,  for 
training  as  well.  The  Ministry's  broader  mandate  has  signifi- 
cant implications  in  relation  to  its  place  in  the  elementary 
and  secondary  education  system.  The  Ministry  is  directly 
responsible  for  policy  governing  education  and  training  at 
all  levels;  this  should  considerably  ease  the  difficulties  of 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Organizing  Education 


tant  lor  the  Miniitry,  in  ihc  next  several 
c  actively  involved  in  auuring  a  M((ni(k4nt 
incrrAse  in  partner^ip^  and  cu-ordination  among 
whooU.  colleges,  and  univertitiev  to  that  educational 
■  ices  arc  belter  articulated  and  ttructured  as  an 
.MJblc  coniinuum. 


aligning  related  polic~y  areas  that,  until  recently,  operated  as 
distinct  and  separate  entities. 

The  Ministry's  responsibilities  to  the  broader  educational 
system  also  suggest  to  us  that  it  must  make  a  priority  of 
better  transition  programs  between  the  various  sectors.  We 
think  it  is  important  for  the  Ministry,  in  the  next  several 
years,  to  be  actively  involved  in  assuring  a  significant 
increase  in  partnerships  and  co-ordination  among  schools, 
colleges,  and  universities,  so  that  educational  services  arc 
better  articulated  and  structured  as  an  accessible  continuum. 

As  well,  through  the  training  board,  the  Ministry  has  a 
strategic  role  in  rationalizing  education  and  training  policies 
and  resources.  And,  as  a  super- ministry  responsible  for  one 
of  the  two  largest  areas  of  social  policies  and  programs,  it  is 
a  central  and  crucial  part  of  the  provincial  government. 

We  strongly  urge  that  the  Ministry  use  its  power  to  influ- 
ence government  planning  so  that  the  needs  of  learners  of 
all  ages  are  addressed  in  a  more  co-ordinated  manner. 

("olleges  and  universities  arc  a  powerful  influence  on 
elementary  and  secondary  education.  Beyond  the  particular 
interests  of  colleges  and  universities  in  relation  to  high- 
Khool  students  and  graduates,  universities  -  and  faculties  of 
education,  in  particular  -  have  an  impact  through  their 
control  of  many  aspects  of  teacher  education,  including 
admission  to  teacher  preparation  programs  and  develop- 
ment of  the  curriculum  for  student  teachers. 

As  we  noted  in  Chapter  12,  because  they  control  admis- 
sions, universities  and  faculties  of  education  act  as  gate- 
keepers to  the  leaching  profession.  The  .Ministry  can  make 
significant  strides  with  these  partners  to  bring  about  more 
coUaborativr  action  in  support  of  educational  reform. 


Our  proposed  C^ollege  of  Teachers  (see  Chapter  12)  will 
play  a  key  role  in  the  education  system  we  envisage.  We 
recommend  that  an  Ontario  (College  of  Teachers  be  estab- 
lished, with  responsibility  for  setting  professional  standards 
for  the  teaching  profession.  This  would  include  accreditation 
or  recognition  of  teacher  education  programs  and  establish 
the  requirements  for  initial  and  continuing  certification.  The 
formation  of  the  college  is  intended  to  grant  teachers  control 
over  many  aspects  of  their  professional  lives.  The  college 
should  not  be  controlled  by  any  special  interest  group. 

(iivcn  the  mandate  of  the  new  Ministry  of  Kducation  and 
Training,  elementary  and  secondary  education  is  now  a  force 
in  the  larger  world  of  education  and  training.  Educators  in 
the  Ministry's  various  sectors  cannot  afford  to  act  in  isola- 
tion, either  fiscally  or  educationally.  The  era  of  autonomous 
sectors  is  gone,  and  all  concerned  must  learn  to  take  account 
of  the  wider  education  community. 

With  its  very  broad  mandate,  the  Ministry  of  Education 
and  Training  is  ideally  placed  to  ensure  that  elementary  and 
secondary  education  policies  arc  more  closely  integrated 
with  policy  relating  to  higher  education,  with  workplace 
training,  and  with  lifelong  learning. 

Ihe  Ministry  and  the  rest  of  government  - 
beyond  education  and  training: 

Throughout  this  report,  we  emphasize  the  need  for  a  more 
comprehensive  approach  to  education,  learning  takes  place 
within  a  social  context  and,  while  educators  must  focus  on 
their  prime  responsibility  -  ensuring  intellectual  develop- 
ment -  we  also  discuss  their  shared  responsibilities  in  meet- 
ing a  whole  host  of  needs  that  arc  part  of  the  lives  of  chil- 
dren. 

In  Chapter  14  we  discuss  community  education  as  one  of 
the  engines  for  change  and  define  the  roles  and  responsibili- 
ties of  principals,  schools,  and  school  boards  in  creating 
community  alliances  to  support  the  learning  process.  The 
Ministry  also  has  a  critical  role  and  responsibility  in  this 
regard.  Because  it  is  responsible  for  education  and  training 
in  this  province,  the  Ministry  is  in  a  unique  position  to 
understand  the  needs  of  learners  and  particularly  the  blocks 
to  a  successful  educational  experience.  Wc  believe  that  a  key 
priority  for  the  Ministry  must  be  the  coordinated  develop- 
ment of  government  policies,  program.s,  and  services  to 
create  a  more  effective  network  of  support  services  for  learn- 


For  Ihm  U>v«  of  Laarning 


In  the  same  way  that  all  stakeholders  in  education 
must  find  new  ways  to  collaborate,  the  Ministry  must 
develop  new  collaborative  approaches  with  other 
government  players. 


ers  and  their  families  as  a  means  of  ensuring  the  healthy 
development  of  all  children. 

This  has  a  number  of  implications  for  the  Ministry.  Just 
as  teachers  cannot  isolate  themselves  within  the  world  of  the 
classroom,  the  Ministry  can  no  longer  isolate  itself  within 
the  world  of  education.  It  must  have  a  significant  interest  in, 
and  build  the  capacity  to  play,  a  key  role  in  shaping  all 
public  policies  related  to  the  healthy  development  of  chil- 
dren. 

This  includes  policy  areas  with  which  the  Ministry  has 
traditionally  been  associated  -  social  services  and  health,  for 
example  -  as  well  as  less  familiar  areas,  such  as  recreation, 
employment,  and  culture.  Just  as  principals  and  schools 
must  be  leaders  in  building  community  alliances  to  better 
support  student  learning,  so  too  must  the  Ministry  take  a 
leadership  role  in  building  provincial  alliances  that  better 
support  learning  in  this  province. 

At  the  provincial  level,  that  means  active  participation  in 
reviewing  policies,  programs,  and  funding  structures  to 
create  a  more  co-ordinated  and  comprehensive  network  of 
supports  for  children  and  their  families.  Locally,  it  means 
active  participation  in  assessing  local  needs  and  planning 
local  approaches  to  service  delivery. 

In  the  same  way  that  all  stakeholders  in  education  must 
find  new  ways  to  collaborate,  the  Ministry  must  develop  new 
collaborative  approaches  with  other  government  players. 
Provincially,  that  involves  assuming  responsibility  for  devel- 
oping collaboration  among  various  government  and  provin- 
cial interests.  Locally,  it  means  assuming  responsibility  for 
developing  collaboration  among  various  local  interests  and 
education  partners. 

Minority  participation  and  influence  in  the 
Ministry's  decision-making: 

We  know  that  some  stakeholders  do  not  perceive  the 
Ministry  as  being  representative  and  inclusive  of  all  individ- 
uals and  communities  in  the  schools  -  not  even  of  those 
formally  granted  constitutional  rights,  such  as  the  Roman 
Catholic  and  Franco-Ontarian  minorities.  WTiile  we  address 
the  question  of  representation  of  our  diverse  communities  in 
several  parts  of  the  report,  here  we  consider  the  issue  of 
sharing  power  within  Ministry  structures. 

First,  the  formally  recognized  components  of  the  educa- 
tion system  must  also  be  formal  parts  of  the  Ministry. 


Although,  over  the  years,  slow  recognition  of  the  Franco- 
Ontarian  minority  led  to  the  development  of  what  the 
Ministry  calls  a  team,  there  is  no  parallel  body  for  Roman 
Catholics.  That  is  why,  in  Chapter  15,  we  recommend  that  a 
team  be  established  with  special  responsibilities  for  and 
expertise  in  Catholic  education  concerns,  similar  to  the  fran- 
cophone team.  We  hope,  of  course,  that  these  teams  will  not 
be  reduced  to  speaking  only  about  their  specific  issues,  but 
will  become  part  of  the  Ministry's  mainstream. 

But  we  want  to  go  further  than  such  basic  organizational 
recognition  of  minority  constituencies.  We  also  recommend 
that  influential  representation  from  the  Catholic  and 
Franco-Ontarian  educational  milieux  be  put  in  place  at  all 
levels  of  professional  and  managerial  Ministry  staff. 

We  note  that  the  francophone  minority  has  had  an  assis- 
tant deputy  minister  (ADM)  position  for  some  15  years  now. 
But,  as  observation  and  experience  show  -  despite  titles  and 
functions  -  a  structure  can  always  informally  marginalize 
certain  players,  especially  those  with  responsibilities  for 
minorities.  The  more  significant  the  representation,  the  less 
likely  the  marginalization.  Indeed,  we  believe  that  over  the 
years  such  senior  positions  will  be  filled  by  individuals 
recognized  as  outstanding  leaders. 

It  is  therefore  only  natural  that,  in  the  near  future,  a 
person  from  the  Catholic  or  francophone  educational  world 
will  become  the  deputy  minister  of  Training  and  Education 
for  Ontario,  with  responsibility  for  managing  the  entire 
system. 

As  a  group,  assistant  deputy  ministers  should  be  truly 
representative  of  the  grassroots  of  the  educational  commu- 
nity. Although  there  is  no  magic  formula  for  creating  true 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Organizing  Education 


boards.  They  can  ensure  that  provincial  policy  directions  arc 
understood,  that  implementation  takes  local  realities  into 
account,  thai  exemplary  practices  are  shared,  and  that  press- 
ing problems  arc  jointly  addressed  and  resolved. 


political  participation,  we  have  already  recommended  that, 
at  all  times,  ADMs  should  formally  include  one  Roman 
Catholic  and  one  francophone  of  influence.  Of  course,  there 
may  well  be  more  than  one  of  each  -  we  arc  not  promoting 
mere  tokenism. 

Recommendation  158 

*ln  order  to  maximize  their  influence  within  the  Ministry,  we 
recommend  that  assistant  deputy  ministers  representing 
particular  constituencies  be  placed  in  charge  of  the  portfolio 
of  issues  related  to  their  respective  constituencies,  as  well 
as  being  responsible  for  other  important  dossiers  related  to 
education  for  all  Ontarians. 

A  Mmislry  presence  at  the  local  level: 

In  a  province  as  large  and  diverse  as  Ontario,  the  Ministry 

clearly  cannot  govern  education  entirely  from  downtown 

Toronto.  Ai  we  note  later,  the  Ministry  must  link  with  other 

mmislries,  as  well  as  with  others  in  the  broader  educational 

community,  and  must  do  so  at  the  provincial  and  local 

levels. 

As  well  as  the  central  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training 
office*  in  Toronto,  there  arc  six  regional  offices  throughout 
the  provmcc:  central,  eastern,  mid-northern,  northeastern, 
northwestern,  and  western.  Because  the  offices  arc  located  in 
communities  around  the  province,  they  are  well  placed  to 
lake  a  lead  role  in  co-ordinalion  at  the  local  level,  where  as 
we  ttre\s  in  Chapter  14,  action  is  most  crucial.  We  would 
encourage  the  .Vlmistry  to  make  this  a  priority  for  all  its 
regional  offices. 

The  regional  offices  can  also  play  a  vital  role  in  helping  to 
fmler  better  relations  between  the  Ministry  and  the  school 


The  provincial  governrncnl 

W'c  have  discussed  the  issue  of  co-ordinating  the  efforts  of 
all  those  who  deal  with  the  needs  of  children  and  youth.  The 
Ministry  cannot  act  alone;  the  provincial  government  must 
play  a  significant  part  in  co-ordinating  the  many  ministries 
that  have  an  impact  on  the  well-being  of  children.  Without 
commitment  and  co-ordinatit)n  at  the  top,  it  will  be  impos- 
sible to  succeed.  There  is  no  question  that  such  inter- 
ministerial  co-ordination  is  difficult  to  initiate,  and  even 
more  difficult  to  sustain  -  as  demonstrated  recently  by  diffi- 
culties in  maintaining  an  inter-ministerial  committee  estab- 
lished for  the  purpose  of  co-ordinating  services  for  children. 

Youn,  Mine,  and  Ours,  the  report  of  the  Clhildren  and 
Youth  Project  Steering  Committee  of  the  Premier's  Council 
on  Health,  Well-Bcing,  and  Social  justice,  was  specifically 
concerned  about  ensuring  such  inter-ministerial  links.  It 
reported  that 

The  provincial  governrncnl,  as  legislalnr,  regulator,  policy-maker 
and  funder,  has  a  key  role  in  encouraging  positive  change  at  the 
community  level  ...  The  Committee  is  asking  the  Province  to  act  as 
a  catalyst  and  enabler  of  change  -  [to]  set  standards;  ensure  equity: 
link  resources  to  measurable  results  and  evaluate  success;  encourage 
communities  to  build  on  current  initiatives  that  are  working; 
promote  creativity  and  flexibility;  and  support  communities  to  find 
their  own  innovative  solutions.' 

VN'hilc  we  endorse  this  statement  and  urge  the  govern- 
ment to  move  ahead  on  these  lines  as  quickly  as  possible,  we 
go  further.  If  large  numbers  of  children  continue  to  suffer 
the  effects  of  poverty;  if  teachers  and  schools  arc  made 
responsible  for  delivering  an  increasing  number  of  social 
programs,  in  addition  lo  traditional  academic  programs;  if 
agencies  funded  by  other  departments  of  government 
continue  to  define  their  responsibilities  as  separate  from 
schools;  then  the  government,  which  has  the  power  to  re- 
deploy resources  and  to  change  mandates,  has  failed. 

While  we  call  on  the  Minister  of  Education  and  Training 
to  provide  leadership  within  government,  we  know  that  only 
when  government  at  the  highest  levels  decides  that  inter- 


For  tht  LOM  or  LMmNiC 


While  schools,  school  boards,  and  the  Ministry  of 
Education  and  Training  have  important  roles  to  play, 
there  is  an  important  need  to  clarify  these  roles,  and 
to  shift  power  and  responsibilities,  as  appropriate,  to 
better  suit  changed  circumstances. 


departmental  collaboration  is  non-negotiable  will  it  occur. 
And  without  that  decisiveness  and  that  leadership,  the  best 
teachers  and  the  best  principals  will  be  unable  to  meet  the 
agenda  we  have  set  for  them:  to  develop  and  nurture  high 
levels  of  literacies  in  all  our  children. 


Conclusion 

We  believe  that,  in  spite  of  changes  in  society  and  in  educa- 
tion, the  overall  organizational  structure  of  education  in 
Ontario  still  makes  sense.  It  is  important  to  start  with  the 
teacher-student  relationship  and  build  the  system  to  support 
it,  with  the  bottom  line  being  student  learning.  While 
schools,  school  boards,  and  the  Ministry  of  Education  and 
Training  have  important  roles  to  play,  there  is  an  important 
need  to  clarify  these  roles,  and  to  shift  power  and  responsi- 
bilities, as  appropriate,  to  better  suit  changed  circumstances. 

Henry  Mintzberg,  a  well-known  organizational  theorist  at 
McGill  University,  writes  "Power  is  a  major  factor,  one  that 
cannot  be  ignored  by  anyone  interested  in  understanding 
how  organizations  work  and  end  up  doing  what  they  do.""' 
All  those  with  a  stake  in  the  school  system  -  the  Minister  of 
Education  and  Training;  the  ministry's  civil  service;  school 
board  trustees  and  administrators;  universities;  principals; 
teachers;  teacher  federations;  parents;  the  business  commu- 
nity; even,  from  time  to  time,  students  themselves  -  try  to 
increase  their  own  power. 

Our  proposals,  here  and  in  Chapters  15  and  16,  are 
attempts  to  find  a  better  balance  among  all  these  forces,  a 
balance  that  will  achieve  system  goals,  promote  effective  use 
of  resources,  redress  inequities,  and  respond  to  the  needs  of 
different  parts  of  the  system  and  of  Ontario's  various 
geographic  regions. 

Although  we  do  not  recommend  any  radical  changes  in 
the  overall  organizational  structure  of  education  in  the 
province,  we  do  recommend  a  review  and  redefinition  of 
some  roles  and  responsibilities.  We  are  also  suggesting  a  shift 
of  some  responsibilities  away  from  school  boards.  In  some 
cases,  these  would  move  to  the  schools,  in  others  to  the 
Ministry. 

We  anticipate  a  reorganization  or  downsizing  of  central 
office  staff  as  a  result  of  other  recommendations  in  the 
report,  particularly  those  related  to  curriculum  development 
(see  Chapters  7  to  10)  and  taxing  powers  (discussed  in 
Chapter  18).  That  may  be  countered  somewhat  by  increased 


responsibilities  in  relation  to  community  education  alliances 
(as  discussed  in  Chapter  14). 

On  balance,  we  try  to  ensure  that,  within  clearly  under- 
stood and  agreed-upon  provincial  guidelines,  local  commu- 
nities and  their  schools  have  the  scope  to  meet  their  needs  as 
they  see  fit.  Our  proposals  protect  students  and  the  public  by 
ensuring  high  standards,  as  well  as  clarity  about  curriculum 
and  intended  learning,  right  across  the  province.  At  the  same 
time,  they  allow  teachers,  principals,  parents,  and  their  local 
communities  not  only  the  freedom,  but  the  resources,  to 
craft  their  own  solutions  and  programs.  In  other  words,  we 
see  the  school  system  as  combining  stability  and  flexibility  as 
much  as  possible. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Organizing  Education 


Endnote* 


1  B<lty  Malcn,  'Enacting  SiK-bascd  Management:  A  Political 
Utilities  Analysis.'  Educational  Evaluation  and  Policy  Analysis 
I6.no.  3  (1994):  249-67. 

2  loyce  Scant,  "NNliai  the  Literature  Tells  U$  about  School- 
based  Management  m  Selected  lurisdictions:  Implications  for 
Ontario,"  p.  22.  Paper  written  for  the  Ontario  Royal 
Commission  on  Learning,  1994. 

3  Priscilla  Wohlstetter,  Koxane  Smyer,  and  Susan  Albers 
Mohrman,~New  Boundaries  for  School-based  Management: 
The  High  Involvement  Model,"  Educational  Evaluation  and 
Policy  Analysts  16.  no.  3  ( 1994):  268-86. 

4  For  a  good  summary  of  the  research,  see  Suzanne  Ziegler, 
The  Effects  of  Parent  Involvement  on  Children's  Achievement: 
The  Significance  of  Home/School  Links,  report  185  (Toronto 
Board  of  Education,  1987). 

For  more  detail,  sec  reports  by  loyce  L.  Epstein,  one  of  the 
more  recent  ones  being  "School  and  Family  Connections,"  in 
Families  in  Community  Settings,  ed.  D.G.  Unger  and  M.B. 
Sussman  (New  York:  Haworth  Press,  1990). 

5  Michael  G.  Fullan  with  Suzanne  Stiegclbauer,  77ie  New 
Meaning  of  Educational  Change  (Toronto:  OISE  Press.  1991 ), 
p.  237. 

6  We  acknowledge  that  the  Chicago  reforms  have  received 
mixed  reviews  from  observers,  participants,  and  researchers. 
On  balance,  however,  we  are  aware  of  no  compelling 
evidence  that  wrould  suggest  Ontario  should  follow  this  kind 
of  school  governance  model.  See,  for  instance,  Anthony  S. 
Bryk  and  others,  "The  State  of  Chicago  School  Reform."  Phi 
Delta  Kappan  76,  no.  I  (1994):  74-78. 

7  B.  Wilson  and  T.  Corcoran,  Successful  Secondary  Schools: 
Visions  of  Excellence  in  American  Education  (Philadelphia: 
Falmer  Press.  1988). 

8  Of  the  170-odd  Ontario  boards.  20  are  called  District  School 
Area  Boards.  These  and  another  eight  very  small  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  boards  operate  mostly  in  remote 
areas  of  the  province,  usually  with  only  one  school,  with 
fewer  than  100  students  under  their  jurisdiction.  Most  of 
them  tuvc  no  administrators  beyond  the  school  principal, 
and  are  physically  distant  from  other  boards.  There  is  also  a 
Protestant  separate  school  board  in  Penclanguishene  and  a 
board  operating  only  a  secondary  school  m  Moosonee.  Four 
boards  do  not  operate  Khoolt  at  all,  usually  buying  educa- 
tion for  the  students  living  in  their  area  from  other  boards. 
Others  are  care  and  treatment  centre  boards  connected  with 
hospitals  or  other  treatment  centres  in  half-a-dozen  cities. 
There  arc.  ihcrcforc,  only  128  Ontario  boards  that  fit  the 


image  of  what  most  people  probably  mean  when  ihey  speak 
of  school  boards,  that  is,  boards  operating  a  number  of 
schools,  and  having  some  central  board  administrative  staff. 
Much  of  the  text  in  this  section  refrrN,  unless  otherwise 
noted,  to  these  128  boards. 

9        For  example: 

)ohn  Carver,  Hoards  That  Make  a  Difference:  A  New  Design 
for  Leadership  in  Nonprofit  and  Public  Organizations  (San 
Francisco:  )ossey-Bass,  1994). 

Michael  Kirst,  "A  Framework  for  Redefining  the  Role  and 
Responsibilities  of  Local  School  Boards"  (Washington,  DC: 
Institute  for  Educational  leadership,  1993). 

10  Ontario,  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  and  Ontario 
school  trustee  associations,  Handbook  for  School  Trustees  in 
Ontario 

(Toronto,  1992). 

1 1  Carver,  Boards  That  Make  a  Difference,  p.  222. 

1 2  F"or  instance: 

Linda  LaKoquc  and  IVtcr  (U)lcman,  "Quality  Control:  School 
Accountability  and  District  Ethos,"  in  Educational  Policy  for 
Effective  Schools,  cd.  Mark  Holmes,  Kenneth  Lcithwood,  and 
Donald  F  Musella  (Toronto:  OISE  Press.  1989),  p.  168-91. 

Karen  Seashore  Louis  and  Matthew  B.  Miles.  Improving  the 
Urban  High  School:  What  Works  and  Why  ( New  York: 
Teachers  College  Press.  1990). 

Susan  Rosenholtz,  Teachers'  Workplace:  The  Social  Organiza- 
tion of  Schools  (New  York:  Longman,  1989). 

13  The  Metropolitan  Toronto  Board  of  Trade  circulated  figures 
in  December  of  1993  claiming  that  a  large  proportion  of  staff 
in  various  Metro  boards  was  non-teaching.  In  particular, 
they  reported  that  only  46. 1  percent  of  Toronto  Board  of 
Education  employees  were  "on  grid  teachers."  However, 
according  to  Toronto  Board  sources,  the  percentage  of  leach- 
ing staff  is  65  to  75  percent,  depending  on  how  staff  such  as 
classroom  teaching  assistants  are  classified. 

1 4.        Edward  Humphreys  and  others.  Alternative  Approaches  to 

Determining  Distribution  of  School  Board  Trustee  Representa- 
tion, vol  2.  (Toronto:  Ontario  Ministry  of  Education,  1986), 
p.  61. 

1 5  Premier's  Council  on  Health,  Well- Being,  and  Social  lustice. 
Yours,  Mine,  and  Ours  (Toronto:  Ontario  Children  and  Youth 
Project.  1994),  p.  46. 

16  Henry  Mmt/berg,  Power  In  and  Around  Organizations 
(Englewood  Cliffs.  N|:  Prentice  Hall,  1983),  p.  I. 


For  th«  |j(M«  o(  LMmmt 


"^•Wit' 


•/\ 


r*.j\'  •<*? 


unding 


Equity  in  education  requires  financial  equity. 
Although  the  very  complex  issue  of  education 
funding  in  general  was  not  a  specific  part  of  our 
mandate,  we  are  convinced  that  our  goal  of 
providing  an  excellent  education  for  all  learners 
cannot  become  reality  unless  the  way  education  Is 
funded  in  Ontario  is  changed  radically.  This  chapter 
explains  briefly  how  we  came  to  that  conclusion 
and  makes  recommendations  we  believe  will  lead 
to  more  equitable  learning  opportunities  across 
the  province. 


We  are  aware  that  financing  education  cannot  be 
discussed  in  isolation;  it  is  inextricably  linked, 
not  only  to  equity,  but  to  the  questions  of  power 
and  influence  we  discussed  in  the  previous  chapter,  and  to 
accountability,  the  topic  of  the  next  chapter. 

Historical  context 

Historically,  the  initiative  to  establish  schools  in  Ontario 
came  from  the  local  level  or  from  private  sources.  Local 
levies  did  not  become  tied  to  the  property  tax  until  1849, 
when  the  Baldwin  Act  was  passed;  the  following  year  munic- 
ipalities were  given  the  right  to  raise  taxes  on  property. 

Provincial  funding  was  sporadic  at  best  until  the  1850s, 
when  the  government,  under  the  leadership  of  Egerton 
Ryerson,  introduced  a  systematic  but  limited  form  of  grants 
to  give  more  students  access  to  schools.  Ryerson  also  tied 
these  grants  to  more  regulatory  measures  designed  to 
improve  the  quality  of  education  across  the  province. 

In  spite  of  attempts  to  equalize  the  money  available 
across  Ontario,  enormous  disparities  remained.  In  1907,  the 
government  first  began  to  pay  a  sliding  scale  of  grants  based 
on  local  ability  to  raise  money;  in  1924,  it  decided  to  use  the 
amount  of  property  assessment  as  the  measure  of  local 
wealth.  However,  it  was  not  until  the  1940s,  when  the  govern- 
ment introduced  the  concept  of  "approved  costs,"  that  it  was 
able  to  maintain  some  degree  of  control  over  funding  and 
began  to  achieve  some  degree  of  equity. 

Initially,  the  province  identified  some  specific  costs  for 
certain  programs,  and  provided  grants  to  ensure  that  all 
schools  had  enough  funds  to  cover  those  costs.  Gradually, 
during  the  '50s  and  '60s,  it  increased  the  types  of  expendi- 


tures included  in  the  "approved  costs"  -  and  increased  the 
amount  of  money  made  available  to  schools.  At  the  same 
time,  because  some  municipalities  were  deliberately  under- 
valuing their  assessment  in  order  to  attract  more  grant 
money,  the  province  also  introduced  assessment  equalization 
factors,  which  were  used  to  arrive  at  a  more  uniform  base 
for  making  grants  to  a  municipality  or  school  board.  The 
province  continued  the  process  of  making  adjustments  and 
reducing  funding  inequities. 

In  1964,  William  Davis,  then  Minister  of  Education, 
implemented  the  Ontario  Foundation  Tax  Plan,  which  based 
the  cost  of  education  on  a  model  school  program.  These 
costs  were  estimated  from  actual  costs  in  sample  boards 
across  Ontario.  The  province  set  a  mill  rate  that  had  to  be 
levied  by  all  boards  and  then  provided  grants  to  bring  all 
boards  up  to  the  foundation  level.  (A  mill  represents  $1  of 
tax  for  every  $1,000  of  property  assessment;  for  example,  a 
property  assessed  at  $100,000  with  a  mill  rate  of  25  will 
attract  taxes  of  $2,500.)  The  government  also  made  a 
commitment  to  increase  provincial  support  to  60  percent  of 
education  costs  by  1972-73. 

By  allowing  boards  to  spend  funds  beyond  the  founda- 
tion level,  as  long  as  the  money  was  raised  from  local  taxes, 
the  government  acknowledged  local  needs;  at  the  same  time, 
however,  this  built  in  a  continuing  source  of  spending 
inequity  across  boards,  and  also  made  it  difficult  to  achieve 
the  promised  level  of  government  support. 

Eventually,  the  level  of  support  did  reach  60.5  percent, 
but  only  because  the  government  imposed  a  ceiling  on 
expenditures;  boards  spending  more  were  subject  to  penal- 
ties. This  gave  the  government  control  over  the  total  expen- 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Funding 


diturc  and  ensured  that  it  knew  exactly  how  much  the  60 
percent  provincial  share  would  cost.  However,  school  boards, 
especially  those  with  significant  assessment  possibilities, 
claimed  that  approved  costs  did  not  give  sufTicicnt  weight  to 
different  local  needs,  and  the  government  relaxed  the  penalties. 

Although  the  government  continued  to  identity  an 
approved  ceiling  and,  to  ensure  province-wide  equity  within 
it,  continued  paying  grants,  some  boards  soon  began  to 
spend  well  beyond  the  imposed  limits.  Until  recently,  the 
government  continued  to  increase  the  ceiling  and  the 
amount  it  paid  in  grants,  to  account  for  both  inflation  and 
the  cost  of  new  programs,  but  the  increases  did  not  keep 
pace  with  the  actual  growth  in  board  expenditures;  there- 
fore, the  government's  share  of  the  total  amount  paid  for 
education  has  slipped  steadily.  VS'hile  in  1964,  the  approved 
costs  were  based  on  real  expenditures,  the  current  ceiling  no 
longer  reflects  reality  and,  once  again,  there  are  great  dispar- 
ities in  the  amounts  different  boards  spend. 

Education  funding  in  Ontario 

fcducaiion  in  Ontario  is  financed  by  a  combination  of  prop- 
erty taxes  and  provincial  grants.  Ontario's  school  boards 
collectively  raise  slightly  more  than  half  of  their  total 
revenue  largely  from  local  property  taxes  on  residential, 
commercial,  and  industrial  properties.  The  remaining  fund- 
ing comes  from  the  province  in  the  form  of  education 
grants.  What  these  figures  disguise,  however,  is  that  depend- 
ing on  the  size  or  wraith  of  the  local  assessment  base,  some 
boards  get  nothing  from  the  province,  while  others  receive 
virtually  their  entire  budget. 


The  proportion  received  from  grants  and  from  local  taxes 
depends  on  the  assessment  wealth  of  the  board,  according  to 
the  following: 

•  First,  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  establishes 
for  each  board  an  amount  per  student  that  the  board  may 
spend;  this  is  kni>wn  as  the  "expenditure  ceiling. " 

•  Second,  the  Ministry  also  establishes  a  provincial  mill  rate 
on  an  equalized  basis.  Boards  are  expected  to  raise  from 
local  taxes  the  amount  this  mill  rate  will  produce  when 
applied  to  its  assessment  base. 

•  Third,  the  Ministry  pays  grants  to  a  board  to  lIosc  any  gap 
between  the  amount  raised  locally  by  the  provincial  mill  rate 
and  the  expenditure  ceiling. 

Any  expenditure  over  the  ceiling  has  to  be  raised  locally. 
School  boards  with  a  strong  commercial  and  industrial 
assessment  base  are  able  to  generate  the  most  money 
through  local  property  taxes;  some  can  spend  well  beyond 
the  ceiling  without  taxing  at  a  higher  rate.  Other  boards' 
local  lax  bases  cannot  even  support  the  expenditure  ceiling. 

Ontario's  method  of  financing  schools  through  a  combi- 
nation of  property  taxes  and  provincial  grants  is  not  unique 
in  Canada,  although  a  higher  proportion  of  our  education 
revenue  comes  through  property  taxes  than  in  any  other 
province.  The  relatively  low  level  of  direct  provincial  support 
for  elementary  and  secondary  education  means  that  the 
province  has  less  control  over  school-board  decision- 
making, particularly  with  boards  that  have  the  capacity  to 
raise  entire  budgets  from  local  taxes. 

Current  concerns 

Based  on  our  public  hearmgs,  combined  with  insights  from 
our  research,'  it  is  clear  that  two  issues  arc  important  to  the 
future  of  school  reform.  The  first  is  equity  -  the  question  of 
whether  the  system  distributes  available  resources  in  a 
manner  that  is  fair  to  all  students  in  the  province.  I  he 
second  issue  is  what  we  call  adequacy  -  the  question  of  what 
funding  is  required  to  provide  the  kind  of  school  program 
we  envision. 

Equity 

hducational  equity,  the  necessity  ot  whuh  wc  have  stre.s.sed 
throughout  the  report  (particularly  in  (Chapters  l.S  and  16), 
requires  financial  equity.  Although  Ontario  does  not  suffer 


For  tlw  Lowt  of  tMrmnC 


TABLE  1 

Pei^Pupil  Expenditure  and  Elementary  Assessment  Wealth 

Index  in  Selected  Boards,  Ranked  in  Order  of  Wealth 


Board 

Average 

PerPupil  Total 

Equalized 

Wealth 

Daily 

Expenditure 

Assessment 

Index 

Enrolment 

1992 

Per  Elementary 

1992 

Pupil  1993 

Chapleau  RCSS 

363 

6,541  elem. 

81.680 

0.2259 

Geraldton  District  RCSS 

403 

6,415  elem. 

106.730 

0.2952 

Kenora  District  RCSS 

813 

6,401  elem. 

129 

8,814  sec. 

115.096 

0.3183 

SImcoe  Country  RCSS 

9,694 

5.565  elem. 

2,280 

11.911  sec. 

145.786 

0.4032 

Hearst  District  RCSS 

1,125 

6.227  elem. 

582 

8.136  sec. 

145.973 

0.4037 

Hornepayne 

181 

6,222  elem. 

109 

10,674  sec. 

158.861 

0.4393 

Kapuskasing  District 

1,903 

6.597  elem. 

RCSS 

857 

9.215  sec. 

159.026 

0.4398 

Waterloo  County  RCSS 

14,233 

6.041  elem. 

5,887 

5.797  sec. 

172.347 

0.4756 

London-Middlesex  County 

10,628 

5.390  elem. 

RCSS 

4.250 

7,913  sec. 

173.721 

0.4804 

Windsor  RCSS 

9,966 

5,990  elem. 

4,508 

6,300  sec. 

185.304 

0.5125 

Ottawa-Carleton  French 

2,146 

9,866  elem. 

Public 

2,210 

9.322  sec. 

189.007 

0.5227 

Red  Lake 

771 

7.085  elem. 

494 

8.455  sec. 

190.353 

0.5264 

Hamllton-Wentworth  RCSS 

16,382 

5.799  elem. 

8,447 

6.277  sec. 

195.016 

0.5393 

Chapleau 

188 

7.696  elem. 

219 

17.777  sec. 

208.286 

0.5760 

Geraldton 

392 

7.406  elem. 

376 

10.793  sec. 

240.914 

0.6663 

London 

26,359 

6,235  elem. 

16,541 

7.021  sec. 

319.296 

0.8830 

Waterloo  County 

32,287 

6,302  elem. 

18,557 

7.206  sec. 

326.554 

0.9031 

SImcoe  County 

27,711 

6.084  elem. 

14,878 

7,031  sec. 

326.897 

0.9041 

Hamilton 

23,548 

6,881  elem. 

12,226 

7,213  sec. 

343,779 

0.9508 

Metropolitan  Toronto 

65,375 

6,211  elem. 

RCSS 

32,464 

6,444  sec. 

356,737 

0.9866 

Provincial  Average 

361,586 

1.0000 

Windsor 

11.141 

6.398  elem. 

7.541 

7.752  sec. 

371,187 

1.0266 

Kenora 

1.567 

8.161  elem. 

993 

7.672  sec. 

374,520 

1.0358 

Ottawa  RCSS 

6.633 

6.618  elem. 

3.010 

6.634  sec. 

389,022 

1.0759 

Hearst 

150 

7.170  elem. 

76 

14,247  sec. 

455,846 

1.2607 

Kapuskasing 

377 

9,058  elem. 

279 

11,355  sec. 

510,731 

1.4125 

Ottawa 

17.288 

8,179  elem. 

12.516 

7,717  sec. 

705,487 

1.9511 

Metropolitan  Toronto 

146.209 

8,356  elem. 

114,599 

8.902  sec. 

810,739 

2.2422 

from  the  extreme  inequities  common  in  some  parts  of  the 
United  States  (for  example,  some  New  York  suburbs  spend 
twice  as  much  as  nearby  inner  city  boards),"  there  are  serious 
problems  with  the  Ontario  system,  in  comparison  both  with 
other  provinces  and  with  what  most  people  believe  would  be 
fair. 

Table  1*  shows  that  there  is  still  a  gap  of  several  thousand 
dollars  between  per-pupil  expenditures  in  boards  like 
Ottawa  and  Toronto  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Roman 
Catholic  separate  school  boards  in  Chapleau,  Geraldton,  and 
Kenora  on  the  other.  When  the  higher  building  and  trans- 
portation costs  in  these  assessment-poorer  boards  are 
factored  in,  the  differences  in  amounts  available,  per  pupil, 
for  actual  in-class  expenditures  is  still  greater.  Even  public 
boards  in  relatively  large  urban  centres  such  as  Hamilton 
and  London  have  considerably  lower  assessment  wealth  and 
spend  significantly  less  per  pupil  than  Ottawa  or  Metro 
Toronto,  and  separate  school  boards  in  those  areas  have 
even  less. 

As  a  result  of  variations  in  assessment  wealth,  many 
boards  provide  program  levels  that  appear  to  be  significantly 
in  excess  of  provincial  standards,  while  others  have  difficulty 
offering  a  basic  program  and  very  few  options.  In  the  past, 
when  resources  were  more  readily  available,  the  inequities 
could  be  dealt  with  by  increasing  the  level  of  the  "have-nots" 
to  that  of  the  "haves,"  but  this  is  no  longer  possible.  Instead, 
the  same  pie  must  be  sliced  and  distributed  differently. 


*  Cost  figures  given  in  the  table  are  actual  per-pupil  expenditures  in  1992.  It 
should  be  noted  that  these  figures  include  capital  projects,  which  can  vary  from 
year  to  year  and  board  to  board. 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Funding 


Inri^uitm  within  the  approved  (.ciling 


I.  For  gcographiCiiJ  and  Ic^l  rcuons,  boards  have 
extremely  varied  aueumenl  bases. 

;nc  boards  can  raise  more  money  on  the  provin- 
bia.  anil  rate  than  the  ceiling  indicates  is  necessary. 

3.  Some  boards  derive  very  little  from  local  taxation 
and.  being  extremely  dependent  on  grants,  have  little 
leeway  for  discrrtiotury  spending  to  meet  local  needs. 

Inequities  beyond  the  approved  ceiling 

1.  E4)uiry  in  the  entire  funding  structure  is  based  on 
the  premise  that  the  expenditure  ceiling  is  adequate  to 
cover  the  costs  of  educating  a  student.  In  fact,  all 
boards  have  had  to  spend  above  the  ceilings  in  recent 
years. 

2.  For  all  expenditures  above  the  ceiling,  boards  may 
draw  only  on  local  taxes.  On  the  basis  of  the  same 
mill  rate  increase,  some  can  collect  20  times  as  much 
money  a  others. 


Given  that  some  boards  will  get  a  smaller  portion,  proposals 
for  such  funding  reforms  arc  necessarily  controversial. 

At  the  public  hearings,  we  were  told  repeatedly  that  the 
method  of  funding  education  makes  it  almost  impossible  for 
some  boards  to  provide  what  the  speakers  considered 
adequate  education  programs  and  services  to  students  with- 
out incurring  serious  deficits.  As  well,  taxes  on  commercial 
and  industrial  assessment  are  linked  to  concerns  about  busi- 
nesses failing  or  moving  out  of  a  jurisdiction. 

These  funding  issues  are  not  new:  several  commissions 
have  concluded  that  the  current  system  is  not  working.  In 
December  1985,  the  Commission  on  the  Financing  of 
Elementary  and  Secondary  Education  in  Ontario  (the 
Macdonaid  commission)  came  to  that  conclusion,  as  did  the 
Fair  Tax  Commivsion  in  1993. 

On  the  face  of  it,  the  current  funding  scheme  is  equitable: 
the  combination  of  grants  and  taxation  means  that  boards 
receive  the  same  revenue  up  to  the  expenditure  ceiling.  It  is, 
in  fact,  deeply  flawed  in  regard  to  both  revenue  within  the 
ceiling,  and,  most  certainly,  in  regard  to  the  revenue  needed 
beyond  the  ceiling. 

There  are  several  key  sources  of  inequity  in  the  current 
syitem.  marry  of  which  we  heard  about  in  the  hearings  and 
submiuions. 


Determination  and  direction  of  commercial 
and  industrial  revenue 

There  is  a  diftcrence  in  the  way  some  commercial  and  indus- 
trial revenue  is  determined  and  who  receives  it.  For  example, 
the  main  industries  in  northern  Ontario  are  related  to 
forestry,  mining,  and  hunting  and  fishing.  A  pulp-and-paper 
company  in  the  area  covered  by  the  Red  Lake  Board  of 
Education  pays  stumpagc  Ices  (or  the  trees  it  cuts,  not  taxes 
on  the  land  on  which  the  trees  arc  cut.  That  fee  is  paid  to  the 
Province  of  Ontario,  not  directly  to  the  local  school  board, 
although  some  will  be  returned  through  the  grants  that  the 
province  pays  to  the  school  board.  The  rest  goes  into  general 
revenues,  out  of  which  the  province  pays  grants  to  other 
school  boards  and  for  other  initiatives.  However,  the  same 
pulp-and-paper  company  pays  taxes  on  its  mill  operation 
directly  to  the  school  board  in  Kenora. 

Similarly,  hunting  and  fishing  licences  are  paid  to  the 
province,  which  means  that  no  education  tax  is  generated 
by  the  land  and  water  on  which  the  hunting  and  fishing 
take  place.  Taxes  on  some  mining  operations  are  paid  to 
the  province,  while  other  operations  provide  a  rich  source 
of  income  for  the  local  municipality  and  school  board. 
These  tax  anomalies  were  also  identified  by  the  Fair  Tax 
(Commission,  and  were  addressed  in  several  of  their 
recommendations. 

Tax  revenue  from  corporate  head  offices  and 
seats  of  government 

Commercial  and  industrial  revenue  is  often  generated  in  one 
place  but  paid  to  a  municipal  authority  in  another.  In  most 
such  cases,  it  is  paid  to  larger  urban  centres,  regardless  of 
where  it  has  actually  been  generated.  For  instance,  major 
corporate  head  offices  tend  t<»  be  clustered  in  a  few  large 
urban  areas,  while  the  corporate  income  comes  from  across 
the  province. 

The  presence  of  Parliament  in  Ottawa  and  of  the  Ontario 
Legislature  in  Toronto  generates  considerable  tax  revenue  for 
those  cities,  through  direct  government  spending  and  the 
spending  of  government  employees,  as  well  as  through  the 
impact  on  tourism. 

The  taxes  that  sustain  these  operations,  as  well  as  taxes 
that  directly  or  indirectly  subsidi7e  such  tourist  attractions 
as  the  National  Arts  Ontre  (which  gels  tax  money  rai.sed  in 
all  parts  of  Canada),  the  Ontario  Science  Centre,  and 


Forth*  LOM  o(  Laaming 


In  brief,  then,  the  key  sources  of  inequitable  funding  are: 


SkyDome  come  from  all  parts  of  the  province  -  as  do  visi- 
tors to  them.  Not  surprisingly,  therefore,  the  Ottawa  Board 
of  Education  has  almost  twice  the  provincial  average  of  per- 
pupil  property  assessment  wealth,  while  Metropolitan 
Toronto  has  more  than  twice  the  provincial  average,  as  is 
obvious  from  Table  1 . 


•  the  way  commercial  and  industrial  revenues  are  deter- 
mined and  directed; 

•  the  fact  that  tax  revenue  from  corporate  head  offices 
and  seats  of  government,  although  generated  across  the 
province,  are  directed  only  to  the  municipality  in  which 
these  headquarters  reside; 

•  lack  of  access  to  the  commercial  and  industrial  tax  base 
by  separate  school  boards; 

•  the  default  provision. 


Access  to  commercial  and  industrial  tax  base 
by  separate  school  boards 

Not  only  are  there  inequities  between  locations  in  the 
province,  there  are  inequities  between  the  ability  of  Roman 
Catholic  and  public  boards  to  raise  funds  in  the  same 
geographic  areas.  (Because  more  than  80  percent  of  French- 
language  students  are  also  Roman  Catholic,  they,  too,  are 
affected  by  this  disparity.)  For  example,  Roman  Catholic 
school  boards  continue  to  have  limited  access  to  the 
commercial  and  industrial  tax  base. 

In  response  to  recommendations  of  the  Macdonald 
commission,  the  province  introduced  co-terminous  pooling: 
placing  the  commercial  and  industrial  taxes  collected  in  the 
area  covered  by  a  public  board  and  a  Roman  Catholic  board 
-  or  a  French-language  board  where  one  exists  -  into  a  pool 
from  which  both  draw  funds. 

However,  this  has  not  removed  all  the  inequities  that  exist 
between  the  two  systems:  pooling  is  still  being  phased  in, 
and  funds  are  currently  distributed  to  the  boards,  not  on  the 
basis  of  per-pupil  needs,  but  rn  proportion  to  the  amount  of 
assessment  homeowners  direct  to  each  board.  Given  that  all 
boards  strive  to  obtain  adequate  funding,  this  method  of 
apportioning  remains  a  source  of  friction  between  public 
and  separate  boards,  and  constitutes  an  obstacle  to  co- 
operation between  local  boards. 

In  presenting  the  1993  budget,  the  Minister  of  Finance 
announced  that  funding  would  be  changed  to  a  per-pupil 
basis,  but  that  will  only  be  phased  in  beginning  in  1996. 

Default  provision 

People  who  for  various  reasons  -  ignorance,  misinforma- 
tion, negligence  -  do  not  specifically  direct  their  taxes  to  the 
separate  school  board  or  to  a  French-language  board  are 
assumed  to  be  public  school  supporters,  and  their  taxes  are 
automatically  sent  to  the  English-language  public  board. 
This  is  done  under  what  is  known  as  the  "default  provision," 
and  has  generally  resulted  in  public  school  boards  getting 


more  than  their  fair  share  of  property  taxes  from  the  resi- 
dential, commercial,  and  industrial  assessments. 

In  brief,  then,  the  key  sources  of  inequitable  funding  are: 

•  the  way  commercial  and  industrial  revenues  are  deter- 
mined and  directed; 

•  the  fact  that  tax  revenue  from  corporate  head  offices  and 
seats  of  government,  although  generated  across  the  province, 
are  directed  only  to  the  municipality  in  which  these  head- 
quarters reside; 

•  lack  of  access  to  the  commercial  and  industrial  tax  base  by 
separate  school  boards; 

•  the  default  provision. 

The  first  three  are  related  to  the  inequitable  distribution 
of  the  commercial  and  industrial  tax  revenues  -  inequities 
either  across  regions,  or  between  separate  and  public  boards. 
We  believe  our  recommendations  will  resolve  all  three  issues. 

The  fourth  is  concerned  with  inequity  in  the  distribution 
of  the  residential  assessment,  and  we  also  make  a  recom- 
mendation to  resolve  this  problem. 

The  Fair  Tax  Commission  recommended  that  the  use  of 
commercial  and  industrial  property  taxes  to  pay  for  educa- 
tion be  eliminated  and  replaced  by  provincial  funding  from 
other  sources,  including  personal  income  tax. 

There  are  other  options  as  well,  but  it  is  not  within  our 
mandate  or  competence  to  prescribe  the  precise  means  to 
reach  the  desired  end  -  greater  financial  equity  across  the 
province.  We  do  insist,  however,  that  the  government  is 
responsible  for  ensuring  that  there  is  an  equitable  amount  of 
money  available,  per  pupil,  across  the  province  so  that  each 
student  gets  the  programs  and  services  necessary  for  achiev- 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Funding 


1  nc  ^.lrKl^  ot  iiun^c  wc  rcmmmciKl  ttiniuj;iuuit  iiiis 
report  lit  povsihic  onlv  it  there  i>  equitable 
'  .       ng  for  all  iludent^.  ret;jrdles»  ol'  where  they  live. 
I  ti  r   in  turn,  is  possible  only  it  the  government 
rcsirucium  th«  funding  system  for  elementary  and 
Kcundarv  education. 


ing  the  recommended  learning  outcomes.  It  can  do  so  only  if 
most  of  the  amount  spent  on  education  is  determined 
provincially  on  a  per-pupil  basis. 

We  want  to  emphasize  that  when  we  recommend  inorc 
equitable  funding,  we  are  emphatically  not  saying  that  all 
boards  should  receive  exactly  the  same  amount  per  pupil. 
There  are  legitimate  reasons  why  some  should  spend  more 
money  on  some  or  all  their  students.  For  example,  French- 
language  education  may  require  more  funds,  especially  in 
areas  that  are  not  near  centres  of  Franco-Ontarian  culture. 
That  is  the  reason  for  our  earlier  recommendation  of  fund- 
ing for  animation  culturelle.  Similarly,  boards  in  the  north, 
particularly  those  not  in  urban  areas,  have  higher  operating 
costs,  as  do  schools  in  communities  with  significant 
numbers  of  immigrants. 

We  therefore  support  the  government's  current  practice 
of  using  different  weighting  factors  or  special  grants  to 
adjust  the  amounts  paid  to  individual  schools  boards. 

The  kinds  of  change  we  recommend  throughout  this 
report  are  possible  only  if  there  is  equitable  funding  for  all 
students,  regardless  of  where  they  live.  That,  in  turn,  is 
possible  only  if  the  government  restructures  the  funding 
system  for  elementary  and  secondary  education.  But  we  note 
that  there  are  many  parts  of  the  province  where  different 
kinds  of  grants  or  weighting  factors  would  be  taken  into 
account,  and  it  is  impossible  to  predict  in  advance  what  thc 
concrete  financial  consequences  for  individual  boards  would 
be,  with  a  more  equitable  fmancc  system. 


Recommendations  159.  160 

•  We  recommend  that  equal  per-pupil  funding  across  the 
province,  as  well  as  additional  money  needed  by  some 
school  boards  for  true  equity,  be  decided  at  the  provincial 
level,  and  that  the  province  ensure  that  funds  be  properly 
allocated. 

•  We  also  recommend  that  boards  be  allowed  to  raise  a 
further  sum.  no  greater  than  10  percent  of  their  provincially 
determined  budget,  from  residential  assessment  only. 

Because  the  so-called  default  system  tends  to  create  a 
windfall  for  the  Fngiish-language  public  school  system,  and 
in  view  t)f  our  recommendation  that  there  should  continue 
to  be  limited  access  to  the  residential  assessment  base, 
further  action  is  necessary. 

Recommendation  161 

•IVe  recommend  that  all  residential  property  owners  be 
required  to  direct  their  taxes  to  the  school  system  they  are 
entitled  to  and  wish  to  support,  and  that  undirected  taxes  be 
pooled  and  distributed  on  a  per-pupil  basis. 

Adequacy 

It  seems  to  us  that  neither  equity  nor  fair  weighting  practices 

arc  possible  as  long  as  there  is  a  lack  of  clarity  about  the 

level  of  programs  and  services  established  for  all  Ontario 

students. 

As  we  indicated  in  our  brief  history  of  funding,  it  has 
been  30  years  since  the  implementation  of  the  Ontario 
Foundation  Tax  Flan,  which  was  based  on  actual  costs  at 
that  time.  From  1991  to  1993,  the  Ministry's  Education 
Finance  Reform  Project  worked  on  determining,  again,  the 
real  costs  of  education,  and  on  developing  a  new  funding 
model  that  would  lead  to  greater  equity.  The  Ministry  has 
not  yet  acted  on  the  work  of  this  project. 

(jiven  our  mandate  and  timelines,  the  Commission 
cannot  address  the  question  of  adequacy  more  thoroughly. 
Wc  note,  however,  that  the  combination  of  a  lack  of  equity 
in  the  access  to  funding,  and  a  distribution  of  resources  that 
n<i  longer  bears  any  relationship  to  actual  cost,  is  bound  to 
increase  the  sense  of  injustice  felt  by  so  many  Ontarians. 

Therefore,  we  urge  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Train- 
ing to  build  on  the  work  of  such  groups  as  the  Fair  Tax 
Commission  and  the  Education  Finance  Reform  Project  and 


For  tha  LOM  o(  LMmmg 


establish  exactly  how  much  money  is  needed  to  provide  an 
adequate  education  program  in  all  parts  of  Ontario,  includ- 
ing the  required  support  services  called  for  in  our  recom- 
mendations. 

Recommendation  162 

*We  recommend  that  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training 
first  decide  what  it  considers  to  be  an  adequate  educational 
program  for  the  province,  and  then  determine  the  cost  of 
delivering  this  program  in  various  areas  of  the  province, 
taking  into  account  different  student  needs  and  varying 
community  characteristics,  such  as  geography,  poverty  rates, 
and  language,  that  affect  education  costs. 

Conclusion 

We  have  addressed  the  two  key  funding  issues  of  equity  and 
adequacy.  Some  of  the  concerns  about  efficiency  that  were 
brought  to  our  attention  were  discussed  in  Chapter  17.  In 
Chapter  19,  when  we  look  at  accountability,  we  will  deal  with 
these  concerns  again.  Our  recommendations  for  centralizing 
curriculum  development,  having  school  boards  enter  into 
arrangements  to  share  services,  and  creating  better  integrated 
health  and  social  support  services  at  the  local  level  will  help 
make  the  system  more  effective  and  efficient. 


Widely  varying  access  to 
assessment,  as  between 
rural  and  urban,  public  and 
separate  boards,  and 
arbitrary  expenditure 
ceilings  that  do  not  cover 
basic  costs  for  any  boards, 
have  combined  to  convince 
the  Commission  that  there 
must  be  radical  reform  of 
provisions  for  financing 
education  in  Ontario.  This 
is  particularly  true  if 


boards  and  the  province 
are  to  implement  the 
recommendations 
contained  in  this  report. 

Therefore,  we  have  recom- 
mended centralization  of 
decisions  about  the  total 
budget  necessary  for  a 
particular  board  to  deliver 
an  approved  program,  and 
limits  on  raising  additional 
funds. 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Funding 


End not** 


S<«,  for  example: 

Stephen  B.  Ljwion  and  Roulcen  Wignall,  eds..  Scrimping  or 
Stiiuindering'  Finiirutng  (  iirtviJuirt  'ichooU  (Turonio:  OISE 
PrcM.  198V 

Ontario,  M  in  iMr\  m  k-Aiu<.jtii>n,  Report  of  the  Commmwn  on 
the  Financing  of  Elementary  and  Secondary  Education  in 
Ontario  (Toronto,  1985).  ChairperMin:  H.  Ian  Macdunald. 

Ontario  Tax  Commission.  Fair  Taxation  in  a  Changing  World 
(Toronto:  University  of  Toronto  Press,  1993). 

Tim  Sale,  An  Analyns  of  School  Funding  Acrois  Canada 
(Vancouver:  EduServ.  1993). 

lofuthan  Kozol,  Savage  Inequalities:  Children  in  America's 
Sciioofa  (New  York:  Crown,  1991 ),  p.  120. 


For  Uw  Lovt  of  tMrnmc 


\ 


h 


I 


TEL 


'>»'^     ■     >«■'--,•  '^■/.f^<Y>> 


Jj 


le  Accountability 
of  tlie  System 


T, 


The  combination  of  two  phenomena  -  the 
world-wide  focus  on  quality,  results,  and 
accountability,  and  the  emphasis  of  educating 
all  of  society  to  a  much  higher  level  and  for  a 
quite  different  world  -  has  put  tremendous 
pressure  on  education  systems,  schools, 


and  educators. 


G.  Rappolt,  "Toward  Accountability  and 
Results-Oriented  Education,"  Orb/t  24,  no.  2 


Accountability  in  education:  What  does  it  involve? 

In  this  era  of  decreasing  revenues  and  increasing  uncer- 
tainty about  the  future,  accountabiUty  is  a  key  concern 
for  many  people.  Virtually  all  public  institutions  have 
been  criticized  for  failing  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  groups 
they  were  intended  to  serve.  In  education,  the  dissatis- 
faction is  often  coupled  with  a  belief  that  if  only  schools  and 
those  who  teach  in  them  were  more  "accountable,"  the  prob- 
lems relating  to  standards  of  learning  and  effective  use  of  tax 
dollars  would  be  resolved.  However,  as  noted  by  educational 
researcher  Lorna  Earl  in  a  paper  written  for  the  Commission: 

Unfortunately,  it  is  rarely  clear  what  is  meant  by  accountability.  It  is 
an  emotionally  charged  term  that  implies  such  things  as  striving  for 
success,  confidence,  trust,  communication  and  responsiveness,  but 
does  not  define  actual  behaviours  or  practices.' 

As  with  every  other  issue  we  addressed,  people  naturally 
assume  that,  because  concerns  about  inadequacies  of  the 
system  are  easy  enough  to  articulate,  solutions  are  as  easy 
to  find.  And,  as  with  every  other  issue,  it  is  simply  not  so 
on  matters  of  accountability.  The  issues  involved,  in  fact, 
are  quite  complex,  and  if  people  are  serious  about  intro- 
ducing accountability  into  the  publicly  funded  education 
system  -  as  this  Commission  is  -  responses  must  be  equal 
to  the  problem. 

Accountability  means  exactly  that:  Who  accounts  to  the 
public  for  what  happens  in  schools?  Equally,  it  could  be 
called  responsibility:  Who  is  responsible  for  the  performance 
of  our  schools?  How  do  we  know  what  we  are  entitled  to 
expect  from  schools?  How  do  we  know  whether  schools  are 
delivering  on  this  entitlement?  Whom  do  we  hold  to  account 


-  who  is  responsible  -  if  we  are  not  satisfied  with  the 
answers  we  get? 

Accountability  in  the  education  system,  then,  means  that 
information  has  to  be  available  to  the  public,  to  taxpayers, 
and  to  parents,  in  a  form  that  allows  them  to  have  reason- 
able expectations  of  the  system,  to  make  reasonable  judg- 
ments about  how  well  the  system  has  performed,  and  to 
know  who  is  responsible  if  they  are  not  satisfied. 

The  most  fundamental  form  of  accountability  is  that  of 
the  classroom  teacher  to  the  parents,  and  of  the  school  to  the 
community.  It  has  been  extraordinarily  difficult  for  parents 
to  find  out  simply  what  the  curriculum  is  and  how  their 
children  are  performing.  Although  our  focus  in  this  chapter 
is  on  system  accountability,  the  ultimate  concern  for  parents 
and  students  is,  naturally,  with  individual  student  learning. 
But  at  both  the  individual  and  the  system  level,  we  should 
remember  that  accountability  is  not  an  end  in  itself:  its  func- 
tion is  to  ensure  that  information  about  performance  is 
actually  used  to  improve  that  performance  in  the  future.  In 
other  words,  "accountability"  and  "reform"  should  always  be 
closely  linked. 

Two  types  of  accountability  are  relevant:  fiscal  and 
program.  Below,  we  look  briefly  at  each,  and  then  discuss 
what  additional  measures  should,  in  our  view,  be  taken  to 
satisfy  the  public  that  the  educational  system  is  operating  as 
it  should,  and  that  identified  problems  are  being  addressed. 

"Fiscal  accountability"  at  the  school,  school  board,  and 
Ministry  level  is  addressed  by  the  use  of  auditing  processes 
to  examine  operations  on  a  regular  basis.  As  well,  the 
Ministry  conducts  spot  audits  of  boards,  examining  its 
transportation  functions,  verifying  enrolment  figures,  and 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      The  Accountability  of  the  System 


u 


ccountabJIKy  is  a  term  that 
should  apply  to  each  student's 
individual  learning  experience.  This 
could  be  measured  most  effectively 
through  student  evaluation  of 
schools,  teachers,  and  programs." 


ensuring  that  provincial  grants  arc  used  as  specified.  Such 
audits  usually  focus  on  whether  funds  are  administered 
honestly  and  according  to  regulations.  Many  people  told  us 
they  wanted  to  know  more  about  whether  the  system  is  run 
as  efficiently  as  it  ought  to  be,  and  whether  funds  are  allocat- 
ed appropriately. 

In  his  1993  annual  report,  Erik  Peters,  the  provincial 
auditor,  looked  not  only  at  the  usual  fiscal  issues,  but  also 
addres.sed  "value  for  money"  questions,  suggesting;  areas  that 
needed  to  be  improved.  He  noted,  for  example,  that: 

Present  arrangcfnenis  for  the  development  and  delivery  of  curricu- 
lum could  be  more  cost  effective  and  are  not  adequate  to  determine 
that  a  curriculum  of  consistent  quality  m  both  official  languages  is 
taught  and  learned  across  the  province.  Therefore,  procedures  to 
measure  and  report  on  the  effectiveness  of  education  programs  and 
services  are  not  yet  satisfactory.' 

We  believe  that  such  initiatives  should  continue,  but  we 
caution  that  auditing  an  education  system  is  a  complicated 
process.  As  we  stressed  in  Chapter  II,  on  assessment  proce- 
dures, the  qualitative  acts  of  teaching  and  learning  do  not 
easily  lend  themselves  to  quantitative  measures  of  efficiency 
and  effectiveness;  fudging  schools  on  the  basis  of  inappro- 
priate tools  docs  not  contribute  to  public  knowledge. 

"Program  accountability."  in  the  sense  of  establishing  and 
assuring  quality  of  student  performance,  is  a  key  priority.  We 
agree  with  the  many  observers,  both  in  and  outside  the 
educational  system,  who  believe  the  lime  has  come  for  a 
clear  id  of  criteria  by  which  performance  can  be  judged: 
people  need  to  know  what  ttudenis  are  expected  to  have 
learned  by  the  lime  ihcy  complete  a  given  course  or  grade 


(the  outcomes)  -  and  what  different  levels  of  achievement 
mean  (standards).  Such  a  framework  can,  and  must,  be  used 
to  monitor  and  enhance  the  progress  of  students  and  the 
performance  of  the  system.  The  results  of  such  monitoring 
must  be  communicated  in  an  understandable  and  timely 
way  to  all  stakeholders. 

In  Chapter  1 1  we  addressed  the  need  for  clearer  and  more 
useful  assessment  of  student  learning  -  a  very  large  part  of 
improved  program  accountability.  That  is  the  purpose  of  the 
province-wide  literacy  tests  we  recommend  for  every  student 
in  Grades  3  and  1 1.  And  individual  results  to  students  and 
parents,  and  system  results  to  all  interested  parties  must  be 
clearly  communicated.  That  these  system-wide  assessments 
are  associated  with  what  we  term  "literacy  guarantees"  is  a 
particularly  powerful  accountability  mechanism.  Of  course, 
the  question  of  the  adequacy  of  the  standards  applied  to  the 
test  results  is  also  a  fundamental  accountability  question. 

We  have  also  said  that  the  Ministry  should  continue  to 
conduct  other  program  reviews,  through  testing  sample 
groups  of  students  across  the  province.  Results  from  such 
reviews  make  it  possible  to  judge  the  adequacy  of  the 
curriculum  .ind  whether  the  official  curriculum  is  actually 
being  taught  and  learned  in  schools. 

Beyond  that,  student  assessment  would  be  primarily  the 
responsibility  of  the  teacher  and  the  school  board,  and,  as  we 
note,  it  is  important  for  all  teachers  to  learn  more  about  how 
best  to  assess  student  learning  and  use  the  results  of  assess- 
nienls  to  improve  instruction  and  program. 

Who  is  accountable? 

Ihc  cclucaiion  system  involves  both  elected  and  appointed 
policy  makers,  and  both  are  accountable  for  their  actions.  At 
the  local  level,  trustees  are  accountable  to  the  electorate 
every  three  years,  although  it  is  widely  acknowledged  that 
complications  exist:  there  is  little  attention  paid  by  the 
media  to  the  activities  of  boards  of  education,  little  useful 
discu.ssion  of  education  issues  during  elections,  and  notori- 
ously low  voter  turnouts.  At  the  provincial  level,  the  Minister 
of  Education  and  Training  is,  of  course,  accountable  to  the 
electorate  whenever  an  election  is  held,  as  is  the  government 
as  a  whole. 

Although  such  political  accountability  is  important,  it 
hardly  seems  sufficient  to  us,  because  the  information  that 
would  allow  voters  to  make  informed  decisions  about  the 


Fof  th*  Low  of  Learning 


system  may  well  not  be  available.  In  terms  of  political 
accountability,  policy  makers  at  the  local  and  provincial  level 
must  answer  for  the  soundness  of  their  policies,  and  also,  to 
some  extent,  for  the  results  of  those  policies. 

On  the  administrative  and  managerial  side,  there  is  a  need 
for  accountability  for  implementing  policies  and  for  moni- 
toring the  process  and  the  impact  of  implementation. 

If  education  policy  makers  are  going  to  be  held  account- 
able, they  will  need  measures  of  educational  quality.  Without 
these,  they  cannot  report  reliably  and  meaningfully  on  the 
soundness  of  their  policies. 


A  A  J^arents  and  the  community  are 
■     demanding  tiiat  schools  and 
teachers  be  accountable  for  the 
money  spent  and  for  student 
outcomes.  School  boards  must  show 
evidence  that  they  respond  to  the 
needs  of  all  students  within  their 
systems ../ 

Association  for  Bright  Children 


Indicators  of  quality 

The  education  system,  like  any  other  publicly  funded  system, 
is  accountable  to  the  public  for  operating  effectively,  effi- 
ciently, and  equitably  -  although,  as  we  have  stressed,  such 
accountability  is  far  easier  to  demand  than  to  deliver.  If  the 
system  is  to  be  as  accountable  as  possible,  there  must  be  far 
more  clarity  about  its  purposes  or  objectives.  We  believe  that 
considerably  more  information  should  be  made  available, 
and  it  should  be  collected  regularly  and  presented  in  more 
consistent,  understandable,  and  meaningful  ways.  This  will 
enable  members  of  the  public  to  look  at  it  and  arrive  at  their 
own  conclusions  about  how  well  the  system  is  operating. 

The  first  step  in  the  process,  as  we  emphasize  in  Chapter 
17,  is  that  the  provincial  government,  through  the  Ministry 
of  Education  and  Training,  establish  clear  directions  and 
expectations  for  the  education  system,  in  terms  of  student 
learning,  regular  assessment,  parental  involvement,  and  other 
important  objectives. 

The  term  "indicators"  is  used  to  refer  to  quantitative  and 
qualitative  data  that  describe  various  features  of  the  school 
system.  The  obvious  problem  is  that  from  an  education 
system  as  a  vast  as  Ontario's,  one  can  derive  endless  statistics, 
and  there  can  be  indicators  that  tell  us  something  about  liter- 
ally any  part  of  the  system  -  and  they  may  refer  to  the 
student,  school,  board,  or  provincial  level.  Decisions  about 
appropriate  indicators  of  a  successful  system  will  determine 
what  kind  of  information  should  be  collected. 

Student  achievement  is  the  most  obvious  indicator  of  the 
effectiveness  of  an  education  system.  If  students  are  doing 
well  on  measures  of  learning  in  relation  to  standards  estab- 
lished locally  and  those  established  province-wide  or  beyond, 
schools  and  school  systems  are  usually  considered  to  be 


doing  their  jobs  satisfactorily  and  providing  value  for 
taxpayers'  dollars. 

At  the  moment,  there  is  a  wide-spread  sense  that  schools 
are  not  doing  the  jobs  well  enough,  based  on  both  anecdotal 
evidence  and  media  reports  of  certain  provincial,  national, 
and  international  tests. 

Questions  of  acceptable  standards  and  their  levels,  became 
a  particularly  contentious  issue  in  Ontario  in  1994,  when  the 
results  of  Grade  1 2  writing  reviews  and  Grade  9  reading  and 
writing  tests  were  released.  Members  of  the  public  seem  to  be 
concerned  that  expectations  of  students  are  too  low,  and  that 
acceptable  standards  are  not  high  enough. 

While  this  report  consistently  stresses  the  need  for  more 
challenging  and  rigorous  learning  for  our  children,  we  stress 
that  an  in-depth  sense  of  student  achievement  is  far  more 
difficult  to  assess  than  the  media  and  the  public  often  seem 
to  think. 

Moreover,  student  achievement,  crucial  as  it  is,  is  not 
the  only  indicator  of  the  quality  of  the  system,  and  it  is  not 
the  only  outcome  for  which  the  system  is  accountable  to 
the  public. 

Other  indicators  of  educational  success  and  quality 
include  such  factors  as  the  proportion  of  students  who  enter 
college  or  university,  or  who  enter  employment  readily;  the 
relative  representation  of  minority  students  across  all 
achievement  levels  and  across  different  programs;  per-pupil 
costs;  the  drop-out  rate  (the  percentage  of  students  who 
leave  school  before  graduating);  attendance  rates  of  both 
staff  and  students;  the  rate  at  which  students  progress 
through  the  school  system.  A  different  type  of  indicator,  but 
an  important  one,  relates  to  the  way  in  which  teacher  and 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      The  Accountability  of  the  System 


ii 


ntario  legisl£ition,  regulations 
and  policies  mandate  early  and 
on-going  identification  [and]  support 
for  children  with  special  neods  ...  The 
current  reality  in  Ontario  however  is 
that  ttiere  is  no  consistency  among 
boards  in  identification  and  provision 
of  services  for  students  with  special 
needs  because  ttie  Ministry  of 
Ethieattoii  does  not  ensure  that 
board*  are  held  accountable  for  these 
legal  requirements  ...  There  Is  no 
•ccountabllity  mechanism  in  place, 
since  the  Ministry  of  Education  and 
TraMi^  is  reluctant  to  withhold 
grants  or  revoke  supervisory 
officers'  documents." 

L«amin(  0«»at>)lrttes  Association  of  Ontario 


administrator  performance  is  evaluated,  and  how  the  results 
of  evaluation  are  used  to  improve  performance  of  individu- 
als and  of  the  system  as  a  whole. 

There  are  also  indicators  that  are  not  (or  not  directly) 
learning  related,  but  also  suggest  the  degree  to  which  a 
school  or  system  is  well  managed.  These  include  cost  effi- 
ciencies, implementation  of  fair  employment  practices,  and 
the  achievement  of  acceptable  standards  of  workplace  and 
school  safety. 

Finally,  we  believe  that  the  level  of  satisfaction  expressed 
by  students  and  parents  -  and,  to  some  extent,  by  the 
community  -  is  also  a  useful  indicator.  To  what  extent  do 
these  groups  feel  their  concerns  arc  addressed,  their  ideas 
welcomed,  their  needs  met? 

Policy  makers  and  administrators  can.  through  regular 
and  systematic  sampling  of  student,  parent,  and  public  opin- 
ion, be  alerted  to  potential  problems  that  need  to  addressed. 
Let  us  be  clear:  we  are  by  no  means  suggesting  that  educa- 
tion policy  and  practice  should  be  determined  by  public 
opinion.  It  should  not.  However,  if  an  education  system  is  to 
serve  its  public  well,  the  system  should  monitor  the  concerns 
and  rra«.tiiins  of  those  it  serves. 


Assessment  agency 

L  mil  rcv-cruly,  Ontario,  m  comparison  with  other  jurisdic- 
tions, did  not  place  a  high  priority  on  monitoring,  assessing, 
and  reporting  various  aspects  ol  school  system  performance, 
at  cither  the  provincial  or  local  level.  I  he  problem  is  that, 
without  regular  monitoring,  teachers  and  principals  do  not 
receive  the  kind  of  feedback  that  allows  them  to  adju.st  their 
instruction  and  curriculum  planning.  Nor  does  the  public 
have  the  information  on  which  to  base  reasonable  judgments 
of  schools.  Assessments,  therefore,  must  not  only  be  carried 
out,  but  must  be  widely  reported  in  understandable  ways. 

Although  most  people,  including  educators,  are  coming 
to  agree  that  more  monitoring  of  system  performance  is 
justified,  there  is  little  consensus  on  just  how  this  should  be 
done.  There  is  particular  disagreement  on  whether  an  inde- 
pendent agcnc-y  should  evaluate  and  report  on  the  system,  or 
whether  the  responsibility  should  be  left  with  the  Ministry: 
there  is  some  concern  about  the  capacity  of  the  Ministry  to 
carry  out  monitoring,  or  to  be  as  open  and  objective  as 
required. 

In  other  countries,  including  the  United  States  and 
Australia,  there  are  models  of  agencies  that  do  large-scale 
assessments;  they  usually  operate  nationally  rather  than  just 
at  the  state  level.  They  tend  to  be  quite  large  institutions  that 
develop  tests,  administer  them,  and  report  on  the  results. 
Such  large-scale  assessments  are  extremely  expensive  to 
develop  and  administer,  and  are  not  easy  to  change  when 
there  are  major  shifts  in  curriculum  policies. 

While  throughout  our  work  we  have  been  reluctant  to 
recommend  the  creation  of  new  bureaucratic  structures, 
largely  for  the  reasons  just  cited,  we  found,  in  the  end,  that 
the  argument  for  an  outside  as.se.ssment  agency  is  persuasive. 

Education  policy  is  .set  by  governments  and,  therefore,  is 
by  definition  political.  But  in  matters  of  a.sscssment,  public 
credibility  is  probably  the  overriding  need.  Therefore,  an 
arm's-length  agency,  removed  from  the  political  arena,  seems 
to  be  the  inevitable  solution. 

We  see  such  an  agency  as  consisting  of  a  small  number  of 
experts  in  education  and  assessment  with  overall  responsi- 
bility for  evaluating  and  reporting  on  the  success  of 
Ontario's  education  policies.  As  a  mark  of  its  independence, 
this  Office  of  Learning  Assessment  and  Accountability,  as  we 
have  chosen  to  call  it,  would  report  directly  to  the  legisla- 
ture, perhaps  through  the  Standing  Committee  on  Social 
Development. 


tar  ttw  LoM  of  LMmmg 


M 


I 


The  first  job  of  the  new  office  would  be  responsibUity  for 
the  Grade  3  language  and  mathematics  test  and  for  the 
Grade  1 1  literacy  test,  as  recommended  in  Chapter  1 1  for  all 
students.  To  keep  the  office  small  and  flexible,  it  would  not 
itself  develop  and  administer  these  tests,  but  would  contract 
with  assessment  experts,  preferably,  but  not  exclusively,  from 
Ontario. 

The  contract  process  would  involve  issuing  a  public  call 
for  proposals,  to  be  advertised  widely.  We  would  hope  that 
the  Ontario  Institute  for  Studies  in  Education  (OISE)  and 
other  Ontario  graduate  schools  of  education  would  respond 
enthusiastically  to  the  call  for  proposals,  as  would  measure- 
ment experts  in  departments  of  psychology  or  elsewhere. 

Recommendation  163  (Cf.  Chapter  11,  Rec.  51) 
*We  recommend  that  the  government  establish  an  Office  of 
Learning  Assessment  and  Accountability,  reporting  to  the 
Legislature.  Its  first  responsibility  would  be  the 
Grades  3  and  11  system-wide,  every-student  assessments. 

The  Ministry  and  school  boards  have  a  variety  of  infor- 
mation-gathering mechanisms  that  can  and  should  be 
adapted  to  give  additional  information  on  such  things  as 
drop-out  rates  and  breakdown  of  data  by  region,  language, 
gender,  race,  etc.  There  is  no  need  for  other  agencies  to 
develop  new  systems,  but  it  is  important  that  the  existing 
systems  be  improved  to  ensure  that  necessary  information  is 
available  for  the  Office  of  Learning  Assessment  and  Account- 
ability and  for  the  Ministry,  so  they  can  provide  accurate 
information  to  the  public  on  the  effectiveness  of  the  entire 
education  system. 

Accountability  and  consistency 

What  is  critical,  and  what  will  require  some  changes  in  data- 
gathering  and  reporting  procedures,  is  that  the  data  be 
comparable  from  board  to  board  and  from  year  to  year.  One 
of  the  problems  in  assessing  today's  education  system  is  a 
lack  of  good  past  data  for  useful  comparisons.  Information 
on  drop-out  rates,  for  instance,  has  been  difficult  to  get  and 
to  interpret,  but  the  Ministry,  in  collaboration  with  several 
school  boards,  is  currently  developing  common  systems  for 
tracking  and  reporting  them. 

Over  a  number  of  years,  many  school  boards  have  devel- 
oped their  own  systems  for  keeping  track  of  information 
about  programs,  staff,  students,  and  finances,  as  well  as 


n  recent  years  the  provincial  auditor 
has  also  devoted  some  attention  to 
school  boards.  In  these  audits  the 
focus  has  been  not  only  on  fiscal 
probity,  but  has  also  addressed  "value 
for  money."  As  Directors  of  Education 
we  strongly  support  increasing  use  of 
'value^'oMnoney'  analysis  and 
auditing." 

Council  of  Directors  of  Education 


about  student  achievement.  Not  surprisingly,  they  are  reluc- 
tant to  abandon  their  investments  by  adopting  new  and 
different  systems,  even  though  these  might  be  more  useful 
for  province-wide  use. 

However,  we  note  that  adoption  of  the  Grades  3  and  1 1 
tests  will  require  all  school  boards  to  use  a  single  provincial 
identification  number  for  students;  once  that  is  done,  devel- 
oping a  single  database  for  all  students  in  the  province  will 
be  much  easier.  The  Ministry  established  a  Student  Informa- 
tion System  in  1986,  which  could  be  the  basis  of  an  expand- 
ed system  for  tracking  students;  it  would  be  important  to 
maintain  data  after  students  leave  the  system,  in  order  to  do 
longitudinal  research  when  that  is  appropriate. 

We  have  already  mentioned  other  existing  mechanisms 
for  accountability,  such  as  the  work  of  the  provincial  audi- 
tor, and  other  provincial  reviews  and  audits.  We  expect  these 
mechanisms  to  continue  to  be  used,  but  see  a  need  for  clear- 
er guidelines,  as  well  as  for  greater  public  scrutiny  and 
reporting. 

We  firmly  believe  that  the  best  way  to  ensure  accountabil- 
ity is  to  make  public  the  relevant  information  about  the 
characteristics  and  performance  of  the  school  system,  and  to 
publish  it  in  a  way  that  is  readily  understood  and  interpreted 
by  people.  Only  then  can  members  of  the  public  decide 
whether  their  schools  are  providing  the  kind  and  level  of 
service  they  want. 

In  recent  years,  the  Ministry  has  not  always  closely  moni- 
tored boards'  implementation  of  its  policies  and  related 
programs.  Monitoring  is  sometimes  perfunctory:  boards  are 
required  to  file  documents  showing  they  have  the  required 
policy  statement  or  plan  (on  special  education,  for  example. 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Ttie  Accountability  of  the  System 


or  on  anti-racism),  but  not  whether  that  policy  or  plan  is,  in 
fact,  being  implemented  in  the  schools  -  or,  even  more 
important,  whether  the  policy  is  having  the  intended  effect. 

We  believe  that  provincial  policies  should  be  developed  in 
terms  of  broad  directions,  and  should  be  accompanied  by  a 
clear  description  of  how  they  are  to  be  assessed.  Then,  the 
most  important  monitoring  is  of  the  intended  results,  or 
outcomes,  leaving  it  up  to  school  boards  to  decide  the  details 
of  how  they  are  to  be  achieved. 

The  difficult  challenge  is  to  balance  central  direction- 
setting  and  monitoring  with  local  flexibility  about  the  ways 
desired  results  are  achieved,  linking  "top-down"  and 
"bottom-up"  strategies  for  reform.  Because  the  Ministry  sets 
the  province's  direction  for  schooling,  it  must  articulate  its 
sense  of  a  shared  purpose,  and  set  clear  expectations. 
Schools  and  school  boards  would  then  be  responsible  for 
deciding,  within  the  broad  guidelines,  and  based  on  their 
knowledge  of  the  local  context,  how  they  will  work  to  meet 
those  expectations. 

Although  government  monitoring  -  evaluating  whether 
local  schools  are  doing  what  they  are  supposed  to  be  doing  - 
is  quite  rightly  seen  as  a  key  element  of  accountability, 
monitormg  is  expensive.  Therefore,  the  information  gath- 
ered must  be  available  to,  and  actually  used  by,  schools  and 
school  boards. 

We  are  convinced  that,  in  the  long  run,  the  most  critical 
accountability  mechanism  is  full  public  disclosure  of  all  rele- 
vant data  concerning  school  and  school  system  performance, 
delivered  in  a  meaningful  form.  It  has  been  suggested  to  us 
that  the  .Ministry  ought  to  apply  sanctions  to  boards  that 
niher  do  not  comply  with  Mini.slry  regulations,  or  whose 


performance  is  not  satisfactory;  withholding  funds  is  the 
most  frequently  suggested  sanction.  This  is  difficult  for  the 
Ministry  to  implement,  because  students  and  parents  will 
suffer. 

We  believe,  however,  that  if  data  are  made  available  to  the 
public  in  ways  that  are  understandable,  consistent,  and 
comparable,  parents  and  the  community  will  put  pressure 
on  schools  and  school  boards  tt)  improve  weak  areas  and 
close  gaps.  It  they  do  not,  trustees  will  not  be  re-elected,  and 
it  will  be  difficult  for  principals  and  supervisory  officers  to 
maintain  any  credibility.  In  a  democracy,  this  is  the  ultimate 
form  of  accountability.  In  other  words,  we  believe  that  if 
people  have  the  information  they  need,  they  will  be  able  to 
judge  and  act  appropriately. 

Reporting 

\Nc  also  believe  that  the  information  on  the  system  indica- 
tors and  on  student  assessment  should  be  readily  accessible, 
not  only  to  the  public,  but,  wherever  possible,  to  the  press. 

The  Minister  of  Education  and  Training  and  individual 
school  boards  prepare  annual  public  reports,  although  we 
doubt  that  most  Ontarians  have  ever  read  one.  We  think 
these  reports  could  be  considerably  more  valuable  than  is 
now  the  case. 

In  the  first  place,  clear  content  guidelines  for  both  the 
Minister's  and  school  boards'  annual  reports,  with  a  list  of 
agreed-on  indicators  to  be  addressed,  would  make  it  easier 
for  the  public  to  understand  and  make  judgments  about  the 
information  and  about  the  system.  Although  it  is  not  diffi- 
cult to  agree  on  at  least  some  indicators  of  a  successful 
education  system,  achieving  consensus  on  comparable  ways 
of  gathering,  summarizing,  and  reporting  such  information 
is  much  more  difficult.  Various  measures  or  indicators  can 
be  seen  as  snapshots,  providing  diagnostic  information 
about  many  aspects  of  the  school  system.  No  one  measure 
can  give  a  full  picture:  several  have  to  be  examined  together 
if  members  of  the  public  are  to  make  reasonable  judgments. 
Questions  of  how  indicators  arc  to  be  developed  and  how 
the  indices  arc  to  be  used  must  be  addressed  by  the  users, 
and  by  the  technical  experts  who  develop  the  statistical 
indices. 

I'hc  Office  of  Ixrarning  Assessment  and  Acc«>untability 
should  begin  its  work  on  this  task  by  bringing  together 
education  stakeholders,  including  boards,  federations,  and 


For  tht  Lam  o(  LMmmg 


£i 


w 


e  ask  ...  that  affordability, 
financial  accountability,  and 


faculties  of  education,  as  well  as  parent,  student,  and 
community  groups.  Working  with  the  other  groups,  it  would 
develop  the  lists  of  indicators  and,  with  input  from  educa- 
tion stakeholders,  decide  how  the  indicators  should  be 
defined,  calculated,  and  reported. 

Recommendation  164 

*We  recommend  that  the  Office  of  Learning  Assessment  and 

Accountability  aiso  be  responsible  for  developing  indicators  of 

system  performance,  to  be  used  at  the  board  and  provincial 

levels. 

Indicators  for  school  board  reports  would  include  report- 
ing on  the  results  of  large-scale  and  other  assessments  and 
on  audits  specific  to  the  board.  Reports  would  also  include 
an  indication  of  what  actions  have  been  taken  to  address 
problems  revealed  by  the  assessment,  and  what  further 
actions  are  planned. 

The  indicators  used  by  the  Ministry  should  also  include 
reporting  on  assessments  and  follow-up;  it  would  be  expect- 
ed that  board  and  Ministry  reports  would  provide  summary 
statistics  decided  on  by  the  Office  of  Learning  Assessment 
and  Accountability. 

In  our  view,  the  Quebec  Ministry  of  Education  produces 
reports  that  may  be  useful  as  an  example  for  Ontario. 
Quebec's  Educational  Indicators  for  the  Elementary  and 
Secondary  Levels  is  analogous  to  Ontario's  Key  Statistics,  but 
is  more  complete.  It  not  only  tracks  indicators  over  time,  but 
also  comments  on  the  most  important  points  arising  from 
an  analysis  of  the  indicators,  all  presented  in  an  attractive 
and  easy-to-comprehend  80-page  format.^ 

Recommendation  165 

*We  recommend  that  the  Office  of  Learning  Assessment  and 
Accountability,  working  with  education  stakeholders,  also 
establish  guidelines  for  the  content  of  annual  reports 
prepared  by  school  boards  and  by  the  Minister  of  Education 
and  Training.  Further,  we  recommend  that: 

a)  these  reports  be  published  and  be  freely  and  widely 
available  in  schools  and  community  locations; 

b)  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  ensure  that  all 
school  boards  be  informed  of  guidelines  for  the  reports, 
and  that  they  follow  those  guidelines. 


good  man^ement  become  top 
priorities  for  all  school  boards. 


Taxpayers'  Coalition  Niagara 


Moreover,  we  believe  that  boards  and  the  Ministry  must 
pay  more  attention  to  providing  useful  information  to  the 
public  on  an  on-going  basis;  they  should  ensure  that  infor- 
mation on  policies  and  their  intended  outcomes  is  available, 
as  are  the  results  of  any  evaluations.  Some  of  this  will  be 
published  in  annual  reports,  but  other  data,  such  as  descrip- 
tions of  policies  and  their  outcomes,  will  have  to  be  provid- 
ed in  a  more  timely  way;  as  well,  there  will  be  occasions 
when  it  is  useful  to  have  more  detail  than  would  be  appro- 
priate for  an  annual  report. 

In  order  to  assure  the  public  that  all  information  and 
reports  are  accurate,  that  interpretations  are  defensible,  and 
that  boards  and  the  Ministry  are  held  accountable  for  learn- 
ing, the  Office  of  Learning  Assessment  and  Accountability 
should  do  spot  checks  of  a  sample  of  board  reports,  and 
monitor  board  and  Ministry  assessments  of  outcomes.  The 
office  should  report  publicly  on  these  activities,  and  could 
do  so,  informally,  by  having  the  head  of  the  office  meet 
regularly  with  the  Committee  of  the  Legislature,  and, 
formally,  through  an  annual  report.  We  stress  that,  to  keep 
costs  down,  the  review  should  be  done  on  a  sample  of 
reports  and  assessments. 

We  would  not  want  any  structure  we  recommend  to  exist 
beyond  its  actual  usefulness.  It  is  not  impossible  that  the 
Office  of  Learning  Assessment  and  Accountability  might  one 
day  prove  redundant,  and  it  is  entirely  plausible  that  its 
responsibilities  might  need  to  be  revised. 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      The  Accountability  of  the  System 


Incuiiiuon 


Accountabte 

to  Mff^OfV^ 


OHIO*  of  LMniing      UgMlalur* 

AMMamamand 

AooounUbNNy 


COH«0*O( 


Public 

Studenu  ] 
Parent*  i 
Teacher* 


Provincial 
tai|>ayers 


Accountable  for  What 

provmce-wrtde  Grades  3  and  11 

student  assessment 

cnonitonng  tMard  reports  on 

implementation  arMl  results  of 

board  and  provincial  policies 

monitonng  Min<stry  of  Education 

arvl  Training  reports  on 

impiementation  arKl  results  of 

provlrtcial  policies 

develop  indicators 

review  tx>ards'  dissemination  of 

their  reports 

professional  star>dards  for 

teaching 

accreditation  of  adequate 

professional  preparation  ar>d 

development  programs 

professional  standards 

for  teaching 


Recommendation  166 

•We  therefore  recommend  that  the  work  and  mandate  of  the 
Office  of  Learning  Assessment  and  Accountability  be 
reviewed  in  five  years. 

In  Chapter  12,  wc  recommended  the  formation  of  an 
Ontario  College  of  Teachers,  as  a  professional  self-governing 
body  responsible  for  setting  professional  teaching  standards 
in  the  province:  thus,  it  would  play  a  critical  role  in  the 
provincial  accountability  framework.  The  college  would  be 
responsible  for  ensuring  that  high  professional  standards  of 
teaching,  and  of  teacher  preparation  programs,  meet  the 
needs  of  Ontario  schools.  Its  duties  would  also  include 
setting  and  monitoring  the  framework  governing  renewal  of 
teacher  certification  every  five  years. 

Because  we  have  now  recommended  the  addition  of  two 
new  bodies  to  the  education  system,  it  might  be  helpful  to 
summarize  briefly  what  they  would  do  and  to  whom  they 
are  accountable,  as  shown  in  Table  I . 

Finally,  we  have  made  recommendations  concerning  the 
education  responsibilities  of  ministries  other  than  that  of 
Education  and  Training,  and  of  other  agencies  of  govern- 
ment. Should  the  government  assign  such  duties  to  other 
government  bodies,  there  would  have  to  be  an  accountability 
ntechanism  for  those  agencies. 


Conclusion 

I  mil  ri-Lintly,  issues  of  accountability  did  not  receive  as 
much  attention  in  Ontario  education  as  many  taxpayers  and 
members  of  the  public  wt>uld  have  wished.  However,  there 
have  been  many  changes  in  the  past  few  years.  For  instance, 
public  reporting  of  the  provincial  Grade  9  reading  and  writ- 
ing tests,  released  in  the  fall  of  1994,  not  only  provided 
board  data,  but  school  results  as  well. 

VVc  are  of  two  minds  about  this  development.  On  the  one 
hand,  we,  of  course,  applaud  the  move  to  share  all  useful 
information  about  students'  performance  with  the  public. 
On  the  other,  we  remain  seriously  concerned  that  informa- 
tion without  perspective,  context,  or  proper  interpretation 
can,  in  fact,  do  more  harm  than  good.  As  we  point  out  in 
Chapter  1 1,  serious  tests  are  not  horse  races  and  should  not 
be  reported  or  judged  as  such. 

To  appraise  an  entire  education  system  on  the  basis  of 
one  test  or  a  single  set  of  tests,  and  to  ignore  the  many 
factors  that  determine  whether  one  school's  students  do 
better  than  another's,  is  an  imperfect  exercise  at  best. 

We  want  the  system  to  be  open  and  accountable,  and  our 
recommendations  would  go  far  to  achieving  that  goal.  But 
we  also  want  that  information  to  be  meaningful  and  rele- 
vant. In  that  context,  we  would  hope  the  media  will  present 
data  in  a  proper  context  in  a  way  that  enhances,  rather  than 
distorts,  public  understanding. 

Once  good  information  becomes  available,  the  onus  will 
be  on  the  public  and  on  parents  to  u.se  it  to  make  reasonable 
judgments,  and  to  find  out  how  schools  plan  to  improve 
programs  on  the  basis  of  current  results. 

The  onus  will  also  be  on  educators  to  work  together  to 
continue  to  improve  their  programs  on  the  basis  of  the 
feedback  represented  by  such  results.  After  all,  the  point  of 
developing  better  accountability  mechanisms  is  to  help 
schools  to  be  more  effective. 


For  the  Um«  of  LMmmg 


Endnotes 


Lorna  M.  Earl,  "Accountability  and  Assessment:  Ensuring 
Quality  in  Ontario  Schools."  Paper  prepared  for  the  Ontario 
Royal  Commission  on  Learning,  1994. 

Ontario,  Office  of  the  Provincial  Auditor,  1993  Annual 
Report:  Accounting,  Accountability,  Value  for  Money  (Toronto, 
1993),  p.  66. 

Quebec,  Ministry  of  Education,  Education  Indicators  for  the 
Elementary  and  Secondary  Levels  (Quebec  City,  1993). 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      The  Accountability  of  tt)e  System 


I . 


'<  *>v  ^"^;^< 


Implementing 
the  Reforms 


Implementation  has  been  referred  to  as  the  Great 
Barrier  Reef  -  the  point  at  which  many  a  good 
curriculum  sinks  without  a  trace. 

David  Pratt,  Curriculum  Planning,  1994 


Reform  asks  everyone  in  the  education  system  to 
change  their  roles  and  responsibilities,  not  just 
teachers  and  students. 

Jane  David,  "Systemic  Reform: 
^  Creating  the  Capacity  for  Change,"  1993 


This  has  been  a  Commission  with  few  illusions  -  or  at 
least  it  has  tried  to  be.  From  the  first,  we  attempted  to 
be  sensitive  to  the  atmosphere  in  which  we  were 
operating,  to  the  constraints  we  knew  we  were  facing,  and  to 
the  realities  of  the  outside  world. 

We  began  our  work  in  a  public  mood  bordering  on  cyni- 
cism. "Another  commission?  Just  what  Ontario  needs!" 
Doubtless,  that  was  the  way  some  people  greeted  the 
announcement  of  the  Commission's  creation.  After  all,  had 
there  not  already  been  a  dozen,  a  hundred,  reports  on 
Ontario  education?  Was  this  yet  another  device  to  stall? 
Would  the  province's  education  system  ever  be  reformed? 

We  looked  at  what  had  happened  to  all  the  various 
reports  that  had  been  produced  -  whether  their  recommen- 
dations had  been  implemented  fully,  how  many  had  been 
implemented  half-heartedly,  how  many  ignored  completely, 
and  why.  We  learned  that  governments  have  introduced  an 
almost  endless  series  of  changes  into  Ontario  schools  over 
the  past  several  decades;  some  of  them  emanated  directly 
from  studies  and  reports  while  others  were  so  changed  from 
the  original  conception  as  to  be  hardly  recognizable.  We  felt 
it  was  important  to  understand  the  past  before  we  made 
more  recommendations  for  the  future. 

Throughout  the  writing  of  this  report,  we  tried  to  pay 
attention  to  the  lessons  learned  about  the  process  of  change 
-  that  is,  how  change  happens  in  a  massive,  complex  system 
such  as  Ontario's.  The  answer  is  only  with  supreme  difficul- 
ty. The  change  process,  perhaps  not  surprisingly,  has  proved 
to  be  almost  as  complex  as  the  institution  itself 

Many  people  would  be  bitterly  disappointed  if  this  report 
merely  collected  dust  on  a  shelf;  therefore,  it  may  seem  para- 
doxical for  us  to  produce  a  scenario  for  a  transformed 


school  system  that  -  as  we  are  the  first  to  acknowledge  -  has 
an  almost  Utopian  cast  to  it.  But  it  is  based  on  quite  realistic 
ideas,  solid  research,  and  many  success  stories.  Idealistic? 
Maybe.  But  what  a  target  to  aim  at!  What  a  vision  to  help 
guide  the  next  steps! 

As  we  thought  about  the  process  of  implementing  the 
reforms  advocated  here,  we  tried  to  analyze,  with  some  care, 
the  roles  of  the  various  stakeholders  in  the  world  of  educa- 
tion; the  way  each  has  been,  and  continues  to  be,  capable  of 
facilitating  or  resisting  change;  and  the  involvement  each  has 
had  in  recent  education  reforms.  This  chapter  makes  sugges- 
tions, for  both  the  immediate  and  longer  term,  for  various 
stakeholder  groups  as  they  begin  the  process  of  making 
changes  needed  to  improve  schools  for  all  Ontarians. 

It  is,  in  fact,  the  public,  as  well  as  all  the  other  stakehold- 
ers, who  will  decide  if  our  recommendations  should  be 
pursued.  Teachers,  parents,  students,  administrators,  citizens 
-  all  must  ask  themselves  if  they  are  prepared  to  make  the 
commitment,  to  take  the  calculated  risk  of  moving  ahead 
with  these  reforms.  As  well,  teachers'  federations  are  a  vital 
group  in  this  process.  We  recognize  they  will  have  concerns 
about  some  recommendations,  but  hope  they  acknowledge 
the  way  we  value  teachers,  and  the  increased  responsibility 
and  recognition  we  give  them  as  a  crucial  part  of  the  educa- 
tion system. 

All  the  groups  have  a  vital  role  to  play,  not  only  in  asking 
school  boards  and  the  Ministry  to  act,  but  in  acting  them- 
selves. Among  others,  students  must  make  their  views 
known  to  schools;  parents  must  insist  on  a  stronger  role  in 
their  children's  schooling;  and  teachers  must  take  a  greater 
degree  of  collective  responsibility  for  student  learning,  for 
their  own  professional  growth,  and  for  the  profession. 


Vol.  IV     Making  It  Happen      Implementing  the  Reforms 


Wc  b«lirvc  thdt  developing  an  implcmcnution  strategy 
wu  inherent  in  our  responsibility  as  a  Cominkssion, 
.1"  '  ''Ui  our  task  would  not  be  complete  without 
>  .. . . '^tlon>  on  making  our  vision  of  schools  a  reality. 


Wc  arc  also  well  aware  that  this  report  is  being  published 
close  to  the  time  of  a  provincial  election.  We  would  be 
disappointed  if  it  becatne  a  political  football.  It  deserves 
better,  as  do  the  Ontario  students,  teachers,  and  parents  it  is 
meant  to  serve,  and  the  thousands  of  people  who  took  the 
trouble  to  share  their  views  with  us.  Wc  challenge  all  three 
parties  to  put  the  needs  of  students  first,  and  to  commit 
themselves  to  action  on  the  major  recommendations  in  this 
report. 

We  believe  that  developing  an  implementation  strategy 
was  inherent  in  our  responsibility  as  a  Commission,  and  that 
our  task  would  not  be  complete  without  suggestions  on 
making  our  vision  of  schools  a  reality. 

Previous  reports 

Our  review  of  government  reports  on  Ontario  education 
over  the  last  25  years,  since  Hall- Dennis  in  1968,  shows  that 
many  recommendations  were  not  actually  implemented.  It 
also  shows  that  many  of  our  recommendations  arc  not  new; 
many  have  appeared  in  earlier  reports,  and  are  still  not  policy. 

Hall- Dennis,  for  instance,  recommended  that  teachers  be 
moved  "from  the  fringe  to  the  heart  of  professional  decision- 
making' and  proposed  that  self-government  be  granted  to 
teachers  through  a  body  to  be  called  the  C^ollcgc  of  Teachers 
of  Ontario,  which  would  have  the  power  to  license  and  disci- 
pline iu  memben. 

In  his  1988  report  f)n  preventing  drop-outs,  Cicorgc 
Radwanski  strongly  recommended  universal  Early  (.hild- 
hood  Education  programs  as  fundamental  to  getting  chil- 
dren off  to  a  good  sun  in  school. 


In  neither  case  was  the  recommendation  adopted  or 
implemented;  when  Bette  Stephenson  was  Minister  of 
Education  she  introduced  a  propt>sal  for  a  ('ollegc  of  Teach- 
ers, but  ran  into  resistance  from  the  teachers'  federations. 
Proposals  for  expansion  of  Elarly  Clhildhood  Education 
programs  have  foundered  on  issues  of  cost,  and  on  political 
and  philosophical  grounds. 

However,  a  simple  tally  of  the  number  of  recommenda- 
tions adopted  or  ignored  might  give  a  distorted  picture  of 
the  impact  of  inquiries  and  reports.  It  could  be  argued  that, 
even  when  recommendations  arc  not  adopted  as  their 
authors  intended,  such  reports  have  a  considerable  effect  on 
schools  and  on  educational  policy.  Ideas  that  may  be  slightly 
ahead  of  their  time,  for  instance,  enter  the  discourse  about 
education,  and  may  shift  beliefs  and  attitudes;  they  may  be 
adopted  later,  when  there  is  a  more  receptive  climate. 

Even  when  government  adopts  policies  and  expects 
school  boards  and  scht)ols  to  implement  changes,  the 
process  may  not  go  as  smoothly  as  anticipated,  (^nc  policy 
analyst  wryly  notes  that  "teachers  have  the  ultimate  control 
over  policy  when  they  enter  the  classroom  to  teach."'  For 
example,  the  Ministry's  curriculum  documents,  designed  to 
provide  more  focus  and  substance  to  elementary-school 
science  programs,  had  less  impact  on  school  programs  than 
expected  because  teachers  did  not  change  their  programs  to 
the  extent  policy  makers  and  curriculum  developers  intend- 
ed. Wc  want  to  avoid  a  similar  fate  for  our  recommendations. 

The  change  process: 

How  educational  change  happens 

bducaliona!  change  ii  technically  Mmplf  and  MKially  complex." 

In  the  1960s,  in  the  midst  of  affluence,  money  was  not  an 
issue,  and  many  people  thought  educational  change  was  a 
simple  matter  of  developing  new  programs,  curricula, 
materials,  or  teaching  methods,  and  then  disseminating 
them  (often  in  a  form  described  as  "teacher  proof")  to 
teachers  and  schools,  who  were  expected  to  implement  the 
new  ways  of  doing  things.  The  results  of  this  approach  were 
quite  disappointing:  teachers  rarely  changed  their  practices. 
Since  then,  educators  have  learned  much  about  the  adop- 
tion and  implementation  of  educational  policy,  and  ab«»ut 
the  process  of  educational  change  in  general.  In  the  words  of 
Professor  Milbrcy  McLaughlin  of  .Stanford  University, 


Forttw  luM«o(ljMming 


J-OfeU     Whete 


Perhaps  the  overarching,  obvious  conclusion  running  through 
empirical  research  on  policy  implementation  is  that  it  is  incredibly 
hard  to  make  something  happen,  most  especially  across  layers  of 
government  and  institutions.* 

Whether  educational  change  actually  occurs  in  practice 
depends  largely  on  will  and  skill  ^  the  extent  to  which  people 
believe  change  is  desirable,  and  the  extent  to  which  they  have 
the  necessary  skill  and  knowledge  to  make  the  changes. 
Although  neither  is  easily  or  directly  controlled  by  policy 
makers,  the  issue  of  will  or  motivation  is  particularly  diffi- 
cult. Teachers,  for  instance,  may  be  interested  in  improve- 
ment, but  if  changes  are  unilaterally  imposed  by  policy 
makers  and  administrators,  or  if  proposed  changes  do  not 
make  sense  to  them,  it  is  hardly  surprising  if  they  resist. 

Studies  of  successful  and  unsuccessful  educational-change 
projects  have  led  to  some  remarkably  consistent  findings 
about  what  factors  make  the  difference.  They  amount  to 
creating  an  atmosphere  and  conditions  of  pressure  and 
support  necessary  to  move  a  complex  system  forward.  The 
critical  factors  seem  to  be: 

•  combining  "top-down"  and  "bottom-up"  strategies 

•  developing  capacity  and  skill  through  training  and 
assistance 

•  leadership  at  all  levels  that  clarifies  priorities  and 
encourages  others 

•  teacher  participation  and  commitment 

•  a  significant  but  manageable  scope  of  change 

•  open  sharing  of  information 

•  monitoring  progress  and  solving  problems. 

Our  suggestions  for  implementing  change  take  these  into 
account.  Although  it  is  important  to  create  a  mandate  for 
change  and  to  monitor  progress,  policy  makers  who  rely 
solely  on  these  two  approaches  will  be  disappointed  if  they 
hope  for  significantly  improved  schools.  The  Ministry  must 
communicate  the  rationale  for  change  and  the  direction  in 
which  schools  are  expected  to  move.  It  must  support  school 
boards,  schools,  and  educators  in  developing  a  clear  under- 
standing of  the  new  goals,  and  in  building  the  capacity  to 
achieve  these  goals  in  each  community.' 


educational 
change  actually  occurs  in 
practice  depends  largely 
on  will  and  skill. 


What  about  the  Commission?  What  do  we  hope 
our  worit  will  achieve? 

Our  recommendations  are  focused  on  four  key  changes  that, 
we  believe,  will  generate  further  improvements.  The  four 
strategies  we  are  suggesting  will  foster  both  the  will  and  skill. 

Based  on  the  evidence  available,  we  believe  the  Ontario 
school  system  does  some  things  very  well,  and  many  things 
fairly  well.  But  our  analysis  suggests  that  most  students 
could  learn  more,  and  learn  better.  We  have  pointed  to  the 
need  for  a  more  focused  and  more  engaging  education 
system  to  take  us  into  the  21st  century.  We  have  noted  the 
demographic  shifts,  the  changing  social  fabric,  new  knowl- 
edge about  learning  and  teaching,  and  the  importance  of 
new  technologies.  We  have  suggested  that  schools  need  to 
change  to  address  these  new  conditions. 

We  believe  that  it  is  possible  to  get  beyond  "fairly  well,"  to 
a  system  in  which  many  more  students  graduate,  and  gradu- 
ate with  more  knowledge  and  with  better  skills  as  thinkers 
and  as  doers.  In  such  a  system,  students  would  be  better 
prepared  for  work,  for  post-secondary  education,  and  for 
lives  as  fully  contributing  members  of  their  communities. 
Although  education  reform  is  not  a  substitute  for  societal 
reform,  we  argue  that  schools  can  do  a  great  deal  to  improve 
the  lives  of  their  students,  and  we  believe  our  recommenda- 
tions can  help. 

People  in  and  outside  the  system  expressed  concern  about 
lack  of  focus,  teacher  overload,  student  learning,  and  stan- 
dards. We  believe  our  statement  of  purpose  is  the  founda- 
tion of  a  system  characterized  by  focus,  quality,  openness, 
fairness,  and  efficiency.  In  opting  for  change,  we  are 
concerned  not  only  about  specific  recommendations,  but 


Vol.  IV     Making  It  Happen      Implementing  the  Reforms 


149 


\    "S 


'\Sniali  changes  can  result 

in  large  changes  as  the 

process  develops  the 

critical  mass  and 

momentum  needed  to 

produce  a  significant 

transformation." 

Gareui  Morgan.  Imagmmiion.  1993 


on 


•  W'c  argue  throughout  for  an  equitable  system:  in  funding, 
in  opportunity,  in  recognition,  and  in  participation,  with  the 
expectation  of  greater  achievement  for  all  students. 

•  We  urge  a  new  and  more  appropriate  balance  of  power 
and  influence,  with  a  system  that  is  open  to  new  ideas  and  to 
participation  by  parents  and  the  community. 

•  We  want  to  ensure  that  there  is  systematic  feedback  and 
monitoring,  at  both  the  classroom  and  system  levels,  so  that 
plans  and  attempts  at  improvement  are  continually  re- 
focused  and  adjusted  in  response  to  problems  and  successes. 


even  more  about  the  overall  vision  of  schooling  we  arc 
proposing. 

To  avoid  piecemeal  solutions  to  isolated  problems,  we 
have  tried  to  identify  key  directions,  based  on  our  vision  of 
what  schools  could  be,  and  on  an  understanding  of  how 
change  actually  takes  place  in  schools.  Students  have 
changed,  teachers  have  changed,  families  have  changed,  tech- 
nology has  changed,  society  has  changed.  How  can  schools 
not  change?  They  must  now  be  redesigned  for  the  new  era. 
This  task  begins  with  our  report. 

Before  we  move  to  our  key  recommendations  and  the 
intervention  strategies  for  moving  the  system  in  the  direc- 
tion of  reform,  we  believe  it  is  necessary  to  describe  our 
approach  to  reform.  It  can  be  summarized  as  follows: 

•  We  articulate  the  purposes  of  schools,  and  situate  them  in 
relation  to  other  social  institutions;  doing  so  means  focusing 
primarily  on  learning  and  teaching,  with  the  development  of 
intellectual  competence  being  the  top  priority.  By  "intellec- 
tual competence'  we  mean  more  than  traditional  academic 
skills,  and  we  include  imagining,  creating,  synthesizing, 
comparmg,  and  analyzing.  Schools,  like  families  and  other 
institutions,  have  other  purposes  as  well:  teaching  values, 
fostering  social  development,  and  preparing  young  people 
for  employment  and  participation  in  democratic  life.  We 
argue,  however,  that  the  community  must  assume  greater 
responsibility  for  important  non-academic  needs. 

•  We  take  account  of  research  and  exemplary  practice  relat- 
ing to  learning,  teaching,  and  human  development. 

•  We  pay  attention  to  the  culture  of  schools,  and  to  creating 
and  tuilaining  the  conditions  that  will  maximize  student 
learning. 


Engines  or  lever*  for  change 

1  hrou^jhout  tills  report.  \vc  li.ui.-  made  recommendations 
related  to  the  most  vital  areas  of  education  reform.  These 
must  be 

•  a  more  challenging  curriculum  and  improved 
student  learning 

•  improved  assessment  and  accountability 

•  power,  authority,  and  equity. 

These  recommendations  -  there  are  more  than  one 
hundred  -  cover  bt)th  general  and  specific  issues,  involve 
both  large  and  small  changes,  and  suggest  new  directions, 
but  also  reinforce  initiatives  already  under  way.  We  have 
discussed  fully  many  of  the  issues  facing  schools,  and  have 
concluded  with  major  recommendations  and  some  specific 
suggestions.  The  recommendations  focus  on  our  vision  of 
the  school  system  and  on  major  strategies  designed  to  put 
the  vision  into  practice. 

The  education  system,  like  other  large  institutions,  is  slow 
to  change  and  difficult  to  redirect.  This  quality  is  a  strength, 
in  that  it  provides  stability,  and  a  problem,  in  that  it  discour- 
ages renewal.  We  need  ways  of  overcoming  the  inertia  of  a 
large  and  often  cumbersome  system  to  stimulate  and  sustain 
major  change. 

We  identified  critical  intervention  points  in  the  system, 
with  the  idea  of  initiating  change  within  these  areas.  These 
changes  can  act  as  engines  or  levers,  moving  the  svstem  in 
the  direction  of  reform.  The  engines  are: 

•  early  childhood  education 

•  teacher  professionalization  and  development 

•  information  technology 

•  community-education  alliances. 


For  th«  Um*  of  l^ammt 


Early  childhood  education 

Our  first  intervention  strategy  involves  an  earlier  and  more 
comprehensive  start  to  formal  education.  By  providing 
better  learning  opportunities  for  very  young  children  -  at 
three  years  instead  of  four,  and  full  time  instead  of  half  time 
-  schools  can  positively  affect  what  comes  after.  An  earlier 
and  stronger  start  leads  to  better  preparation  for  basic  litera- 
cy and  numeracy,  and  the  prospect  of  building  on  that  head 
start  throughout  the  school  years. 

The  responsibilities  parents  and  schools  have  for  children 
of  three  and  four  are  very  much  intertwined;  both  influence 
affective  and  intellectual  development.  Just  as  schools  or 
other  institutions  also  have  an  important  nurturing  role, 
parents  also  teach.  This  interconnectedness  opens  the 
possibilities  of  low-cost  but  highly  effective  community 
interventions,  providing  "parent  development,"  which  will 
significantly  pay  off  in  children's  later  intellectual  develop- 
ment. (See  Volume  II,  Chapter  7.) 

Community-education  alliances 

We  are  recommending  stronger  links  between  schools  and 
other  sectors  of  government  and  the  community  in  order  to 
strengthen  and  support  schools,  while  ensuring  that  other 
important  social  and  personal  needs  are  met.  If  we  are  to 
meet  changing  societal  needs  and  support  learning,  new 
ways  must  be  found  to  strengthen  those  who  want  to  raise 
healthy,  competent  children. ^ 

The  recommendations  related  to  community  partner- 
ships are  intended  to  free  up  teachers  so  they  can  better 
focus  on  their  students'  learning,  helping  students  to  learn 
the  social  skills  they  require  to  work  in  a  group,  and  to 
complete  the  school's  core  curriculum.  The  certified  teacher 
who  has  chosen  and  been  trained  to  help  students  learn  to 
read  and  write,  or  to  learn  academic  subjects,  should  not  be 
expected  to  have  the  public-health  worker's  expertise  in  drug 
or  sex  education,  or  the  trained  social  worker's  ability  to  lead 
students  through  a  curriculum  in  decision-making  or 
conflict  resolution. 

Moreover,  it  makes  good  sense  for  such  community 
resources  to  be  more  readily  available  to  schools.  When 
health-  and  community-service  personnel  provide  recre- 
ation, health,  and  social-development  programs,  or  practis- 
ing artists  offer  arts  programs,  teachers  will  have  more  time 
in  the  day  and  week  to  spend  on  activities  essential  to 
improving  learning  for  students:  planning  and  evaluating 


the  program  they  deliver  individually  and  collaboratively, 
working  together  to  improve  their  assessment  skills,  and 
connecting  more  often  and  more  effectively  with  parents. 

Such  community  links  can  also  open  up  the  school,  and 
situate  it  at  the  nexus  of  a  local  community  and  its  various 
resources,  all  of  which  exist  to  support  the  people  who  live 
there  -  in  this  case,  the  young  people. 

The  role  of  principal  will  also  change  as  the  school 
becomes  more  integrally  linked  to  the  community  beyond  its 
walls.  School/community  councils  have  a  vital  contribution 
to  make  in  helping  to  draw  in  and  co-ordinate  community 
partners.  The  necessary  interdependence  between  teaching 
professionals  and  other  people  is  in  itself  a  lesson  for  youth 
about  how  society  works.  The  fact  that  some  members  of  the 
community  work  as  volunteers  is  another  valuable  lesson 
about  the  way  society  operates,  and  what  we  should  expect 
of  ourselves  and  of  others. 

If  community  partnerships  are  to  work,  the  way  depart- 
ments of  government  work  -  largely  in  isolation  and  some- 
times in  competition  -  must  change.  Unless  government 
ensures  that  responsibility  is  shared  centrally  and  locally,  by 
the  appropriate  sectors,  the  presence  of  community 
members  in  the  school  will,  in  itself,  create  significant 
demands  on  educators'  time.  Various  government  depart- 
ments must  focus  more  on  co-ordination  and  collaboration 
across  the  usual  bureaucratic  boundaries,  bringing  together 
policies  to  support  the  healthy  development  of  children. 
Such  policies  will  reward  collaborative  action  at  the  local 
level,  making  it  easier  for  different  groups  to  work  together. 
Funding  provisions  will  also  have  to  be  changed,  to  ensure 
that  co-operation,  rather  than  isolation,  is  the  norm.  The 
government,  for  instance,  might  decide  to  fund  only  those 


Vol,  IV     Making  It  Happen      Implementing  the  Reforms 


proposals  in  which  various  sectors  arc  working  together  on  a 
project.  (Ser  \.>liinu-  IV,  Chapter  14.) 

Teacher  development  and  professionalizalion 

ProlcssiDnai  responsibility,  autoni)my,  and  accuuntability  are 
essential  to  the  teaching  force  we  envision.  We  recommend 
that  teachers  have  more  collective  responsibility  for  their 
profession,  with  control  being  shifted  from  the  Ministry  to 
an  independent  College  of  Teachers.  It  would  have  authority 
for  teaching  standards,  as  well  as  for  accreditation  of 
teacher-education  programs,  and  for  setting  standards  of 
professional  development.  This  shift  would  recognize  that 
teaching  should  be  acknowledged  as  a  profession  whose 
members  are  capable  of  setting  their  own  standards  of 
professional  practice.  It  is  essential  to  evaluate  the  perfor- 
mance of  all  educators,  and  we  stress  the  need  to  follow 
through  effectively  when  performance  is  unsatisfactory. 

Teacher  development,  both  before  and  after  certification, 
is  an  essential  vehicle  for  implementing  the  other  proposed 
reforms.  No  school  system  is  better  than  its  teachers,  and  no 
amount  of  legislation  and  regulation  of  policy  and  practice 
will  affect  student  learning  unless  there  are  well-educated 
and  dedicated  teachers  who  are  clear  about  their  goals. 

If  reforms  are  to  be  implemented,  teachers  must  under- 
stand what  is  expected,  believe  that  the  reforms  make  sense, 
and  know  how  to  get  started.  Schools  must  be  places  where 
teachers  and  principals  work  together  to  set  priorities,  agree 
on  plans  for  action,  and  keep  track  of  progress.  Because  they 
must  do  all  this  while  continuing  to  operate  the  school,  there 
will  be  a  tension  between  the  need  for  stability  and  for 
continuity  on  the  one  hand,  and  for  change  on  the  other. 


Although  we  recommend  lengthening  and  strengthening 
the  teacher  preparation  program,  no  such  program  would  be 
enough  to  educate  teachers  for  a  career  in  which  there  is 
always  more  to  be  learned,  honed,  and  practised  than  can  be 
squeezed  into  a  one-  or  two-year  program,  teachers  must 
continue  to  learn  throughout  their  careers,  and  one  of  the 
best  possible  venues  is  the  school  itself.  Research  shows  that 
the  development  of  teacher  collaboration  that  focuses  on 
continuously  improving  teaching  and  monitoring  results  is 
the  most  effective  route  to  success.  Such  "collaborative 
cultures"  embrace  the  involvement  of  students  and  parents 
in  the  education  enterprise.  This  results  in  a  co-ordinated 
program  that  is  effective  and  that  pays  attention  to  student 
progress.  Schools  must  be  learning  organizations  for  teach- 
ers if  they  are  to  be  effective  learning  organizations  for 
students.  (Sec  Volume  III.) 

Information  technology 

{k)mputcr  hardware  and  software  combine  to  become  a 
powerful  new  tool  for  learning,  making  the  road  smoother 
and  faster  for  students  and  teachers.  It  is  genuinely  motivat- 
ing for  students  -  a  fa.scinating  way  to  learn  more,  and  to 
learn  quite  different  things,  it  makes  routine  tasks  for 
students  and  teachers  more  pleasant  and  efficient,  but  more 
significantly,  it  opens  up  the  world  to  learning  in  a  way  that 
is  brand  new,  and  that  can  set  a  pattern  for  lifelong  learning. 

Instruction  can  be  more  easily  tailored  to  student  needs, 
enabling  students  to  move  at  their  own  pace.  Of  even  greater 
importance  is  thai  through  electronic  technology  students 
can  move  beyond  dependence  on  their  teachers  for  access  to 
knowledge:  through  communications  software  and  access  to 
data  banks,  CD-ROMs,  and  libraries,  they  can  become  more 
independent  learners.  Moreover,  information  technology 
offers  the  potential  for  developing  problem-solving  and 
reasoning  abilities.  With  that  new  technology,  teachers 
become  more,  not  less,  important  as  they  work  with  students 
to  accommodate  and  integrate  complex  knowledge  bases. 

In  short,  information  technology  is  becoming  essential  to 
teachers'  continuing  ability  to  do  their  jobs  well,  and  to 
students'  future  success  in  a  world  where  computer  literacy 
is  becoming  as  universal  and  essential  as  print  literacy. 

Throughout  our  report  we  talk  about  the  fundamental 
purpose  of  schools  as  building  literacy  -  going  bcy<'nd  basic 
literacy  to  the  higher  literacies  thai  are  expected  of  the  well 


Forlh*  toM  of  iMmtnK 


educated.  People  can  not  remain  well  educated  if  they  stop 
reading,  or  stop  talking  with  others  who  can  challenge  their 
thinking.  Increasingly,  reading  and  discussion  happen  on- 
screen. The  access  that  the  computer  brings  to  knowledge, 
through  print,  sound,  and  graphics,  as  well  as  through 
discussion,  cannot  be  gained  in  any  other  way. 

Computerized  networks  of  professionals,  such  as  the 
Ontario  Teachers'  Federation  network  "The  Culture  of 
Change,"  have  already  shown  themselves  to  be  more  power- 
ful than  many  conventional  means  of  building  and  updating 
teacher  knowledge  and  professionalism,  and  are  likely  to 
have  the  same  impact  on  other  kinds  of  work.  Increasingly, 
students,  on  their  own,  are  acquiring  knowledge  of  what 
computers  can  do.  At  school  that  familiarity  must  be  made 
universal,  so  that  computers  facilitate  equal  opportunities 
and  equal  outcomes  in  a  learning  environment,  and  so  that 
their  potential  as  educational  tools  for  life,  not  only  as  enter- 
tainment, is  realized. 

Computers  are  used  as  working  tools  by  writers,  mathe- 
maticians, scientists,  artists  and  designers.  They  can  be  used 
in  schools  to  become  libraries  and  learning  circles,  tied  into 
global  networks  dedicated  to  building  and  sharing  knowl- 
edge and  understanding.  (See  Volume  IV,  Chapter  13.) 

By  itself,  each  of  these  four  engines  offers  significant 
benefits;  combined,  their  power  increases  substantially. 
While  all  our  engines  for  change  focus  on  the  school  and  the 
classroom,  they  also  reach  out  to  change  other  systems:  the 
teacher-education  and  child-care  systems,  as  well  as  govern- 
ment policies  and  programs  designed  to  support  children 
and  families.  Operating  schools,  like  educating  the  youth 
within  them,  becomes  more  of  a  community  issue,  with 
joint  responsibility.  Meeting  the  needs  of  young  people 
effectively  and  efficiently  will  mean  some  redefinition  of 
who  works  in  schools,  with  whom,  and  with  what  kind  of 
funding,  support,  and  co-ordination.  That  is  why  some  of 
our  recommendations  go  beyond  the  education  system  per 
se,  and  involve  government  and  community  players. 

What  actions  are  needed? 

All  stakeholders  must  take  action  and  responsibility  for 
implementation  of  our  recommendations,  or  else  change 
will  not  take  place.  Politicians,  we  know,  are  unlikely  to 
move  in  bold  new  directions  unless  they  perceive  that  there 
is  a  public  demand  for  them  to  do  so.  Therefore,  the  first 
important  step  in  implementation  is  for  parents,  students. 


All  stakeholders  must  take  action  and  responsibility  for 
implementation  of  our  recommendations,  or  else 
change  will  not  take  place. 

Time  lines  are  important,  but  implementation  of 
complex  reforms  means  more  than  working  through 
the  list  of  tasks  and  actions  to  be  taken.  Because  the 
unexpected  always  happens,  schedules  will  have  to  be 
adjusted  and  new  issues  will  have  to  be  considered. 


taxpayers,  and  other  groups  and  associations  to  express  their 
support  for  ideas  in  the  report.  If  the  general  orientation 
and  recommendations  of  this  report  represent  good  public 
policy  in  the  eyes  of  Ontarians;  if  they  meet  public  expecta- 
tions of  what  the  educational  policy  should  be;  the  public 
should  say  so,  individually  and  as  members  of  groups, 
through  the  various  channels  available. 

That  said,  we  must  stress  that  simplistic  solutions  do  not 
work  for  complicated  problems.  Better  ideas  or  more  money 
do  not  guarantee  better  schools;  there  are  no  quick  fixes.  Co- 
ordinated action  on  many  fronts  is  needed,  and  the  system 
must  acknowledge  that,  at  the  beginning  of  the  reform 
process,  not  all  the  answers  are  known.  Inevitably,  the  situa- 
tion will  change  even  as  people  begin  to  act,  making  it 
impossible  to  set  out  a  detailed  implementation  plan  that 
would  provide  a  complete  guide  to  schools  and  others. 

Implementation  is  not  just  a  question  of  doing  a  series  of 
tasks  or  steps  that  have  been  set  out  sequentially.  Rather, 
above  all  else,  it  is  a  question  of  people  understanding  what 
reforms  mean  in  concrete  and  practical  terms.  The  Ministry 
of  Education  and  Training  must  adopt  an  implementation 
strategy  that,  first  and  foremost,  helps  to  clarify  the  precise 
requirements  for  each  of  the  key  directions  for  reform. 

Time  lines  are  important,  but  implementation  of 
complex  reforms  means  more  than  working  through  the  list 
of  tasks  and  actions  to  be  taken.  Because  the  unexpected 
always  happens,  schedules  will  have  to  be  adjusted  and  new 
issues  will  have  to  be  considered. 

With  these  cautions  in  mind,  we  have  developed  the 
beginning  of  an  implementation  plan.  Implementation 
involves  changes  in  practice,  and  because  we  believe  quick 
action  is  necessary,  we  have  identified  actions  that  all  stake- 


Vol.  IV     Making  It  Happen      Implementing  the  Reforms 


view,  an  Implcmcnuiiun  Cummiuiun  would  b« 
%t  vehicle  tor  ovcr»ecing  the  progress  of  reforms. 


holders  can  take  to  move  schools  and  the  school  system  in 
the  desired  directions. 

Although  many  meaningful  changes  can  be  implemented 
locally  without  Ministry  sanction,  we  look  first  at  the  actions 
required  at  the  provincial  level,  because  these  set  the  direc- 
tion for  all  of  Ontario.  Wc  then  suggest  actions  to  be  taken 
by  others,  including  school  boards,  schools,  and  parents. 

An  liiipl«ni«ntJrtlon  commission 

(lOvcriiiiKiit  h.is  rcs('unMliilit\  tnr  introducing  and  follow- 
ing political  agendas,  and  for  the  daily  management  of 
ministries.  These  do  not  easily  permit  the  re-adjustments 
needed  to  also  accommodate  changing  directions  in  a  large 
system  such  as  education.  We,  therefore,  believe  that  a 
special  mechanism  is  needed  to  oversee  implementation  of 
the  reforms  recommended  in  this  report. 

Recommendation  167 

'We  recommend  the  establtshment  of  an  Implementation 
Commission  to  oversee  the  implementation  of  the  recommen- 
dations made  by  the  Royal  Commission  on  Learning. 

In  our  view,  an  Implementation  Commission  would  be 
the  best  vehicle  for  overseeing  the  progress  of  reforms.  The 
Implementation  (Commission  would  report  to  the  I.egisla 
ture  through  the  .Minister  of  Education  and  Training,  and 
would  be  required  to  publish  a  report  every  six  months. 

The  Commission  should  be  established  for  a  three-year 
term,  with  a  small  secretariat  to  support  its  work.  The  Chief 
Commissioner  should  be  someone  who  is  credible  to  educa- 
tors and  the  public. 

We  assume  there  would  be  a  committee  structure,  with 
members  drawn  from  the  field,  from  faculties  of  education. 


and  from  federations.  Participants  would  focus  on  imple- 
mentation of  recommendations  in  specific  areas,  such  as 
harly  Childhood  Education,  information  technology,  teacher 
development,  and  so  on.  However,  the  Implementation 
Commission  would  continue  to  stress  the  inter-relationship 
of  the  recommendations  for  reform,  to  guard  against  the 
danger  of  fragmentation  and  work  done  at  cross-purposes. 

As  implementation  gets  under  way,  the  Commission 
would  provide  information  to  be  used  by  all  those  involved 
in  education  as  the  basis  for  further  improvement.  Data 
from  pilot  projects  would  be  widely  shared,  and  information 
from  student  learning  assessments  would  be  used  to  improve 
programs  and  instruction. 

The  Implementation  (Commission  would  also  keep 
educational  reform  on  the  public  agenda.  Its  working 
committee  structure  would  give  it  a  high  profile,  through 
links  with  educators  and  communities  around  the  province, 
regular  annual  reports  to  the  Minister  and  to  the  Premier's 
Office,  and  regular  (at  least  twice  yearly)  informal  reports  to 
the  general  public,  similar  in  format  to  the  Royal  Commis- 
sion's Spotlight  on  Learning  newsletters. 

Finally,  the  Implementation  CCommission  could  monitor 
and  assess  whether  reforms  were  having  the  intended  effect, 
and  what  changes  needed  to  be  made. 

We  specifically  expect  the  Implementation  Commission 
to  establish  criteria  by  which  each  of  the  reforms  would  be 
evaluated,  and  to  contract,  perhaps  through  the  Office  of 
Learning  Accountability  and  Assessment,  for  evaluations  of 
pilot  projects  and  early  reform  initiatives.  The  results  of  such 
evaluations  would  be  widely  available,  to  be  used  to  improve 
future  implementation  efforts. 

Several  briefs,  including  the  first  one  at  our  public  hear- 
ings, called  for  a  kind  of  "on-going  Royal  Commission  on 
Education"  to  which  special  problems  and  ideas  for  reforms 
could  be  addressed.  We  understand  the  intent  of  the  idea, 
but  consider  that  once  the  push  towards  the  implementation 
of  the  report  has  been  given  by  the  Implementation 
(Commission,  it  is  best  to  direct  future  demands  directly  to 
the  Ministry,  where  they  belong. 

Other  support  for  implementation 

Change  takes  many  different,  i)(tcn  parallel,  paths,  and  the 
actions  of  different  players  at  different  levels  are  needed  to 
achieve  the  final  goal  of  reforming  a  system.  Of  course,  the 
Minister  and  the  Ministry  are  expected  to  play  a  key  role  in 


For  tha  LOM  of  Ltamtng 


ir^T^ 


bringing  about  change.  But  by  themselves  they  cannot  do 
much.  Stakeholders,  as  well  as  individuals  in  the  system,  can 
and  must  initiate  change  in  their  fields. 

Beyond  the  Implementation  Commission,  there  is  the 
Ministry  (and  to  some  extent,  school  boards),  which  can  use 
various  strategies  in  moving  ahead  with  reform.  The 
Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  must  first  establish  a 
clear  direction  and  expectations,  in  terms  of  such  factors  as 
student  learning,  regular  assessment,  and  parental  involve- 
ment, by  setting  policy  guidelines  to  ensure  desired 
outcomes. 

The  Ministry  must  balance  central  direction  setting  and 
monitoring  with  local  flexibility  about  the  way  to  achieve 
desired  results.  Here,  too,  we  see  the  importance  of  firm 
principles,  but  flexibility  in  applying  them.  Policy  imple- 
mentation in  the  province  should  shift  from  "control"  to 
"service."'  Provincial  authorities  must  set  clear  expectations 
related  to  student  learning,  and  then  help  school  boards 
meet  them,  while  school  boards  do  the  same  in  relation  to 
schools. 

Although  we  can't  mandate  everything  that  matters, 
mandates  can  be  effective  in  kick-starting  systems,  by 
providing  clarity  about  goals  and  information  about 
progress.  The  danger  is  in  relying  solely  on  such  regulatory 
approaches,  because  important  changes  are  difficult,  and 
require  skill,  motivation,  commitment,  and  judgment  from 
those  who  must  make  the  changes  work. 

The  Ministry  and  school  boards  can  also  provide  incen- 
tives to  encourage  schools  and  teachers  to  move  into  new 
areas.  Incentive  grants  encourage  school  boards,  individual 
schools,  and  consortia  to  set  up  pilot  programs.  Such 
concrete  local  initiatives  can  then  be  used  as  models  for 
others. 

Changing  organizational  structures  is  another  way  of 
stimulating  reform.  For  instance,  the  Office  of  Learning 
Assessment  and  Accountability  is  intended  to  deal  more 
effectively  with  assessment  and  accountability  issues,  while 
school/community  councils  would  co-ordinate  community 
resources  more  effectively,  and  give  the  community  a 
stronger  voice  in  the  school. 

None  of  these  approaches,  however,  will  work  unless 
schools  and  those  involved  with  them  have  the  necessary 
skills  and  resources.  Teachers  need  professional  development 
and  curriculum  support  materials.  Parents,  community 
representatives,  and  school  staff  need  preparation  and 


X 


School  improvement  efforts 

are  most  likely  to  succee 

where  there  is  a  combination 

of  internal  commitment  to 

and  incentives  for  change,  and 

external  pressure 

and  support. 

Karen  Louis  and  Matthew  Miles, 
Improving  the  Urban  High  School,  1990 


support  so  they  can  get  school/community  councils  operat- 
ing effectively. 

The  reforms  we  are  suggesting  are  not  simple,  and  in 
many  cases  there  are  few  working  models  to  follow.  More- 
over, the  context  for  educators  and  students  is  constantly  in 
flux,  and  what  might  make  sense  today  could  be  unworkable 
next  year.  Therefore,  implementation  plans  are  more  like 
road  maps  than  blueprints:  they  cannot  specify  every  detail 
in  advance. 

Provincial  actions 

There  must  also  be  clear  expressions  of  support  for  reform 
from  the  provincial  government,  accompanied  by  wide 
dissemination  of  this  report,  in  both  its  full  and  brief 
versions.  Discussion  of  the  key  ideas  of  the  report  must  be 
encouraged,  in  both  the  education  and  the  broader  commu- 
nities, to  increase  the  understanding  of  the  principles  guid- 
ing the  proposed  reforms.  There  must  then  be  a  statement, 
from  the  Minister  of  Education  or  the  Premier,  or  both,  on 
what  the  government  plans  to  do  in  response  to  our  report: 
whether  they  support  the  key  directions  we  have  identified, 
and  what  implementation  plan,  with  time  lines,  has  been 
developed.  The  first  step,  of  course,  is  to  establish  the  Imple- 
mentation Commission,  with  clear  and  broad  authority  to 
oversee  the  process. 

The  province  must  be  clear  and  firm  about  principles, 
and  about  the  directions  in  which  schools  should  be 
moving.  But  it  is  equally  important  to  be  flexible  about  the 
means  that  schools  and  school  boards  adopt  to  move  in  the 
desired  directions.  One  such  principle  is  that  schools  must 
increase  the  involvement  of  parents  in  ways  that  benefit 
student  learning.  However,  there  should  be  considerable 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Implementing  the  Reforms 


o 


rhc  first  practical  step 

reform  is  to  take  it. 

Murray  Scftaler,  Ttm  fittinoc*fOS  m  (fw  CtMsroom.  1976 


in  any  ^JL  J- 


•  set  up  a  council  at  the  I'rcnmr's  k\il  to  consider  how  to 
strengthen  inter-ininisterial  work,  and  co-ordinate  ierviccs 
for  children,  with  the  designation  of  a  senior  minister 
responsible  for  such  co-ordination  in  addition  to  his  or  her 
regular  portfcilio 

•  plan  changes  in  funding  structures 

•  plan  changes  in  French-language  governance 

•  the  MET  changes  its  structures  and  functions  as  recom- 
mended by  the  RCOL 

•  sponsor  and  encourage  working  conferences  to  discuss 
and  begin  to  implement  key  recommendations  of  the  RCOL 


flexibility  about  how  schools  and  school  boards  increase 
parent  involvement.  The  Ministry  and  school  boards  should, 
therefore,  support  diversity  in  local  arrangements,  as  long  as 
that  diversity  suppoiis  and  is  consistent  with  the  general 
principles. 

If  the  government  is  serious  about  its  response  to  our 
report,  it  may  choose  to  use  the  following  list  of  suggested 
actions  as  a  starting  point.  Appendix  I  to  this  chapter 
provides  examples  of  further  actions  that  could  be  taken  by 
the  provincial  government  and  the  Ministry  in  each  of  the 
next  three  years,  as  well  as  indications  of  what  might  be  put 
in  place  over  the  next  five  to  ten  years. 

Time  lines  are  critical  to  any  implementation  plan, 
although  some  flexibility  must  be  built  in.  Although  199.S  is 
an  election  year  -  a  somewhat  disruptive  time  for  imple- 
menting major  new  public  policies  -  we  think  the  recom- 
mended actions  constitute  an  appropriate  agenda  for  all 
parties,  regardless  of  which  one  forms  the  government. 

Sutfested  short-term  actions  for  the  provincial 
^ovornmont  and  for  the  Ministry:  1995-96 
/  he  framework  for  reform 

•  the  government  and  the  .V1F.T  respond  to  the  RCOL 
report,  indicating  their  support  and  plans  for  implementa- 
tion, with  time  lines 

•  set  up  Implementation  Commission  through  the  MtT 

•  prepare  enabling  legislation  as  necessary  to  implement 
RCOL  recommendation* 

•  preparr  <n  f<»r  the  0>llege  of  Teachers 

•  »etupt(  ingA.vses*ment  and  Accountability 

•  create  a  central  body  to  co-ordinate  information  technology 


Curriculum 

•  develop  an  action  plan  for  curriculum  development  and 
provincial  reviews 

•  continue  implementing  The  Common  Curriculum,  with  a 
clearer  focus  on  a  few  clear  outcomes 

•  bring  together  schools  and  other  interested  groups 
concerning  Grade  12  outcomes  and  new  specialized 
curriculum 

Assessment  and  accountability 

•  the  MHT  and  Office  of  Learning  Assessment  and  Account- 
ability begin  planning  Grade  3  and  1 1  assessments 

•  provide  target  funding  to  OISF.  and/or  other  graduate 
faculties  of  education  and/or  1-2  consortia  involving  boards 
and  faculties  of  education  to  establish  centres  of  expertise  re 
assessment  of  student  learning  and  program  evaluation. 

Power,  influence,  and  equity 

•  prcp.ire  legislative  ch.inges  for  short  term  action,  e.g.. 
voting  student  trustees,  status  of  aboriginal  band-operatcd 
schools 

•  repeal  of  Section  136  regarding  preferential  hiring  of 
Roman  Catholic  teachers 

•  provide  targeting  incentive  funding  at  both  the  provincial 
and  board  level,  to  begin  phasing  in  school/community 
councils 

•  develop  and  begin  to  apply  funding  formulas  that  will 
encourage  more  co-operative  service  arrangements  between 
school  boards 

•  develop  students'  and  parents'  Charters  of  Rights  and 
Responsibilities 


For  tfw  Ijom  o(  LMmtnt 


Early  childhood  education 

•  set  up  a  joint  college/faculty  of  education  committee  to 
discuss  short-term  and  long-term  arrangements  for  prepara- 
tion and  certification  of  staff 

•  develop  policy  to  guide  program  development,  relation- 
ships to  current  child-care  providers,  certification  and 
preparation  of  staff  and  organization 

•  begin  establishing  learning  outcomes  for  ECE  programs 

•  survey  space  needs  for  ECE 

•  plan  pilot  project  for  phasing  in  ECE  programs  in  schools 

•  establish  models  for  integrated  daycare  and  ECE  programs 

Teacher  prof essionalization  and  development 

•  plan  with  key  groups  the  composition  and  authority  of  the 
College  of  Teachers 

•  set  up  review/evaluation  teams  for  principal  preparation 
courses  and  supervisory  officer  qualification  programs,  and 
begin  evaluations 

•  fund  and  establish  a  pilot  project  concerning  the  two-year 
preservice  preparation  program,  with  a  full  evaluation 

•  encourage  faculties  of  education  to  introduce  programs 
requested  by  Catholic  school  systems 

Information  technology 

•  seek  out  partnership  agreements  with  computer  firms 

•  plan  development  and  licensing  of  more  Canadian  educa- 
tional software,  where  appropriate 

•  negotiate  agreements  between  the  MET  and  businesses  to 
give  discarded  computers  to  schools 

Community-education  alliances 

•  identify  the  inter-government  and  inter-Ministry  initia- 
tives necessary  to  remove  barriers  to  community-education 
alliances;  for  instance,  changes  in  legislation  to  provide  for  a 
common  age  of  consent  (the  age  at  which  a  young  person  is 
considered  adult)  to  facilitate  service  delivery  to  older 
adolescents 

•  develop  guidelines  for  programs  to  be  provided  in  schools 
by  arts,  health,  social  service  and  recreation  agencies,  in 
collaboration  with  other  ministries 

•  prepare  (or  contract  for  preparation  of)  a  directory  of 
community/education  partnership  initiatives,  categorized  for 
easy  access,  as  well  as  empirically  based  guidelines  for  the 
development  of  such  initiatives 


opin  M.„.«.. 

B  significant  changes  can  be 

made  by  teachers  and 
principals  in  schools. 


Actions  by  other  stakeholders 

The  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  and  the  provincial 
government  must  act.  So,  too,  must  educators  and  commu- 
nity members.  Parents,  students,  teachers,  faculties  of  educa- 
tion, and  others  can  make  a  big  difference  at  the  local  level, 
and  can  also  put  pressure  on  the  Ministry  and  the  govern- 
ment. Appendix  2  to  this  chapter  provides  examples  of 
actions  that  these  groups  can  take  immediately,  without 
waiting  for  changes  at  the  provincial  level. 

Once  the  government  has  enacted  enabling  legislation 
and  clarified  the  overall  rationale  for  the  reforms,  all  those 
involved  in  Ontario  education  will  have  to  act  simultaneous- 
ly in  a  number  of  areas.  For  instance,  changes  in  curricula 
will  have  to  be  accompanied  by  changes  in  assessment  that, 
in  turn,  are  not  possible  without  on-going  teacher  develop- 
ment. All  these  actions  will  need  to  be  closely  co-ordinated 
so  they  reinforce  each  other. 

Although  all  parties,  from  the  provincial  government  to 
students,  have  a  role  to  play  in  changing  the  education 
system,  there  are  three  groups  whose  initial  responses  and 
actions  will  be  crucial.  The  first  is  the  provincial  government 
-  particularly,  but  by  no  means  only,  the  Ministry  of  Educa- 
tion and  Training.  As  the  major  regulatory  and  policy- 
making bodies,  ministries  set  the  direction  for  the  province. 
Second  are  the  school  boards,  which  translate  Ministry  poli- 
cy at  the  local  level,  and  have  considerable  power  to  set  local 
priorities  within  provincial  guidelines.  And  third  are  the 
Ontario  Teachers'  Federation  and  its  five  affiliates,  who 
represent  120,000  teachers,  and  are  a  major  force  on  the 
province's  educational  scene.  Their  support  will  be  decisive 
in  achieving  the  gains  we  anticipate. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Implementing  the  Reforms 


We  stress,  however,  that  many  of  the  most  significant 
changes  can  be  made  by  teachers  and  principals  in  schools, 
without  waiting  for  governments  or  boards  to  act.  As 
Jennifer  Ixwington  and  Graham  Orpwood  observed  in  their 
recent  book.  Overdue  Assignment: 

Schools  will  not  flourish  if  teachers  and  others  In  the  system  hunker 
down  in  hopes  of  waiting  out  the  storm.  Instead, ...  those  who  work 
in  |the  system!  must  develop  a  strong;  capacity  for  self-renewal.' 

Cost  lssu*s 

Lust  issues  are  critical,  particularly  in  light  of  Ontario's 
continuing  budgetary  difFiculties.  Educational  change  cannot 
wait  until  we  have  more  money,  and  in  any  case,  we  do  not 
believe  that  more  money  is  necessarily  the  answer.  Instead, 
reform  must  now  be  achieved  by  shifting  the  focus  of  the 
system,  allocating  the  same  pot  of  money  in  different  ways. 
There  is  no  avoiding  the  fact  that  many  choices  will  be 
painful.  Setting  priorities  is  difficult,  not  only  within  the 
education  system,  but  also  between  education  and  other 
societal  needs. 

Given  the  complexity  and  uncertainty  of  specific  cost 
projections,  as  well  as  our  lime  frame  and  limited  resources, 
we  cannot  provide  detailed  cost  estimates.  These  will  need  to 
be  done  by  the  Ministry.  In  the  end,  choices  must  be 
governed  by  the  cost  of  providing  adequate  programs  to 
students  across  the  province,  the  amount  of  money  available 
for  education,  and  the  priorities  that  are  set. 

NN'  'hat  many  of  our  recommendations  have 

cost  i;  .  and  in  most  cases,  we  have  made  sugges- 

tions about  redirecting  funds  within  the  system,  with  little 
or  no  new  money  required.  Equali7.ation  of  funding  across 


the  province,  for  instance,  should  involve  redistribution 
rather  than  additional  resources. 

Budgetary  constraints  have  become  a  lung  term  feature 
of  the  system.  It  is  therefore  critical  that  funds  are  targeted 
to  the  areas  where  they  will  have  the  most  impact.  That  is 
why  we  recommend,  for  instance,  Early  Childhood  Educa- 
tion programs,  because  investments  in  quality  programs  for 
very  young  children  will  pay  off  later  in  reduced  need  for 
remedial  programs  and  other  social  supports.  Such  an 
approach  might  be  compared  to  preventive  health  care,  with 
the  assumption  that  money  spent  on  early  prevention  initia- 
tives will,  in  the  long  run,  reduce  costs.  Since  we  are  recom- 
mending that  students  graduate  from  secondary  school  after 
12  years  in  the  system,  rather  than  the  13  years  many  of 
them  now  take,  we  anticipate  significant  savings  at  the  level 
of  senior  secondary  school. 

We  also  point  out  that  the  initial  costs  of  school-based 
Early  Childhood  Education  programs  should  be  partially 
offset  by  reduced  costs  for  subsidized  daycare. 

Costs  for  large-scale  assessments  and  for  increased  moni- 
toring should  also  produce  favourable  cost/benefit  results,  as 
long  as  the  information  is  used  for  improving  the  system 
and  targeting  efforts  more  accurately.  C^osts  of  developing 
and  administering  challenge  exams  and  General  Education 
Diploma  exams,  as  recommended  in  Chapter  10,  will  be 
partially  offset  by  less  time  spent  in  school  by  students. 
(They  won't  have  to  lake  courses  if  they  already  know  the 
material  and  demonstrate  their  knowledge  in  these  exams.) 

We  also  expect  costs  of  some  reforms  to  be  offset  by 
savings  from  improved  efficiencies  in  other  parts  of  the 
delivery  system.  We  suggest,  for  example,  that  clarification  of 
the  roles  of  trustees  and  supervisory  officers,  as  well  as  some 
shifts  of  responsibility  to  schools  and  the  Ministry,  should 
lead  to  savings  as  fewer  central-office  staff  will  be  required. 

We  also  suggest  increased  sharing  of  resources  and 
services  between  boards  and  other  local  agencies;  greater  and 
more  effective  use  of  various  staffing  formulas  and  commu- 
nity resources  in  schools;  and  centralized  curriculum  devel- 
opment, to  avoid  duplication  of  effort  among  school  boards. 

It  is  difficult  to  estimate  the  cost  implications  of  greater 
co-ordination  of  government  services  and  increased 
community  alliances,  particularly  because  these  involve 
ministries  other  than  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Train- 
ing. But  we  anticipate  that,  after  the  initial  start-up,  better 
coordination  of  services  will  result  not  only  in  improved 


For  tht  Low  of  Laamtnc 


services  but  in  a  more  streamlined  system  with  significant 
reductions  in  duplication  of  effort  and  administration. 

An  important  consideration  in  costing  is  that  many  of 
our  recommendations  incorporate  a  rethought  use  of  time 
and  other  resources.  Done  imaginatively  and  effectively,  this 
is  a  low-cost  strategy  for  making  other  things  happen.  In 
particular,  we  have  identified  a  variety  of  ways  in  which  flex- 
ibility can  be  built  into  teachers'  working  lives  at  little  cost. 
For  example,  throughout  the  report  we  recommend  the  use 
of  volunteers,  peer  tutors,  and  cross-age  tutors,  which  bene- 
fits those  tutoring  and  those  being  tutored. 

We  also  recommend  that,  in  their  second  year  of  pre- 
service  preparation,  student  teachers  work  in  schools  as 
interns,  significantly  adding  to  the  staff  resources,  and 
potentially  freeing  teachers  for  collaborative  curriculum 
work.  School/community  councils  would  act  to  bring  addi- 
tional resources  into  schools,  while  more  flexible  groupings 
of  some  students  could  free  time  for  teachers  to  provide 
more  intensive  remedial  or  enrichment  opportunities  to 
others.  The  creative  use  of  technology  is  another  time- 
fireeing  strategy. 

Although  savings  from  such  shifts  in  the  way  time  and 
other  assets  are  perceived  and  utilized  are  difficult  to  calcu- 
late, they  are  a  low-cost  way  of  substantially  adding  to  exist- 
ing resources. 

Although  there  will  undoubtedly  be  costs  attached  to 
implementing  our  recommendations  -  as  there  are  for  any 
changes  -  we  expect  these  to  be  offset  by  savings  in  the 
longer  term.  However,  it  is  crucial  that  funding  choices  be 
made  deliberately,  on  the  basis  of  educational  priorities. 

A  call  to  action 

We  believe  that  our  recommendations  and  intervention 
strategies  provide  powerful  directions  and  tools  for  reform. 
We  want  our  recommendations  to  be  implemented;  we  want 
the  school  system  of  Ontario  to  become  more  responsive, 
open,  and  flexible;  we  want  higher  levels  of  student  learning; 
we  want  well-prepared,  highly  motivated  teachers  taking 
greater  collective  responsibility  for  professional  issues.  But 
we  are  not  naive.  We  realize  that  there  are  constraints  and 
barriers.  These  must  not,  however,  stop  stakeholders  from 
moving  forward. 

We  are  under  no  illusions  that  hurdles  are  easy  to  over- 
come, or  that  our  suggestions  will  always  be  successful.  We 
believe,  however,  that  the  journey  must  begin.  Schools  and 


For  many  people  the  challenge  of  change  is  overwhelm- 
ing. The  shift  towards  new  forms  of  organization  and 
management  often  calls  for  a  leap  of  faith  that  many 
people  are  not  prepared  to  make.  They  need  help  and 
encouragement.  But  above  all  else,  they  need  to  learn 
specific  tactics  and  techniques  that  can  make  them 
more  effective. 

Gareth  Morgan,  Finding  Your  15% 
(Video  series),  1993 


their  communities  need  a  reasonably  clear  vision  of  the 
destination,  the  will  to  overcome  or  work  around  the 
constraints,  and  a  commitment  to  imaginative  problem- 
solving.  If  there  was  ever  a  time  for  a  massive  call  to  action, 
that  time  is  now.  We  suggest  ways  of  overcoming  some  of 
the  key  barriers  to  change. 

Inertia 

Having  already  acknowledged  the  difficulty  in  getting  a  large 
and  complicated  system  to  change  course,  we  stress  the 
importance  of  having  the  government  give  clear  direction 
and  a  well-articulated  sense  of  the  overall  goals,  as  well  as 
incentives  for  change.  We  also  underline  that,  through  the 
public  hearing  process,  we  were  strongly  reminded  that  pres- 
sures for  change  are  mounting,  and  cannot  be  resisted. 

Support  for  innovative  initiatives  that  operate  outside  the 
usual  organizational  and  bureaucratic  constraints  can  help 
overcome  inertia.  Highly  visible  projects  can  provide  the 
incentive  for  others  to  develop  their  own  innovations. 

Power  issues 

Although  it  is  rarely  acknowledged  openly,  concerns  about 
protecting  influence  often  get  in  the  way  of  change.  No 
group  wants  to  lose  power.  Those  who  have  more,  at  what- 
ever level  of  the  hierarchy,  may  resist  efforts  to  decrease 
their  spheres  of  influence,  or  to  democratize  organizational 
decision -making  processes.  Educators,  however,  like  others 
in  contemporary  society,  are  aware  that  times  have  changed, 
and  that  the  education  system  must  become  more  responsive 
to  parent  and  community  concerns.  We  stress  that  the  goals 
of  increased  student  learning  and  the  opening  up  of  a  closed 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Implementing  the  Reforms 


students.  This  clearer  focus  and  direction  should  help 
ameliorate  the  overload  problem. 

Ihc  truth,  however,  is  that  the  overload  will  worsen  if 
people  do  not  take  action.  Will  and  skill,  although  not  magic 
solutions,  can  be  effective  antidotes  to  overload.  We  believe 
that  an  essential  (but  difficult)  first  step  is  for  teachers, 
schools,  and  boards  to  critically  review  what  they  are  now 
doing  and  to  set  priorities.  Hducators  must  identify  tasks 
that  may  no  longer  be  important,  or  that  arc  better  done  by 
others,  in  a  difficult  process  that  has  been  termed  "organized 
abandonment." 


education  s>'stcm  should  guide  the  decisions  of  all  stake- 
holders on  the  best  wav  to  organize  schooling. 

CcUective  bargaining  issues 

Specific  provisions  ot  collective  agreements  must  not 
prevent  changes  that  will  improve  student  learning.  There 
must  be  more  flexibility  in  the  use  of  staff  and  in  the  way 
time  15  allocated  and  accounted  for.  Teachers'  federations 
have  been  tireless  and  effective  in  their  roles  as  advocates  for 
teachers,  and  have  also  positively  addressed  many  profes- 
sional issues.  However,  the  rigidities  of  collective  agreements 
may  not  always  work  to  the  benefit  of  students  and  schools. 
More  flexible  approaches  to  collective  bargaining  seem  to  be 
appropriate  if  schools  are  to  change  with  changing  social 
circumstances. 

In  this  report,  we  have  repeatedly  acknowledged  the  ines- 
timable value  and  contributions  of  teachers,  and  have 
recommended  a  variety  of  measures  to  support  them  in 
their  very  challenging  work.  We  expect,  in  turn,  that  federa- 
tions will  be  flexible  on  issues  where  the  interests  of  students 
and  teachers  may,  to  some  extent,  conflict. 

Overload 

We  often  heard  that  schools  and  the  people  in  them  are 
overloaded,  and  find  it  difficult  -  if  not  impossible  -  to  take 
on  more  responsibilities.  We  acknowledge  these  concerns, 
and  although  we  have  no  magic  solution  to  alleviate  them, 
we  do  think  our  recommendations  address  the  problems. 
Most  important,  the  report  takes  a  stand  in  clarifying  the 
purpose  of  schools,  stressing  that  schools  exist  first  and  fore- 
most for  the  intellectual  and  academic  nurturing  of 


Lack  of  resources 

We  recognize  the  serious  financial  constraints  affecting  both 
provincial  and  local  governments,  constraints  shared  by 
most  public  institutions  in  the  1990s.  Expansionary  times 
have  long  gone,  and  society  is  becoming  aware  that 
complaints  do  nothing  to  case  fiscal  difficulties.  Although 
constraints  are  real,  they  should  not  be  seen  as  an  insur- 
mountable barrier.  In  some  cases,  low-cost  options  are  high- 
ly effective;  we  have  already  pointed  to  peer  tutoring  as  a 
low-cost  program  with  benefits  to  students.  In  our  opinion, 
volunteers  are  another  under-used  and  low-cost  resource.  In 
other  cases,  educators  and  the  public  should  be  prepared  to 
argue  for  re-allocation  of  funds  to  ensure  that  essential  and 
high-priority  services  and  programs  are  available. 

Achieving  the  kind  of  school  system  we  envisage  will  be 
difficult,  but  it  is  a  worthy  ideal.  We  have  not  shied  away 
from  difficult  issues,  even  when  wc  cannot  offer  clear  or 
guaranteed  solutions. 

Will  our  recommendations  be  implemented  faithfully? 
That  will  be  decided  by  the  government,  school  boards, 
schools,  teachers,  parents,  students,  and  others  with  a  stake 
in  education  in  Ontario.  If  the  Commission's  vision  is  to  be 
realized,  these  people  and  organiz^ations  must  move  forward 
without  waiting  for  others  to  take  the  first  step. 

We  began  our  report  by  highlighting  the  dramatically 
altered  context  in  which  schools  now  operate.  Profound 
social,  economic,  demographic,  and  technological  changes 
have  made  the  old  forms  of  schooling  outmoded.  We  went 
on  to  suggest  that  changes  in  the  education  system,  impor- 
tant as  they  are,  are  not  enough.  People  must  rethink  how 
schools  relate  to  the  community,  and  htiw  the  education 
system  relates  to  the  rest  of  government  and  to  other  societal 
institutions. 


For  Itw  I^M  o(  IjMmni 


ODIP 


We  want  real  change  in  the  hves  of  students  and  teachers. 
We  are  not  interested  in  political  rhetoric  about  education. 
We  have  indicated  what  is  required  in  terms  of  the  govern- 
ment's response  and  implementation  plan,  but  if  substantial 
changes  are  to  occur,  more  than  provincial  policy  changes 
are  needed. 

School  boards,  faculties  of  education,  principals,  teachers, 
parents,  and  students  can  and  must  act.  They  need  not  - 
and,  indeed,  should  not  -  wait  for  governments.  Local 
actions  will  produce  improvements  in  classrooms  and 
schools,  and  will  also  put  pressure  on  decision-makers  to 
follow  through  with  necessary  supports. 

In  other  words,  everybody  has  to  take  responsibility  for 
making  schools  increasingly  better.  A  1994  implementation 
guide  published  by  the  British  Columbia  Ministry  of  Educa- 
tion sets  out  how  each  stakeholder  contributes  to  reform. 
Because  we  found  it  to  be  an  excellent  summary  of  responsi- 
bilities, we  reproduce  it  here: 

Implementation  responsibilities 

•  Ministry  provides  leadership  and  implementation  support 

•  School  boards  organize  planning  and  allocation  of  financial, 
human  and  learning  resources  in  support  of  implementation 

•  Teachers  and  school  administrators  participate  in  [board]  and 
school-based  planning  for  implementation  of  new  policies,  and 
implement  policies  according  to  provincial  guidelines 

•  Students  work  to  take  advantage  of  learning  opportunities  offered 
by  provincial  and  local  programs 

•  Parents  help  children  to  develop  clear  values  and  self-discipline, 
and  to  apply  themselves  to  their  schoolwork 

•  Provincial  and  professional  organizations  (teachers'  federations] 
plan,  and  assist  members  to  understand,  adapt  and  implement  new 
policies  and  programs 

•  College  of  Teachers  reviews  requirements  for  certification  and 
teacher  education  in  relation  to  the  new  programs 

•  Business  and  labour  work  with  local  school  boards  and  schools  to 
develop  partnerships  in  and  outside  of  schools  to  assist  in  the  imple- 
mentation of  new  programs,  especially  in  the  area  of  work  experi- 
ence and  career  development' 

We  would  add  to  this  list  the  need  for  parents  and  other 
community  members  to  work  with  schools  to  establish 
school/community  councils,  and  to  look  for  ways  to  link 
school,  home,  and  community  more  effectively,  while 


"To  wait  to  introduce 
J  change  until  we  have 

unanimity  is  usually  to 
wait  forever ...  There  is 
probably  no  innovation 
that  has  benefitted 
humankind  that  was  not 
originally  condemned  by 
experts  as  impractical, 
impossible,  or  immoral." 


David  Pratt,  Curriculum  Planning,  1994 


Students  are  responsible  for  organizing  their  systematic 
input  to  schools. 

The  actions  that  people  take  in  schools,  in  the  communi- 
ty, and  in  government,  will  have  a  cumulative  effect  in 
moving  reform  forward.  They  will: 

•  build  commitment  to  the  necessary  reforms,  and  encourage 
action  by  all  stakeholders,  at  the  local  and  provincial  levels 

•  develop  capacity  and  skill  among  educators,  parents, 
students,  and  others,  to  implement  the  changes 

•  create  organizational  cultures  supportive  of  changes,  and 
provide  necessary  resources  for  schools,  school  boards,  the 
Ministry,  and  community  groups 

•  provide  relevant  feedback  to  schools  and  to  the  public, 
about  how  the  process  is  proceeding  and  about  early 
outcomes,  and  ensure  that  such  feedback  is  used  to  improve 
future  implementation. 

We  end  our  report  by  suggesting  actions  for  all  those  who 
care  about  Ontario's  schools.  Through  thousands  of  such 
actions,  guided  by  the  goal  of  improved  learning  for  all 
students,  our  schools  will  rise  to  the  challenge  of  preparing 
children  and  adolescents  for  the  21st  century. 

Together,  those  with  the  biggest  stake  in  Ontario  educa- 
tion can  work  to  make  our  recommendations  a  reality.  They 
can  also  insist  that  the  government  act  promptly  to  imple- 
ment the  report.  "Systems  ...  don't  change  by  themselves; 
people  change  systems."  The  report  of  the  Royal  Commis- 
sion on  Learning  is  now  in  the  hands  of  the  people  of 
Ontario.  Its  future  is  up  to  you. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Implementing  the  Reforms 


Endnotes 


Onuho,  Provincul  Committee  on  Aims  and  Objectives  of 
Education  m  the  Schools  of  Ontario,  Living  ami  Ltarning 
(Toronto:  Newton  Publishing,  1968),  p.  134. 

Allan  R.  Odden.  "New  Patterns  of  Education  Policy  Imple- 
mentation and  Challenges  for  the  1990s,"  m  tiiuiatum  Poliqf 
Implementation  (Albany:  State  University  of  New  York  Press, 
1991).  p.  326. 

Michael  G.  Fullan  with  Suzanne  Stiegelbaucr,  The  Net* 
Meaning  of  Educational  Change  (Toronto:  OISE  Press,  1991 ), 
p.  65. 

Milbrey  W.  McLaughlin,  "Learning  from  Experience:  Lessons 
from  Policy  Implementation."  in  Odden,  Education  Policy 
Implementation,  p.  187. 

Matthew  Miles,  "Practical  Guidelines  for  School  Administra- 
tors: How  to  Get  There'  (paper  presented  at  the  annual 
meeting  of  the  American  Educational  Research  Association, 
1987). 

Two  recent  articles  point  to  the  challenge  of  helping  a  large 
and  diverse  educational  community  understand  highly 
complex  and  difficult  changes,  and  the  danger  that  people 
will  rely  on  oversimplified  interpretations  of  new  policies. 
See: 

Roland  Case.  "Our  Crude  Handling  of  Educational  Reforms: 
The  Case  of  Curricular  Integration,"  Canadian  Journal  of 
Education  19,  no.  1  ( 1994):  80-93. 

Walter  Werner.  "Defining  Curriculum  Policy  through 
Slogans,"  Journal  of  Education  Policy  6,  no.  2  ( 1991 ):  225-38. 

Kenneth  I^thwood  and  Byron  Dart,  "Guidelines  for  Imple- 
menting Educational  Policy  in  British  Columbia,"  p.  7.  Draft 
paper  prepared  for  the  British  Columbia  Ministry  of  Educa- 
tion. 1994. 

G.  Orpwood  and  I.  Lewinglon,  Overdue  Assignment:  Taking 
RaponsiMity  for  Canada's  Schoob  (Rexdale,  ON:  )ohn  Wiley. 
1993),  p.  182. 

British  (;>>lumbia.  Ministry  of  Education,  Putting  Policies  into 
Practice:  Implementation  Guitir  ( Victoria,  1994),  p.  2-3. 


For  the  UiM  of  IjMmtnc 


Appendix  1:  Action  Plan  for  Government 


Examples  of  longer-term  actions  for  the  province 
and  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training 

Year  2  (1996-97) 

•  continue  legislative  change  for  longer-term  actions; 

•  monitor  the  initial  changes,  and  on  the  basis  of  these  experiences, 
develop  guidelines  for  further  implementation,  create  necessary 
training  and  professional  development  programs,  disseminate 
information  throughout  the  province; 

•  establish  the  College  of  Teachers;  MET  transfers  control  of  teacher 
education,  certification  (initial  and  continuing); 

•  phase  in  French-language  governance  and  other  changes  in  board 
structure; 

•  carry  out  evaluations  of  principal  courses  and  SOQPs;  follow 
through  on  results  by  setting  out  improvement  targets  -  with 
timelines. 


Over  the  longer  term  (10  years,  with  MET  setting  out 
detailed  implementation  plans  to  guide  efforts  over  this 
time) 

•  initiate  full  implementation  of  Early  Childhood  Education 
programs; 

•  implement  the  new  curriculum  in  its  entirety; 

•  implement  new-teacher  preparation  and  professional  develop- 
ment programs; 

•  initiate  the  annual  administration  of  Grade  3  and  1 1  assessments; 

•  implement  the  full  range  of  changes  in  funding  structures  and 
French-language  governance; 

•  create  a  framework  for  on-going  improvement,  based  on  the 
results  of  assessments. 


Year  3  (1997-98) 

•  set  outcomes  for  all  grades; 

•  implement  Grade  3  and  Grade  1 1  assessments; 

•  assure  that  all  funding  and  local  governance  changes  are  in  place 
for  1997  municipal  and  school  board  elections; 

•  plan,  with  the  College  of  Teachers,  the  new-teacher,  pre-service 
prerequisites  for  admission  and  program  requirements,  and  the 
requirements  for  on-going  professional  development; 

•  make  decisions  re  continuation  of  various  prinicpals'  courses  and 
SOQPs; 

•  request  curriculum  teams  to  write  support  documents  (through 
contracts). 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Implementing  the  Reforms 


Appendix  2:  Action  Plan  for  Education  Stakeholder* 


•f  lwm»iH»t»  or  •hort-torm  actions:  To  bo  dono  In  1995-96  by  oducation  stakoholdoro 


To94<  of  RCOl  S«teoo4  Board* 

R9C041HVI#4MltfC  lOnft 


T««ch«r»' 
F»d«ftto«i» 


•ccountabiltty 


AsalM  m  dtssAfTwiM  Assist  in  communi'  Provtde  RCOL  infor 

mg  information  about  eating  RCOL  infor  mation  to  parents. 

RCOt.  report  and  malion  to  members,  students,  and 

racofranandauons.  community. 


Review  current 
programs  in  light  o( 
RCOL  discussion 
and  recommenda- 
twns. 


Help  to  organize  arul 
attend  information 
sessions. 


Work  witfi  Softools 
and  scfiooi  boards  to 
distnbute  RCOL  s 
short  version 
summary  tt>rou0i 


hold  information 

sessions. 

Curriculum 

Idanufy  omlcuium 

Continue  program 

Review  programs  re 

Contact  teachers 

Work  on  establishing 

and 

•xparUM.  hnkwtth 

of  producing 

programs  arx)  teach 

changes  needed  so 

about  ways  to  help 

peer  coaching  and 

lMna«« 

MET.  other  boards. 

specific  additional 

ing  approacr>es  to 

that  student  teach 

your  child  leam. 

tutonng  program. 

with  federations. 

curriculum 

irwrease  levels  of 

ers  are  prepared  to 

arxl  wrth  faculties  of 

support  matenals 

cfiallenge.  ensure 

teach  the  common 

education. 

that  all  students 
benefit,  and  identify 
teacher  in  service 
needs. 

curnculum. 

iderKify  teacher  in- 

Provide  professional 

Ensure  that  all 

Strengthen 

Contact  teachers 

Produce  best  efforts 

service  ne«<ts.  and 
coHaborata  witfi 
other  school  boards, 
ledaralKKts.  and 
with  faculttea  of 
aducauon  m  setting 
up  programs. 


development 
programs  tor 
members  on 
student  assess- 
ment, and  collabo- 
rate with  boards 
and  faculties  on 
such  programs. 


teactiers  learn  atxiut      programs  relating         atXKit  use  of 


assessing  student 
learning  effectively. 


to  assessment  arxl 
accountability, 
through  hiring, 
professional  devel 
opment  o(  faculty 
members,  and 
curriculum  for  pre- 
service  programs. 


assessment  results 
to  help  your  child 
learn. 


on  assessment 


■  ■iMWiWg 

^w««  and 

lRfW«OC« 


Begtn  turning  over 
more  budget  and 
daosiorwnalung 


•ooounUbWty  to 


Develop  federation 
perspective  on  hem 
best  to  implement 
nxKe  differentiatad 
staffing  m  schools. 


Expand  and 
strengthen  ways  to 
communicate  wnh 
parents. 


Explore  setting  up 
professional  devel 
opment  scTiools  in 
which  practising 
taact«ers  have 
sigrtlflcant  Input 
arnl  mfluerKe  in 
pre-servlce 
programs. 


WorV  with  your 
school  ary]/or 
school  tward  re 
setting  up  scfKxH/ 
community  councils. 


WorV  with  teacTiers 
to  strengtfien 
student  councils. 


Survey  axMUng 
kindargartan.  cMO- 
car*.  andcMfwr 
space  to  plan  for 
aoconvnodaUon  of 

ad(Micir\^  ciMldren 


WorV  toward  coordl^ 
nation  of  Early  ChMd- 
hood  Education  artd 
school  staff. 


Survey  eiistmg 
space  with  a  view 
to  planntnghow 
ito 


Wort(  wrthi 
to  develop  prt)grams 
for  prepanng  staff 
for  Earty  Childhood 
Education  programs. 


Request  that  school 
board  begin  linking 
with  current 
providers  of  earty 
childhood  education 


Wortt  w«t^  prinapals 
arx)  teacfters  to 
develop  ways  in 
«4iich  senior  students 
can  help  In  Early 
Childhood  Education 


young  childran. 


for  the  Love  of  Laammg 


Topic  of  RCOL  School  Boards 

Recommendations 


Teachers' 
Federations 


Information 
technology 


Teacher 

professional- 

Ization 


Community 
education 


Identify  hardware 
and  software  needs. 


Expand  work  on 
professional  elec- 
tronic networks. 


Ensure  that  all 
teachers  have  famil- 
iarity and  expertise 
with  computers  and 
electronic  communi- 
cations -  to 
strengthen  learning. 


All  student  teachers 
learn  to  use  technol- 
ogy to  strengthen 
student  learning. 


Volunteer  to  assist 
in  classrooms  re 
computer  usage 
during  and/or  after 
school. 


Identify  students  who 
can  help  staff  and 
other  students  in 
using  information 
technology. 


Identify  professional      Work  with  faculties       Identify  priorities  for       Meet  with  represen-      Work  with  school  to       Establish  a  program 


development  of  education  re 

priorities  of  all  board     various  alternative 
staff  and  trustees.        models  of  profes- 
sional development. 


Create  inventory 
of  existing  links 
with  community 
agencies. 


Establish  federation 
perspectives  on 
how  best  to  link 
with  community 
beyond  school,  and 
to  co-ordinate 
programs  and 
services  to  the 
advantage  of 
students,  as  well 
as  teachers. 


professional  develop-    tatives  from  school 
ment  and  identify  boards  and  teacher 

what  can  be  provided     federations  re  joint 
with  in-school  programs  and  how 

expertise.  mandatory  profes- 

sional development 
will  be  implemented. 


Identify  a  problem 
shared  by  school 
and  community, 
as  focus  for  action. 


Develop  courses  to 
explore  community 
education. 


plan  professional 
development  for 
school  community 
council  members. 


Ask  schools  to  bring 
in  outside  resources 
and  volunteers  - 
and  identify  commu- 
nity expertise. 


of  leadership  develop- 
ment for  students. 


Start  student-initiated 
community  service 
programs. 


For  the  community  partnership  engine  in  particular,  community 
agencies  and  business  groups  are  also  stakeholders.  They  all  can 
take  action  to  initiate  and  support  closer  links  between  schools 
and  their  communities.  Senior  officials  in  various  community  agen- 
cies and  business  groups  can  contact  school  boards  re  common 
interests,  joint  ventures,  conferences  to  build  common  under- 
standing, as  well  as  putting  pressure  on  government  to  support 
such  links  through  regulatory  and  funding  mechanisms. 


Vol.  IV    Making  It  Happen      Implementing  the  Reforms 


For  the  Love 
of  Learning: 
Recommendations 


This  section  includes  the  connplete  set  of 
recommendations  of  the  Royal  Commission 
on  Learning. 


Chapter  7:  The  Learner  from  Birth  to  Age  6 

The  Commission  recommends: 

1.  That  Early  Childhood  Education  (ECE)  be  provided  by  all 
school  boards  to  all  children  from  3  to  5  years  of  age  whose 
parents/guardians  choose  to  enrol  them.  ECE  would  gradual- 
ly replace  existing  junior  and  senior  kindergarten  programs, 
and  become  a  part  of  the  public  education  system; 

2.  That  the  ECE  program  be  phased  in  as  space  becomes 
available; 

3.  That,  in  the  implementation  of  ECE,  the  provincial  govern- 
ment give  priority  funding  to  French-language  school  units; 

4.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  develop  a 
guide,  suitable  for  parents,  teachers,  and  other  caregivers, 
outlining  stages  of  learning  (and  desirable  and  expectable 
learner  outcomes)  from  birth  onwards,  and  that  it  link  to  the 
common  core  curriculum,  beginning  in  Grade  1.  This  guide, 
which  would  include  specific  learner  outcomes  at  age  6, 
would  be  used  in  developing  the  curriculum  for  the  Early 
Childhood  Education  program. 

Chapter  8:  The  Learner  from  Age  6  to  15 

The  Commission  recommends: 

5.  That  learner  outcomes  in  language,  mathematics,  science, 
computer  literacy,  and  group  learning/interpersonal  skills 
and  values  be  clearly  described  by  the  Ministry  of  Education 
and  Training  from  pre-Grade  1  through  the  completion  of 
secondary  school,  and  that  these  be  linked  with  the  work  of 
the  College  Standards  and  Accreditation  Council,  as  well  as 


universities;  and  that  clearly  written  standards,  similar  in 
intent  to  those  available  in  mathematics  and  language 
(numeracy  and  literacy),  also  be  developed  in  the  other 
three  areas; 

6.  That  the  acquisition  of  a  third  language  become  an  intrin- 
sic part  of  the  common  curriculum  from  a  young  age  up  to 
Grade  9  inclusively,  with  the  understanding  that  the  choice 
of  language(s)  taught  or  acquired  will  be  determined  locally, 
and  that  the  acquisition  of  such  a  third  language  outside 
schools  will  be  recognized  as  equivalent  by  an  examination 
process,  similar  to  what  we  term  challenge  exams  within  the 
secondary  school  credit  system; 

7.  That  all  elementary  schools  integrate  a  daily  period  of 
regular  physical  exercise  of  no  less  than  30  minutes  of 
continuous  activity  as  an  essential  part  of  a  healthy  school 
environment.  Schools  that  have  problems  scheduling  daily 
periods  should,  as  a  minimum,  require  three  exercise  periods 
per  week; 

8.  That,  at  the  Grade  1-5/6  level,  an  educator  monitor  a 
student's  progress  during  the  years  the  student  is  at  the 
school,  and  be  assigned  responsibility  for  maintaining  that 
student's  record; 

9.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  and  the  local 
boards  of  education  provide  incentives  to  large  middle  (and 
secondary)  schools  to  create  smaller  learning  units,  such  as 
schools-within-schools  or  houses; 

10.  That,  beginning  in  Grade  7,  every  student  have  a  Cumu- 
lative Education  Plan,  which  includes  the  student's  academic 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Recommendations  to  the  Total  Report 


and  other  learning  experiences,  is  understood  to  be  the 
major  planning  tool  tor  the  student's  secondary  and  post- 
secondary  education,  and  is  reviewed  semi-annually  by  the 
student,  parents,  and  by  the  teacher  who  has  a  continuing 
relationship  with  and  responsibility  tor  that  student  as  long 
as  she  or  he  remains  in  the  school; 

1 1.  That  curriculum  guidelines  be  developed  in  each  subject 
taught  within  the  common  curriculum,  to  assist  teachers  in 
designing  programs  that  will  help  students  achieve  the  learn- 
ing outcomes  in  The  Common  Curriculum.  These  guidelines 
should  include  concrete  suggestions  on  how  teachers  can 
share  with  parents  ways  to  help  their  children  at  home; 

12.  That  the  Minister  of  Education  and  Training  aniond  the 
regulations  to  enable  school  boards  to  extend  the  length  of 
the  school  day  and/or  school  year; 

13.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  work  with 
curriculum  and  learning  specialists  to  develop  strategies 
(based  on  sound  theory  and  practice  and  enriched  with 
detailed  examples)  for  providing  more  flexibility  in  the 
amount  of  time  available  to  students  for  mastering  curricu- 
lum: 

14.  That  local  schools  and  boards  be  allowed  to  develop  and 
offer  programs  in  addition  to  those  in  The  Common  Curricu- 
lum, as  long  as  those  options  meet  provincially  developed 
criteria,  and  as  long  as  at  least  90  percent  of  instructional 
time  is  devoted  to  the  common  curriculum  for  Grades  1 

to  9. 

Chapter  9:  The  Learner  from  Age  15  to  18 

The  Commission  recommends: 

15.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  review 
community  college  education  -  its  mandate,  funding,  coher- 
ence, and  how  it  fits  into  the  system  of  education  in  Ontario, 
including  clarification  of  access  routes  from  secondary 
Khool  to  college,  and  with  special  attention  being  paid  to 
students  who  are  not  university-bound; 

16.  That  secondary  Khool  be  defined  as  a  three  year 
program,  beginning  after  Cirade  9,  and  that  students  be 
permitted  to  take  a  maximum  of  three  courses  beyond  the 
rr<)iiirr(i  21.  f(ir  a  totjl  of  not  more  than  24  credits.  We 


further  recommend  that  all  courses  in  which  the  student  has 
enrolled  -  whether  completed  t)r  incomplete,  passed  or 
failed  -  be  recorded  on  that  student's  transcript; 

17.  That  only  two,  not  three,  differentiated  types  of  courses 
should  exist; 

18.  That  some  courses  (to  be  called  Ontario  Academic  Cours- 
es, or  OAcCs)  be  offered  with  an  academic  emphasis;  that 
others  (to  be  called  Ontario  Applied  Courses,  or  OApCs)  be 
offered,  with  an  emphasis  on  application;  and  that  still  others 
be  presented  as  common  courses,  blending  academic  and 
applied  approaches,  and  with  no  special  designation; 

19.  That  large  secondary  schools  be  reorganized  into 
"schools-within-schools"  or  "houses,"  in  which  students  have 
a  core  of  teachers  and  peers  with  whom  they  interact  for  a 
substantial  part  of  their  program. Such  units  may  be  topic-, 
discipline-,  or  interest-focused; 

20.  That  as  a  mandatory  diploma  requirement  ail  students 
participate  each  year  in  physical  exercise  at  least  three  limes 
per  week,  for  not  less  than  30  minutes  per  session,  either  in 
or  outside  physical  education  classes; 

21.  That  as  a  mandatory  diploma  requirement  all  students 
take  part  in  a  minimum  of  20  hours  per  year  (two  hours  per 
month)  of  community  service,  facilitated  and  monitored  by 
the  school,  to  take  place  outside  or  inside  the  school; 

22.  That  the  same  efforts  to  centrally  develop  strategies  and 
ideas  for  increasing  flexibility  and  individualization  of  the 
pace  of  learning,  which  we  called  for  in  the  common  core 
curriculum,  be  applied  to  the  specialization  years; 

23.  That  a  set  of  graduation  outcomes  be  developed  for  the 
end  of  Grade  12;  that  they  be  subject  and  skill  oriented,  as 
well  as  relatively  brief;  and  that  they  cover  common  learner 
outcomes  for  all  students  as  well  as  supplemental  learner 
outcomes  for  the  OAcC  and  the  OApC  programs; 

24.  That  students  have  the  option  of  receiving  as  many  as 
two  international  language  credits  toward  their  diploma  no 
matter  where  they  obtained  their  training  or  knowledge  of 
the  languagc(s)  if,  upon  examination,  they  demonstrate 
appropriate  levels  of  language  mastery; 


For  tht  l/rm  ol  l«amtng 


25.  That  the  Ontario  Training  and  Adjustment  Board 
(OTAB)  be  given  the  mandate  to  take  leadership,  working  in 
partnership  with  school  boards,  community  colleges,  and 
other  community  partners,  to  establish  programs  that  will 
assist  secondary  school  graduates  and  drop-outs  to  transfer 
successfully  to  the  workforce,  including  increasing  opportu- 
nities for  apprenticeship  and  for  other  kinds  of  training  as 
well  as  employment  counselling; 

26.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  create  a 
brief  and  clear  document  that  describes  for  parents  what 
their  children  are  expected  to  learn  and  to  know,  based  on 
the  developmental  framework  of  stages  of  learning  from 
birth  to  school  entrance.  The  Common  Curriculum,  and  the 
secondary  school  graduation  outcomes.  Succinct  information 
on  college  and  university  programs  should  be  also  included; 

27.  That,  in  order  to  ensure  that  all  Ontario  residents, 
regardless  of  age,  have  access  to  a  secondary  school  diploma, 
publicly  funded  school  boards  be  given  the  mandate  and  the 
funds  to  provide  adult  educational  programs; 

28.  That  a  consistent  process  of  prior  learning  assessment  be 
developed  for  adult  students  in  Ontario,  and  that  this  process 
include  an  examination  for  a  secondary  school  equivalency 
diploma; 

29.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  with  its 
mandate  which  includes  post-secondary  education,  require 
the  development  of  challenge  exams  and  other  appropriate 
forms  of  prior  learning  assessment  by  colleges  and  universi- 
ties, to  be  used  up  to  and  including  the  granting  of  diplomas 
and  degrees; 

30.  That  the  right  of  adults  to  pursue  literacy  education  must 
be  protected,  regardless  of  employment  status  or  intentions; 

31.  That  COFAM/OTAB  immediately  define  and  set  aside, 
for  short-  and  medium-term  adult  literacy  programs,  a  fran- 
cophone allotment  that  is  not  linked  to  participation  in  the 
workforce,  in  addition  to  the  francophone  programs  linked 
to  workforce  status  and  intention. 


Chapter  10:  Supports  for  Learning:  Special 
Needs  and  Special  Opportunities 

The  Commission  recommends: 

32.  That  the  Ministry  make  it  mandatory  for  English- 
language  school  units  to  provide  ESL/ESD,  and  French- 
language  school  units  to  provide  ALF/PDF,  to  ensure  that 
immigrant  students  with  limited  or  no  fluency  in  English  or 
French,  and  Charter  rights  holders  with  limited  or  no  fluen- 
cy in  French,  receive  the  support  they  require,  using  locally 
chosen  models  of  delivery.  In  its  block-funding  grants,  the 
Ministry  should  include  the  budgetary  supplements  required 
to  allow  the  schools  to  offer  these  programs  wherever  the 
community  identifies  a  need  for  them. 

33.  That  no  child  who  shows  difficulty  or  who  lags  behind 
peers  in  learning  to  read  be  labelled  "learning  disabled" 
unless  and  until  he  or  she  has  received  intensive  individual 
assistance  in  learning  to  read,  which  has  not  resulted  in 
improved  academic  performance; 

34.  That  in  addition  to  gifted  programs,  acceleration,  based 
on  teacher  assessment,  challenge  exams,  and/or  other  appro- 
priate measures  become  widely  available  as  an  important 
option  for  students; 

35.  That  when  parents  and  educators  agree  on  the  best 
programming  for  the  student,  and  there  is  a  written  record 
of  a  parent's  informed  agreement,  no  Identification,  Place- 
ment, and  Review  Committee  (IPRC)  process  occur; 

36.  That  when  there  is  no  agreement,  and  an  IPRC  meeting 
must  take  place,  a  mediator/facilitator  be  chosen,  on  an  ad 
hoc  basis,  to  facilitate  discussion  and  compromise,  to  allevi- 
ate the  likelihood  of  a  legal  appeal;  and  that  the  legislation 
be  rewritten  to  provide  for  this  pre-appeal  mediation; 

37.  That  when  a  student  has  been  formally  identified  and 
placed,  the  annual  review  be  replaced  by  semi-annual  indi- 
vidual assessment  that  will  show  whether  and  how  much  the 
student  has  progressed  over  a  five-month  period,  and  deci- 
sions about  continuation  of  the  program  be  made  based  on 
objective  evidence  as  well  on  as  the  judgment  of  the  educa- 
tors and  parents  in  regard  to  the  student's  progress; 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Recommendations  to  the  Total  Report 


38.  That  school  boards  look  for  ways  to  provide  assistance  to 
thoic  who  need  it,  without  tving  that  assistance  to  a  formal 
identification  process. 

39.  That,  while  integration  should  be  the  norm,  school 
boards  continue  to  provide  a  continuum  of  services  for 
students  whose  needs  would,  in  the  opinion  of  parents  and 
educators,  be  best  served  in  other  settings; 

40.  That  all  elementary  school  teachers  have  regular  access  to 
a  "community  career  coordinator"  responsible  for  co-ordi- 
nating the  school's  community-based,  career-awareness 
curriculum,  and  working  with  teachers  and  community 
members  to  build  and  support  the  program; 

41.  That,  beginning  in  Grade  6  or  7  and  continuing  through 
Grade  12,  all  schools  have  appropriately  trained  and  certified 
career-education  specialists  to  carry  out  career  counselling 
functions; 

42.  That  the  Ministry,  in  co-operation  with  professional 
career-education  groups,  the  Ontario  School  Counsellors' 
Association,  and  the  Association  of  Career  Centres  in  Educa- 
tional Settings,  and  with  representation  from  colleges, 
universities,  and  business  and  labour,  develop  a  continuum 
of  appropriate  learner  outcomes  in  career  awareness  and 
career  education  for  Grades  1-12; 

43.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  take  the 
lead  in  working  with  the  Ministry  of  Health  to  develop  a 
defmition  of  es.sential  mental-health  promotion  programs 
and  services  that  should  be  available  in  the  school  setting; 
the  professional  training  necessary  to  provide  them;  the 
services  that  should  be  offered  to  students  outside  the 
schools  and  by  whom;  and  the  way  responsibility  for  provid- 
ing these  services  is  shared  across  ministries; 

44.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  cLirity  the 
nature  and  function  of  personal  and  social  guidance  coun- 
selling in  schools  by: 

.1)  redefining  the  appropriate  training  required  for  a 
guidance  or  pervinal  counsellor,  and  creating  and 
implementing  a  plan  for  educating  and  re-educating 
those  people  who  arc  now,  or  should  now  be,  deliver- 
ing these  services  to  students;  this  redefinition  should 
be  done  in  co-operation  with  the  Ontario  School 


C'ounsellors'  Association  and  rcprcscntalives  of 
colleges  and  universities;  such  training  should  also  he 
accessible  through  avenues  other  than  teacher  educa- 
tion; 
b)  ensuring  that  delivery  of  these  services  be  implement- 
ed by  personnel  who,  after  a  date  to  be  specified,  have 
received  the  agreed-on  training; 

45.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  develop  a 
new  guideline  for  social/personal  guidance  to  replace  Guid- 
ance, Intermediate  and  Senior  Divisions,  ]984,  including  a 
description  of  the  kind  of  differentiated  staffing  needed  to 
deliver  guidance  and  counselling  services  in  schools,  both 
elementary  ami  secondary. 

Chapter  11:  Evaluating  Achievement 

The  Commission  recomdieiidb. 

46.  That  significantly  more  time  in  pre-service  and  continu- 
ing professional  development  be  devoted  to  training  teachers 
to  assess  student  learning  in  a  way  that  will  help  students 
improve  their  performance,  and  we  recommend  supervised 
practice  and  guidance  as  the  principal  leaching/learning 
mechanism  for  doing  so; 

47.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  begin 
immediately  to  develop  resource  materials  that  help  teachers 
learn  to  assess  student  work  accurately  and  consistently,  on 
the  specific  learner  outcomes  upon  which  standardized 
assessment  and  reporting  will  be  based; 

48.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  in 
conjunction  with  professional  educators,  assessment  experts, 
parents,  students,  and  members  of  the  general  public,  design 
a  common  report  card  appropriate  for  each  grade.  lb  be 
known  as  the  Ontario  Student  Achievement  Report,  it  would 
relate  directly  to  the  outcomes  and  standards  of  the  given 
year  or  course  and,  in  all  years,  would  be  used  as  the  main 
vehicle  for  communicating,  to  j>arents  and  students,  informa- 
tion about  the  students  achievements.  UTiilc  school  hoards 
would  not  be  permitted  to  delete  any  part  of  the  OSAR,  they 
could  seek  permi.ssion  from  the  Ministry  to  add  to  it; 


tn 


For  ttw  l^w«  o(  LMmim 


49.  That  the  Ministry  monitor  its  own  assessment  instru- 
ments for  possible  bias,  and  work  with  boards  and  profes- 
sional bodies  to  monitor  other  assessment  instruments;  that 
teachers  be  offered  more  knowledge  and  training  in  detect- 
ing and  eradicating  bias  in  all  aspects  of  assessment;  and  that 
the  Ministry  monitor  the  effects  of  assessment  on  various 
groups; 

50.  That  all  students  be  given  two  uniform  assessments  at 
the  end  of  Grade  3,  one  in  literacy  and  one  in  numeracy, 
based  on  specific  learner  outcomes  and  standards  that  are 
well  known  to  teachers,  parents,  and  to  students  themselves; 

51.  That  the  construction,  administration,  scoring,  and 
reporting  of  the  two  assessments  be  the  responsibility  of  a 
small  agency,  independent  of  the  Ministry  of  Education  and 
Training,  and  operating  at  a  very  senior  level,  to  be  called  the 
Office  of  Learning  Assessment  and  Accountability; 

52.  That  a  literacy  test  be  given  to  students,  which  they  must 
pass  before  receiving  their  secondary  school  diploma; 

53.  That  the  Ministry  continue  to  be  involved  in  and  to 
support  national  and  international  assessments,  and  work  to 
improve  their  calibre; 

54.  That  the  Ministry  develop  detailed,  multi-year  plans  for 
large-scale  assessments  (program  reviews,  examination 
monitoring),  which  establish  the  data  to  be  collected  and  the 
way  implementation  will  be  monitored,  and  report  the 
results  publicly,  and  provide  for  the  interpretation  and  use  of 
results  to  educators  and  to  the  public; 

55.  That,  initially,  and  for  a  five-  to  seven-year  period,  until 
the  process  is  well  established  in  the  school  system  and  in 
the  public  consciousness,  an  independent  accountability 
agency  be  charged  with  implementing  and  reporting  the 
Grades  3  and  1 1  universal  student  assessments.  The  reports 
and  recommendations  of  the  Office  of  Learning  Assessment 
and  Accountability  would  go  directly  to  the  Minister  and  the 
public; 

56.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  in  consul- 
tation with  community  members  and  researchers,  develop  a 
specific  procedure  for  collecting  and  reporting  province- 
wide  data  on  student  achievement  (marks,  and  Grade  3  and 


Grade  II  literacy  test  results)  for  groups  identified  accord- 
ing to  gender,  race,  ethno-cultural  background,  and  socio- 
economic status. 

Chapter  12:  The  Educators 

The  Commission  recommends: 

57.  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; 

58.  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  determin- 
ing 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; 

59.  That  the  College  of  Teachers,  in  close  co-operation  with 
faculties  of  education,  develop  a  framework  for  accrediting 
teacher  preparation  programs  offered  by  Ontario  faculties  of 
education,  and  that  the  College  be  responsible  for  carrying 
out  such  accreditation  processes; 

60.  That  faculties  of  education  and  school  staff  who  super- 
vise student  teachers  be  accountable  for  ensuring  that  those 
recommended  for  Ontario  Teaching  Certificates  have  the 
qualities  required  for  admission  to  the  teaching  profession, 
and  that  those  candidates  who  do  not  show  such  qualities  be 
advised  to  leave  teacher  preparation  programs; 

61.  That  faculties  expand  their  efforts  to  admit  more  student 
teachers  from  previously  under-represented  groups,  includ- 
ing ethno-cultural  and  racial  minorities,  aboriginal  commu- 
nities, and  those  who  are  disabled,  and  that  they  be  account- 
able to  the  College  of  Teachers  for  demonstrating  significant 
progress  toward  achieving  this  objective; 

62.  That  faculties  of  education,  school  boards,  and  teachers' 
federations  develop  joint  programs  to  encourage  more 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Recommendations  to  ttie  Total  Report 


young  people  from  minority  groups  to  consider  teaching  as 
a  career,  and  to  ensure  that  minority  youth  and  adults  inter- 
ested in  teaching  have  opportunities  to  gain  the  necessary 
experience  with  children  and  adolescents; 

63.  That  faculties  of  education  establish  partnership  arrange- 
ments with  selected  school  boards  and  schools  in  the  public, 
Roman  Catholic,  and  French-language  systems  that  agree  to 
work  with  faculties  in  preparing  student  teachers.  In  such 
designated  "professional  development  schools,"  staff  from 
faculties  and  from  the  schools  would  be  jointly  responsible 
for  planning  the  program  and  for  guiding  student  teachers 
through  their  learning; 

64.  That  school  staff  with  responsibility  for  student  teachers 
be  selected  jointly  by  the  faculty  of  education  and  the  school 
principal,  and  that  they  participate  in  a  significant  and  well- 
designed  preparation  program  themselves,  to  ensure  that 
they  have  a  fully  developed  understanding  of  the  process  of 
learning  to  teach,  and  a  shared  understanding  of  the  skills, 
knowledge,  competencies,  and  values  that  beginning  teachers 
should  have; 

65.  That  school  staff  supervising  student  teachers  have 
significant  input  into  recommendations  for  certification; 

66.  That  common  undergraduate  prerequisites  be  established 
for  entry  to  pre-service  teacher  preparation  programs,  with 
decisions  about  specific  prerequisites  to  be  made  by  the 
College  of  Teachers,  with  input  from  faculties  of  education 
and  school  boards; 

67.  That  faculties  of  arts  and  science  be  encouraged  to  work 
with  faculties  of  education  to  develop  suitable  undergradu- 
ate courses,  where  these  do  not  exist,  in  subjects  that  are 
prerequisites  for  entry  to  faculties  of  education; 

68.  That  the  consecutive  program  for  teacher  education  be 
extended  to  two  years,  and  that  one  year  be  added  to  the 
concurrent  program,  and  that  the  Bachelor  of  Education 
degree  be  awarded  on  successful  completion  of  the  two-year 
program  or,  in  the  case  of  the  concurrent  program,  on 
completion  of  the  equivalent  of  the  two-year  education 
program; 

69.  That  the  current  practice-teaching  requisite  of  40  days  be 
replaced  by  a  requirement  that  student  teachers  spend  at 
least  that  much  time  observing  and  working  in  designated 


"professional  development  schools"  during  the  first  year  of 
the  B.Ed,  program,  and  that  they  spend  a  substantial  portion 
(at  least  three  months)  of  the  second  year  working  in 
schools,  under  the  supervision  of  school  staff.  As  well,  a 
similar  requirement  for  students  in  concurrent  programs 
should  be  established  over  the  length  t»t  the  pre-service 
program; 

70.  That  faculties  of  education  recommend  to  the  CA)llege  of 
Teachers  that  those  who  have  been  awarded  B.Ed,  degrees  be 
given  a  provisional  Ontario  Teaching  Certificate; 

71.  That  the  Ontario  Teaching  Certificate  be  made  perma- 
nent on  completion  of  one  year's  teaching  in  Ontario,  on  the 
recommendation  of  a  qualified  principal  or  supervisory  offi- 
cer. However,  this  certification  process  would  he  quite 
distinct  from  the  employing  board's  decision  concerning 
probationary  and  permanent  contracts; 

72.  That  the  College  of  Teachers  develop  a  set  of  criteria  for 
certifying  staff  for  school  readiness  programs,  and  that 
whatever  preparation  and  certification  requirements  are 
adopted,  teachers  in  early  childhood  education  programs 
have  qualifications  equivalent  to  other  teachers,  and  be 
equal  in  status; 

73.  That  the  College  of  Teachers  consider  how  to  recognize 
staff  members  who  arc  currently  licensed  as  early  childhood 
educators  or  certified  primary  teachers  and  who  will  be 
affected  by  the  establishment  of  school  readiness  programs 
for  three-year-olds  in  publicly  funded  schools; 

74.  That  school  boards  be  required  to  provide  appropriate 
and  sustained  professional  support  to  all  first-year  teachers, 
to  case  their  entry  into  full-time  teaching; 

75.  That  mandatory  professional  development  be  required 
for  all  educators  m  the  publicly  funded  school  system,  with 
continuing  certification  every  five  years,  dependent  on  both 
satisfactory  performance  and  participation  in  professional 
development  recognized  by  the  College  of  Teachers; 

76.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  school 
boards,  and  federations,  in  collaboration  with  the  ('ollegc  of 
Teachers,  investigate  and  encourage  various  ways  of  provid- 
ing opportunities  for  professional  renewal  for  teachers  and 
Khool  admini-strators; 


m 


For  Vm  Lov«  o(  Le«m«n( 


77.  That  all  school  boards  make  information  available  to  the 
public  about  their  performance  appraisal  systems,  using 
newsletters  or  other  means,  so  that  students,  parents, 
teachers,  and  the  public  are  aware  of  the  basis  of  perfor- 
mance appraisal  and  the  guidelines  being  followed; 

78.  That  all  school  board  performance  appraisal  systems 
include  provision  for  systematically  and  regularly  seeking 
input  from  students  and  parents  in  regard  to  teaching,  class- 
room, and  school  atmosphere,  and  to  related  matters  about 
which  they  may  have  concerns  or  suggestions; 

79.  That  beginning  teachers  have  an  opportunity  to  get  help- 
ful performance  feedback  from  colleagues  other  than  the 
principal  or  vice-principal,  understanding  that  such  infor- 
mation will  not  be  used  for  decisions  about  permanent 
contracts.  Designated  mentor  teachers  -  or  in  secondary 
schools,  department  heads  -  could  provide  this  assistance; 

80.  That  the  College  of  Teachers,  the  Ministry,  and  school 
boards  emphasize  that  principals  are  accountable  for  satis- 
factory teacher  performance  in  their  schools,  and  that  super- 
visory officers  are  responsible  for  ensuring  that  principals 
take  appropriate  action  in  dealing  with  teachers  whose 
performance  is  not  satisfactory; 

81.  That  the  Ministry,  teachers'  federations,  and  school 
boards  reach  agreement  on  any  changes  required  to  ensure 
that  policies  and  practices  related  to  dismissal  effectively 
balance  the  rights  of  teachers  and  the  rights  of  students; 

82.  That  an  M.Ed,  degree  be  a  requirement  for  appointment 
to  the  position  of  vice-principal  or  principal; 

83.  That  the  provincial  courses  to  prepare  candidates  to 
become  principals  continue,  but  that  these  courses  be  regu- 
larly evaluated,  starting  immediately,  by  an  external  review 
team,  composed  of  practising  principals,  supervisory  offi- 
cers, academics  in  the  field  of  educational  administration, 
and  at  least  one  member  from  outside  Ontario.  The  review 
should  be  rigorous,  to  assess  how  successfully  the  course 
addresses  the  skills  and  knowledge  required,  as  well  as  the 
needs  of  the  system.  Continuation  of  any  courses  would 
depend  on  a  satisfactory  evaluation; 

84.  That  school  boards  create  a  variety  of  structured  experi- 
ences through  which  aspiring  and  junior  administrators  can 


learn  leadership  skills.  Such  experiences  would  include 
internships  or  job  shadowing,  exchanges  outside  the  educa- 
tion field,  secondments  to  a  number  of  different  educational 
settings,  and  organized  rotation  of  vice-principals  to  differ- 
ent schools; 

85.  That  appointment  to  the  position  of  principal  or  vice- 
principal  be  for  a  five-year  term,  continuation  of  the 
appointment  to  depend  on  evidence  of  participation  in,  and 
successful  completion  of,  professional  development 
programs  satisfactory  to  the  employing  school  board,  and  on 
satisfactory  performance; 

86.  That  in  light  of  recent  and  proposed  changes  in  the 
nature  and  organization  of  secondary  school  programs: 

a)  the  role  of  department  head  be  reviewed,  with  a  view 
to  reducing  the  number  of  department  heads  where 
appropriate; 

b)  responsibilities  of  department  heads  include  supervi- 
sion and  evaluation  of  teachers  in  their  departments; 

c)  appropriate  professional  development  be  provided  for 
department  heads; 

87.  That  school  boards  review  the  responsibilities  of  supervi- 
sory officers  in  light  of  the  changes  in  governance  and  orga- 
nization recommended  in  this  report,  with  a  view  to  reduc- 
ing the  number  of  supervisory  officers  as  appropriate,  as 
current  incumbents  retire,  and,  if  necessary,  changing 
responsibilities  assigned  to  supervisory  officers,  as  organiza- 
tional needs  change; 

88.  That  the  Supervisory  Officer  Qualification  Programs 
continue,  but  be  regularly  evaluated,  starting  immediately, 
by  an  independent  review  team,  which  would  include  super- 
visory officers  and  academics  in  educational  administration, 
as  well  as  some  members  from  outside  Ontario.  The  contin- 
uation of  programs  should  depend  on  a  satisfactory  evalua- 
tion from  this  team; 

89.  That  requirements  for  admission  to  the  Supervisory 
Officer  Qualifications  Program  be  adjusted,  to  make  it  possi- 
ble for  school  boards  to  appoint  administrators  from  outside 
Ontario  as  supervisory  officers; 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Recommendations  to  the  Total  Report 


90.  That  schiwl  boards  provide  current  and  aspiring  supervi- 
sory officers  with  increased  opportunities  Jor  varied  experi- 
ences, both  in  and  outside  the  educational  system,  including 
exchange  programs  with  government  and  business; 

91.  That  newly  appointed  supervisory  officers  be  given  a 
minimum  ot  15  days  release  time  during  their  first  year  in 
the  position,  for  participation  in  structured  professional 
development  activities  such  as: 

a)  working  with  other  supervisory  officers  to  increase 
their  understanding  of  their  new  roles; 

b)  taking  part  in  a  study  group  or  series  of  workshops 
with  other  newly  appointed  supervisory  officers; 

92.  That  supervisory  officers  be  appointed  for  a  five-year 
term,  with  a  continuation  of  the  appointment  dependent  on 
successful  participation  in  professional  development 
recognized  by  the  employing  board,  and  on  satisfactory 
performance. 

Chapter  13:  Learning  ,  Teaching  and 
Information  Technology 

The  Commission  recommends: 

93.  That  the  Ministry  be  responsible  for  overseeing  the 
increased  and  effective  use  of  information  technology  in  the 
province's  schools,  and  that  its  role  include 

a)  determining  the  extent  and  nature  of  the  computer- 
related  resources  now  in  use  in  schools  across  Ontario; 

b)  functioning  as  an  information  clearing  house  for  these 
resources,  assuring  that  all  boards  are  privy  to  such 
information,  and  preventing  unnecessary  duplication 
of  effort; 

c)  facilitating  alliances  among  the  Ministry,  school 
boards,  hardware  and  software  firms,  and  the  private 
sector; 

dl  developing  common  standards  jointly  with  system 
partners,  for  producing  and  acquiring  technology; 

e)  developing  license  protocols  that  support  multiple 
remote  users  accessing  centrally  held  software  in  a 
local  area  network  (LAN)  or  wide  area  network 
(WAN)  structure;  and 


f)  co-ordinating  efforts,  including  research  and  special 
projects,  to  refine  effective  educational  assessment 
programs; 

94.  That  school  boards  in  co-operation  with  the  Ministry, 
the  private  sector,  universities,  and  colleges,  initiate  a 
number  of  high-profile  and  diverse  projects  on  school 
computers  and  learning,  to  include  a  major  infusion  of 
computer  hardware  and  software.  I  hese  projects  should 
reflect  the  province's  diversity,  include  a  distinct  and 
comprehensive  evaluation  component,  and  be  used  for 
professional  development,  software  design,  and  policy 
analysis; 

95.  That  the  Minister  approach  colleagues  in  other 
provinces,  through  the  (Council  of  Ministers  of  Education 
of  Canada,  to  establish  a  national  network  of  projects  on 
computers  and  learning,  which  can  inform  teaching  and 
learning  from  sea  to  sea; 

96.  That  the  proposed  College  of  Teachers  require  faculties 
of  education  to  make  knowledge  and  skills  in  the 
educational  use  of  information  technology  an  integral  part 
of  the  curriculum  for  all  new  teachers; 

97.  That  teachers  be  provided  with,  and  partKip.ile  in, 
professional  development  that  will  equip  them  with  the 
knowledge  and  skills  they  need  to  make  appropriate  use 
of  information  technology  in  the  classroom,  and  that 
acquisition  of  such  knowledge  become  a  condition  of 
re-certification; 

98.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  and  the 
Ministry  of  Economic  Development  and  Iradc,  working 
through  learning  consortiums  and  existing  federal  govern- 
ment programs,  co-ordinate  efforts  with  the  Ontario  busi- 
ness community  to  distribute  surplus  computers  through 
Ontario  school  board.s,  and  that,  as  more  computers  are 
introduced  into  the  .school  system,  priority  be  given  to 
equipping  schools  serving  low-income  .imi  Iramo  Ontarian 
tommunities; 

99.  That  the  Ministry  increa.se  the  budget  allocated  for 
purchasing  software  on  behalf  of  school  boards  in  Ontario, 
and  that  it  increase  boards'  flexibility  in  using  funds  to 


174 


For  ttw  Uw*  Of  LMminc 


permit  leasing  or  other  cost-sharing  arrangements,  in  addi- 
tion to  purchasing,  in  acquiring  information  technology 
equipment; 

100.  That  computer  software  and  all  other  electronic 
resources  used  in  education  be  treated  as  teaching  materials 
for  the  purpose  of  Circular  14  assessment  (for  quality, 
balance,  bias,  etc.); 

101.  That  the  Ministry,  with  the  advice  of  educators  in  the 
field,  identify  priority  areas  in  which  Canadian  content  and 
perspective  are  now  lacking; 

102.  That  the  Ministry  exercise  leadership  with  the  Council 
of  Ministers  of  Education  of  Canada  to  initiate  a  program 
promoting  production  of  high-quality  Canadian  educational 
software  by  Canadian  companies  and  other  appropriate 
bodies,  such  as  school  boards,  universities,  and  colleges; 

103.  That  the  Government  of  Ontario,  working  with  school 
boards  and  other  appropriate  agencies,  commit  itself  to 
ensuring  that  every  classroom  in  every  publicly  funded 
school  in  Ontario  is  connected  to  at  least  one  local  computer 
network  and  that,  in  turn,  this  network  is  connected  to  a 
provincial  network,  a  national  network,  and  the  Internet; 

104.  That  school  boards,  in  co-operation  with  government 
ministries  and  appropriate  agencies,  establish  in  neighbour- 
hoods where  personal  computer  access  is  less  likely  to  be 
prevalent  community  computing  centres,  possibly  in  school 
buildings  or  in  public  libraries,  and  provide  on-going  fund- 
ing for  hardware,  software,  and  staffing; 

105.  That  the  Ministry  support  boards  in  pilot  projects  that 
extend  the  opportunity  for  learners  to  access  funded 
programs  and  equipment  outside  the  defined  school  day; 

106.  That  the  Government  of  Ontario  advocate  that  public 
facilities,  such  as  public  libraries  and  schools,  and  such  non- 
profit groups  as  "freenets,"  be  given  guaranteed  access  to  the 
facilities  of  the  electronic  highway  at  an  affordable  cost 
(preferably  free  for  users  of  these  facilities); 

107.  That  the  Ministry  proceed  to  upgrade  Contact  North 
from  an  audio  to  an  interactive  video  network. 


Chapter  14:  Community  Education 

The  Commission  recommends: 

108.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  mandate 
that  each  school  in  Ontario  establish  a  school-community 
council,  with  membership  drawn  from  the  following  sectors: 

-  parents 

-  students  (from  Grade  7  on) 

-  teachers 

-  representatives  from  local  religious  and 
ethnic  communities 

-  service  providers  (government  and  non-government) 

-  municipal  government(s) 

-  service  clubs  and  organizations 

-  business  sectors; 

109.  That  each  school  principal  devise  an  action  plan  for  the 
establishment  and  implementation  of  the  school-community 
council; 

110.  That  school  boards  provide  support  to  principals  to 
establish  and  maintain  school-community  councils  and  that 
the  boards  monitor  the  councils'  progress  and  indicate  the 
progress  in  their  annual  reports; 

111.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training,  teachers' 
federations,  and  school  boards  take  whatever  actions  are 
necessary  to  ensure  that  community  liaison  staff  persons  are 
sufficiently  available  to  assist  principals  in  strengthening 
school-community  linkages.  These  staff,  who  would  not  be 
certified  teachers,  would  be  responsible  for  helping  to  imple- 
ment decisions  and  initiatives  of  the  school-community 
councils  as  well  as  other  school-community  initiatives; 

112.  That  the  Premier  assign  responsibility  for  reforming 
children's  services  to  a  senior  Minister,  in  addition  to  his/her 
regular  portfolio;  and  that  this  senior  Minister  be  supported 
by  an  Interministerial  Committee  of  Ministers  responsible 
for  children's  services;  and  that 

a)  the  Committee  be  assisted  by  permanent  staff; 

b)  the  Committee  include  the  systematic  review  and  revi- 
sion of 

-  service  approaches  taken 

-  quality  of  services  provided 

-  funding  mechanisms 


Vol.  IV  Making  It  Happen      Recommendations  to  the  Total  Report 


-  Icgulation 

-  regional  organization  of  authority 

-  provincial  structures; 

c)  the  Committee  estabhsh,  through  the  regional  offices 
of  the  MET,  a  leadership  and  co-ordinating  plan 
between  the  school  boards  and  the  other  local 
providers  of  services  to  develop  and  help  implement 
the  mechanisms  necessary  to  support  the  work  of 
school-community  councils. 

1 13.  That  the  provincial  government  review  legislative  and 
related  impediments,  and  that  they  develop  a  policy  frame- 
work for  collaboration  to  facilitate  partnerships  between 
community  and  schools; 

1 14.  That  the  Interministerial  Committee  of  Ministers, 
under  the  senior  minister  responsible,  as  its  first  task  set  a 
sustainable  timeline  for  implemcntatinp  community  part- 
nership, policies,  and  mechanisms,  with  specific  points  for 
reporting  and  disseminating  the  results  of  the  efforts. 

Chapter  15:  Constitutional  Issues 

The  Commission  recommends: 

115.  That  section  136,  which  restricts  preferential  hiring  in 
the  Roman  Catholic  school  system,  be  removed  from  the 
Education  Act; 

1 16.  That,  with  reference  to  the  role  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
education  system,  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training 
ensure  appropriate  and  influential  representation  from  the 
Roman  Catholic  education  system  at  all  levels  of  its  profes- 
sional and  managerial  staff,  up  to  and  including  that  of 
Assistant  Deputy  Minister;  and  that  the  Minister  establish  a 
Roman  Catholic  Education  Policy  and  Programs  Team  or 
branch  in  the  Ministry; 

117.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  and  the 
faculties  of  education  establish  a  pre-service  credit  course  in 
the  foundations  of  Roman  Catholic  education,  and  that  this 
course  be  available  at  all  faculties  of  education  in  Ontario; 

1 18.  That  the  religious  education  courses  currently  offered  at 
faculties  of  education  receive  full  credit  status  and  be  made 
part  of  the  regular  academic  program: 


1 19.  That,  with  reference  to  the  admission  of  non-righthold- 
ers  to  French-language  schools: 

a)  the  Minister  of  Education  and  Training  give  the 
CEFFO  a  mandate  in  consultation  with  school  boards, 
to  propose  and  ensure  the  adoption  of  uniform  crite- 
ria for  the  admission  of  "non-rightholders"  or  their 
children; 

b)  the  Ministry  of  hdiajtion  and  Training  require 
school  boards  to  assume  responsibility  for  making 
information  about  these  criteria  available  to  the 
relevant  communities,  particularly  ethno-cultural 
communities; 

c)  the  composition  of  committees  to  admit  non- 
rightholders  or  their  children  include  one  or  more 
Franco-Ontarian  parents  and  one  or  more  parents 
from  ethno-cultural  communities; 

120.  That  the  Ontario  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training 
give  the  Conseil  dc  I'education  et  de  la  formation  Iranco- 
ontariennes  (CEFFO)  the  mandate  to  recommend  to  the 
Ministry,  as  soon  as  possible  and  on  the  basis  of  existing 
documents,  school  governance  model(s)  by  and  for 
francophones,  encompassing  education  from  preschool  to 
the  end  of  secondary  school  without,  however,  seeking  to 
define  structures  that  arc  administratively  symmetrical  to 
those  of  the  English-language  system;  and  that  the  govern- 
ment, through  the  Ontario  Ministry  of  Education  and  Train- 
ing, approve  and  diligently  implement  the  recommendations 
submitted  by  the  CEFFO  with  respect  to  school  governance 
by  and  for  francophones; 

121.  That  funding  by  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Train- 
ing automatically  mcludc  among  its  calculation  of  grants 
and  weighting  factors,  for  all  French-language  instructional 
units,  the  budgetary  supplements  required  to  allow  these 
units  to  offer,  according  to  the  needs  identified  by  the 
community: 

a)  accelerated  language  retrieval  programs  (designed  for 
recovery,  actualization,  and  skill  and  deveU)pment); 
and 

b)  the  necessary  animation  cullurcllc  in  classes  and 
schools; 


For  Vtt  La^  o(  Uamtnf 


122.  That  for  the  early  childhood  education  programs  (chil- 
dren age  3  to  5),  one  of  our  key  recommendations  in  Chap- 
ter 7,  the  provincial  government  give  priority  funding  to 
French -language  instructional  units  over  every  other  school; 

123.  That  rather  than  having  the  two  levels  of  government 
work  independently  of  each  other,  and  in  order  to  avoid 
duplication,  the  Government  of  Canada  and  the  Govern- 
ment of  Ontario  jointly  fund  for  use  in  both  on-reserve 
schools  and  schools  under  provincial  jurisdiction,  the  devel- 
opment of  curriculum  guidelines  and  resource  materials  that 
more  accurately  reflect  the  history  of  Canada's  aboriginal 
people  and  their  contribution  to  Canada's  literature,  culture, 
history,  and  values,  and  in  other  areas  to  be  incorporated 
throughout  the  curriculum; 

124.  That  the  Governments  of  Canada  and  Ontario  jointly 
fund  the  development  of  assessment  and  teaching  strategies 
that  are  more  sensitive  to  the  learning  styles  identified  by 
aboriginal  educators; 

125.  That  the  federal  and  provincial  governments  work  with 
Native  education  authorities  and  the  First  Nations  to 
provide  better  support  to  students  who  must  live  away  from 
their  communities  to  obtain  elementary  and/or  secondary 
education; 

126.  That  the  federal  government  review  its  method  of  fund- 
ing education  for  Native  students  in  on-reserve  schools  to 
ensure  there  are  adequate  funds  to  provide  any  necessary 
special  programs  to  support  aboriginal  education  and  for 
professional  support  of  teachers; 

127.  That  the  province  include  in  its  requirements  for  pre- 
service  and  in-service  teacher  education  a  component  relat- 
ed to  teaching  aboriginal  students  and  teaching  about 
aboriginal  issues  to  both  Native  and  non-Native  students; 

128.  That  the  federal  government,  which  has  responsibility 
in  this  field,  give  top  priority  to  ensuring  the  availability  of 
good  telecommunications  throughout  Ontario  in  order  to 
support  education  through  the  use  of  interactive  video  and 
computer  networking; 


129.  That  both  the  federal  and  provincial  governments 
provide  resources  to  support  the  development  of  courses, 
initially  video-  and  CD-ROM-based,  that  would  use  interac- 
tive technology  when  an  adequate  telecommunication  infra- 
structure is  in  place; 

130.  That  the  federal  government  provide  assistance  to 
aboriginal  peoples  to  develop  language  teaching  resources 
co-operatively  with  communities  that  use  the  same 
languages,  in  other  provinces  and  in  the  United  States; 

131.  That  the  province,  in  co-operation  with  First  Nations 
communities  and  school  boards,  develop  guidelines  for 
permitting  the  use  of  Native  languages  as  languages  of 
instruction,  where  teachers  and  teaching  resources  are 
available; 

132.  That  the  provincial  and  federal  governments  continue 
their  programs  to  develop  resource  materials  that  support 
the  teaching  of  Native  languages  and  culture  for  teacher  in- 
service  and  for  classroom  use  in  on-  and  off-reserve  schools, 
providing  such  materials  are  made  available  to  other  boards 
and  schools; 

133.  That  the  Ministry  and  the  representatives  of  the  First 
Nations  review  the  Declaration  of  Political  Intent  proposal 
on  Native  trustee  representation,  taking  into  account  possi- 
ble changes  in  overall  board  structures  that  could  follow  the 
issue  of  this  report,  and  that  at  the  earliest  opportunity  the 
parties  implement  the  agreement  that  results; 

134.  That  the  federal  and  provincial  governments  continue 
negotiations  that  lead  to  full  self-governance  of  education  by 
the  First  Nations; 

135.  That  the  province  develop  a  different  way  of  dealing 
with  band-operated  elementary  and  secondary  schools  than 
it  now  has.  Such  a  method  would: 

a)  recognize  that  they  are  publicly  funded  schools  of  a 
First  Nation,  governed  by  a  duly  constituted  education 
authority;  and 

b)  permit  more  reciprocity  and  co-operation  with 
provincial  school  boards. 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Recommendations  to  the  Total  Report 


Chapter  16:  Equity  Considerations 


Chapter  17:  Organizing  education 


The  Commission  recommends; 

136.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  always 
have  an  Assistant  Deputy  Minister  responsible,  in  addition 
to  other  duties,  for  advocacy  on  behalf  of  anglophone, 
francophone,  ethno-cultural  and  racial  minorities; 

137.  That  trustees,  educators,  and  support  staff  be  provided 
with  professional  development  in  anti-racism  education; 

138.  That  the  performance  management  process  for  supcrvi 
scry  officers,  principals,  and  teachers  specifically  include 
measurable  outcomes  related  directly  to  anti-racism  policies 
and  plans  of  the  .Ministry  and  the  school  boards; 

139.  That,  for  the  purposes  of  the  anti-racism  and  ethno 
cultural  equity  provisions  of  Bill  21,  the  Ministry  of  F.duca- 
tion  and  Training  require  boards  and  schools  to  seek  input 
from  parents  and  community  members  in  implementing 
and  monitoring  the  plans.  This  process  should  be  linked  to 
the  overall  school  and  board  accountability  mechanisms; 

140.  That  the  Ministry  and  school  boards  systematically 
review  and  monitor  teaching  materials  of  all  types  (texts, 
reading  materials,  videos,  software,  etc.).  as  well  as  teaching 
practices,  educational  programs  (curriculum),  and  assess- 
ment tools  to  ensure  that  they  are  free  of  racism  and  meet 
the  spirit  and  letter  of  anti-racism  policies; 

141.  That  in  jurisdictions  with  large  numbers  of  black 
students,  school  boards,  academic  authorities,  faculties  of 
education,  and  representatives  of  the  black  community 
collaborate  to  establish  demonstration  schools  and  inno- 
vative programs  based  on  best  practices  in  bringing  about 
academic  success  for  black  students; 

142.  That  whenever  there  are  indications  of  collective  under 
achievement  in  any  particular  group  of  students,  school 
boards  ensure  that  teachers  and  principals  have  the  neces- 
sary strategies  and  human  and  financial  resources  to  help 
these  students  improve. 


The  Commission  recommends: 

143.  That  all  boards  have  at  least  one  student  member,  enti- 
tled to  vote  on  all  board  matters,  subject  to  the  usual 
conflict-of-interest  and  legal  requirements; 

144.  That  student  councils  be  given  the  responsibility  for 
organizing  students'  views  on  all  aspects  of  school  life,  and 
for  transmitting  these  views  to  teachers  and  principals  with 
responses  sent  back  to  students  in  a  systematic  way,  and  that 
thcv  provide  advice  to  student  trustees; 

145.  That  the  .Minister  of  Hducation  and  Training  establish  a 
Student  and  Youth  Council,  to  advise  on  all  educational 
matters,  to  seek  further  ways  to  involve  students  in  decisions 
that  affect  their  lives,  and  to  sponsor  research  about  what 
students  can  do  to  improve  learning  in  schools; 

146.  That  the  Ministry  organize  a  collaborative  process  for 
developing  a  Students'  Charter  of  Rights  and  Responsibili- 
ties, and  that  the  process  include  a  significant  role  for 
students.  The  essential  elements  of  such  a  charter  must 
include  a  description  of  the  kind  of  information  a  student  is 
entitled  to  receive,  the  programs  and  services  to  which  a 
student  is  entitled,  the  responsibilities  a  student  is  expected 
to  accept,  the  role  that  students  are  entitled  to  play  in  the 
decisions  made  in  the  system,  and  the  recourse  available  if 
students  feel  that  their  rights  have  not  been  upheld; 

147.  That  students  be  involved  in  developing  and  regularly 
reviewing  codes  of  behaviour  and  other  selected  policies  and 
procedures  that  flow  from  the  Students'  Charter  of  Rights 
and  Responsibilities  at  both  board  and  school  levels.  These 
policies  and  procedures  may  not  take  away  from  the  rights 
and  responsibilities  specified  in  the  charter; 

148.  That  information  about  the  students'  charter  and  all 
policies  and  procedures  that  directly  affect  students  be  made 
available  to  all  students  in  a  way  most  students  can  readily 
understand; 

149.  That  the  Ministry  phase  in  a  policy  requiring  school 
hoards  to  turn  over  an  increasingly  significant  portion  of  the 
school  budget  to  principals,  on  the  t<mdilion  that  the  school 
have  a  school  grov^th  plan;  that  this  plan  be  monitored  by 
the  board;  that  teachers  participate  in  decisionmaking 
concerning  curriculum.  a.ssessment,  professional  develop- 


iia 


For  th«  Lo«*  or  tMming 


merit,  and  staffing;  and  that  the  school  demonstrate  how  it 
reaches  out  to  students,  parents,  and  the  community; 

150.  That  a  Parents'  Charter  of  Rights  and  Responsibilities 
be  developed  at  the  provincial  level  as  a  result  of  collabora- 
tion among  parents,  teachers,  administrators,  and  political 
decision-makers; 

151.  That  parents  be  involved  in  developing  student  codes  of 
behaviour,  and  other  policies  and  procedures  that  flow  from 
the  Students'  and  Parents'  Charter  of  Rights  and  Responsi- 
bilities at  both  board  and  school  levels; 

152.  That  information  about  the  students'  and  parents'  char- 
ters and  all  policies  and  procedures  that  directly  affect 
students  and  parents  be  readily  available  to  parents; 

153.  That  all  schools  in  Ontario  be  accountable  for  demon- 
strating the  ways  in  which  they  have  strengthened  parents' 
involvement  in  their  children's  school  learning; 

154.  That  the  Minister  of  Education  and  Training,  in  consul- 
tation with  the  provincial  trustees'  associations,  review  and 
revise  the  legislation  and  regulations  governing  education,  in 
order  to  clarify  the  policy-making,  as  distinct  from  the  oper- 
ational, responsibilities  of  school  board  trustees; 

155.  That  the  Ministry  set  a  scale  of  honoraria  for  trustees, 
with  a  maximum  of  $20,000  per  annum; 

156.  That  following  the  proposed  shift  to  the  provincial 
government  of  the  responsibility  for  determining  the  fund- 
ing of  education,  the  two-tiered  governance  structure  of  the 
public  schools  in  Metropolitan  Toronto  be  phased  out,  with 
the  Metropolitan  Toronto  School  Board  being  replaced  by  an 
administrative  consortium  of  school  boards  in  the  Metro- 
politan Toronto  area; 

157.  That  the  Ministry  clearly  set  out  its  leadership  and 
management  roles,  especially  in  relation  to  school  boards, 
teacher  federations,  and  faculties  of  education,  and  that  it 
develop  a  plan  for  more  complete  communication  with  all 
those  interested  in  elementary  and  secondary  education; 

158.  That,  in  order  to  maximize  their  influence  within  the 
Ministry,  assistant  deputy  ministers  representing  particular 
constituencies  be  placed  in  charge  of  the  portfolio  of  issues 
related  to  their  respective  constituencies,  as  well  as  being 


responsible  for  other  important  dossiers  related  to  education 
for  all  Ontarians; 

Chapter  18:  Funding 

The  Commission  recommends: 

159.  That  equal  per-pupil  funding  across  the  province,  as 
well  as  additional  money  needed  by  some  school  boards  for 
true  equity,  be  decided  at  the  provincial  level,  and  that  the 
province  ensure  that  funds  be  properly  allocated; 

160.  That  boards  be  allowed  to  raise  a  further  sum,  no 
greater  than  10  percent  of  their  provincially  determined 
budget,  from  residential  assessment  only; 

161.  That  all  residential  property  owners  be  required  to 
direct  their  taxes  to  the  school  system  they  are  entitled  to 
and  wish  to  support,  and  that  undirected  taxes  be  pooled 
and  distributed  on  a  per-pupil  basis; 

162.  That  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  first 
decide  what  it  considers  to  be  an  adequate  educational 
program  for  the  province,  and  then  determine  the  cost  of 
delivering  this  program  in  various  areas  of  the  province, 
taking  into  account  different  student  needs  and  varying 
community  characteristics,  such  as  geography,  poverty  rates, 
and  language,  that  affect  education  costs. 

Chapter  19:  The  Accountability  of  the  System 

The  Commission  recommends: 

163.  That  the  government  establish  an  Office  of  Learning 
Assessment  and  Accountability,  reporting  to  the  Legislature. 
Its  first  responsibility  would  be  the  Grades  3  and  1 1  system- 
wide,  every-student  assessments  (Cf  Rec.  51); 

164.  That  the  Office  of  Learning  Assessment  and  Account- 
ability also  be  responsible  for  developing  indicators  of 
system  performance,  to  be  used  at  the  board  and  provincial 
levels; 

165.  That  the  Office  of  Learning  Assessment  and  Account- 
ability, working  with  education  stakeholders,  also  establish 
guidelines  for  the  content  of  annual  reports  prepared  by 
school  boards  and  by  the  Minister  of  Education  and  Train- 
ing. Further,  we  recommend  that: 


Vol.  IV   Making  It  Happen      Recommendations  to  the  Total  Report 


a)  thcvr  reports  be  published  and  be  freely  and  widely  Chapter  20:  Implamenting  the  Reforms 

available  in  schools  and  community  lucatiuns;  ^^      „ 

The  Commisbiof!  fetomineiKJb. 

b)  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  ensure  that  all  167.  That  an  Implementation  Commission  be  established  to 
school  boards  be  informed  of  guidelines  for  the  oversee  the  implementation  of  the  recommendations  made 
reports,  and  that  they  follow  those  guidelines;  by  the  Royal  Commission  on  Learning. 

166.  That  the  work  and  mandate  of  the  Office  of  Learning 
Asseument  and  Accountability  be  reviewed  in  five  years. 


For  ttw  Low  of  Uamtni 


^ 


For  the  Love  of 
Learning:  Appendices 
An  Introduction 


In  these  six  appendices,  we  gratefully 
acknowledge  the  contributions  of  a  broad  range 
of  people  who  were  instrumental  in  helping  to 
shape  this  report. 

Their  passion  and  commitment  to  publicly  funded 
education  cannot  be  reflected  in  mere  lists. 

Still,  we  believe  that  to  name  them  is  to  honour 
them:  the  educators,  parents,  citizen  groups,  and 
others  who  made  oral  and  written  submissions, 
the  students  and  youth  we  spoke  with  in  our 
youth-outreach  strategy,  the  individuals  who 
shared  their  specialized  expertise,  the  scholars 
who  wrote  papers  on  the  more  vexing  problems 
before  us,  and  the  many  educators  and  students 
who  welcomed  us  to  dozens  of  schools  during 
our  travels  over  the  autumn  and  winter  roads 
of  Ontario. 


Appendix  A  lists  groups  and  individuals  who  made 
their  views  known  -  who  made  oral  or  written 
submissions  -  to  the  Commission.  We  were 
astonished  and  delighted  by  the  number  of  Ontarians  who 
took  the  time  to  either  come  to  the  public  hearings  or 
submit  a  written  brief  (and  in  many  cases,  both). 
Presentations  were  made  by  educators,  parents,  citizen 
groups,  and  others.  We  heard  from  communities  based  on 
geography,  religion,  culture,  language,  and  interest.  Student 
submitters  are  listed  in  Appendix  B,  not  in  Appendix  A. 

Appendix  B  identifies  all  students  and  other  young 
people  who  talked  with  the  Commission  as  part  of  our 
youth-outreach  strategy,  both  individually  and  through 
youth  organizations.  As  part  ,of  the  Commission's  efforts  to 
consult  with  young  people,  outreach  activities  were 
organized  across  Ontario.  In  addition  to  encouraging 
student  participation  in  the  public  hearings,  we  sought  the 
views  of  young  people  who  were  not  in  school.  Sessions  were 
held  in  shopping  malls,  detention  centres,  community 
centres,  and  other  agencies.  The  presentations  at  public 
hearings  and  the  non-school  sites  visited  during  the  youth 
outreach  program  are  listed. 

Appendix  C  lists  those  who,  in  response  to  requests  from 
the  Commission,  contributed  their  expertise  to  our  work. 
The  range  of  their  contributions  is  impressive  -  university 
professors  and  other  researchers  talked  and  wrote  about 
their  research;  practising  educators  reflected  on  their 
experience  and  what  implications  there  might  be  for  policy; 
those  who  had  conducted  other  inquiries  into  education  and 
related  issues,  in  Ontario  and  elsewhere,  generously  shared 


their  perspectives.  We  have  indicated  those  who  are  from 
outside  Ontario.  We  also  consulted,  in  an  official  capacity, 
representatives  from  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training 
and  others  from  provincial  government.  In  other  cases, 
provincial  employees  provided  necessary  background 
information  to  inform  our  work.  The  report  benefited  from 
the  efforts  of  all  these  people,  but  they  bear  no  responsibiity 
for  any  weaknesses  it  might  have.  We  apologize  to  any  who 
have  inadvertently  been  omitted  from  our  list. 

Appendix  D  gives  the  schedule  for  the  most  publicly 
visible  facet  of  the  Commission's  work,  the  public  hearings. 
Over  a  period  of  three  months  in  the  fall  of  1993,  the 
Commission  sat  in  school  auditoriums  across  the  province, 
hearing  from  hundreds  upon  hundreds  of  Ontarians  who 
took  the  opportunity  to  make  their  views  known. 

In  Appendix  E,  we  name  the  schools  visited  by 
Commissioners  during  the  course  of  the  deliberations. 
Commissioners  spent  anywhere  from  an  afternoon  to  several 
days  in  each  school,  hearing  the  views  of  students,  staff,  and 
parents. 

Appendix  F  provides  the  titles  of  the  background  papers 
prepared  for  the  Commission  under  contract.  These  papers 
will  be  made  available  to  the  academic  community,  and  to 
any  others  interested  in  reviewing  them,  in  two  volumes,  one 
for  English-language  papers,  the  other  for  French-language 
papers.  In  most  cases,  these  papers  summarize  and  review 
research  in  a  particular  area,  and  outline  policy  implications 
of  the  research. 

Finally,  brief  biographies  of  the  five  Commissioners, 
Monique  Begin,  Gerald  Caplan,  Manisha  Bharti,  Avis  Glaze, 
and  Dennis  Murphy,  are  given  in  Appendix  G. 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


Appendix  A:  Submitters 


Anvxnc  wi^iny  u>  Jk:>.ru  the 
tubmiuioiu  and  mnrds  u(  ihr 
Ri»~4l  (!otnmtMH>n  un  learning 
ihuuld  t.untact  the  Rrvordi 
ManagrmenI  L'nit  ur  (he 
Freedom  oC  lnfunnatu>n  and 
Privacy  Oflke  of  ihe  Ministry  of 
Education  and  Training.  The 
records  will  be  retained  there  for 
three  years  and  then 
periTvanently  stored  at  the 
Archives  of  Ontario. 

Abbott.  Beverly/ Abbott.  Murray 

Abongiival  Women  Solidarity  of 
Mushkcgowuk 

Abthcz.  Charles,  Toronto 

Acad^mie  b  Pin^de,  Comity  de 
parents  BFC  Borden 

Acheson,  Gis^,  Navan 

Advrman.  Robert  H.,  Guelph 

Action  Centre  for  Social  Justice 

Actrve  Living  AlliatKe  of 
Ontario,  Toronto 

Ad  Hoc  (u>mminee  of  the  V.I. P. 
(Values,  InfluciKes  &  Peers) 
Program 

Adam  Scott  (>>llegute 
Vocational  Institute.  stiKlcnts, 
Pttrrboroufh 

Adamv  Karen,  RuhmonJ  flitl 

Addison,  Bill 

Addison  PuMk  School.  Addison 
School  CxNnmittee.  Additon 

Administrators  of  Medium-sued 
PuMk  LibrarvTA  ,.f  ( >nijr... 
Whttby 

Aduh  BasK  IdiKalHin 
AiMKialioti  nf  Hamihon- 
Wentworth 


Adult  Day  School  of  St.  loiephV 
Scullard  Hall.  Sorth  Bay 

Advanced  Coronary  Treatment 
Foundation/Ottawa  (general 
Hospital,  Base  Hospital  Program, 
OrtiiHtj 

Ackema,  (Mrs.)  M.  W..  Agtncourt 

African  Canadian  Organization, 
Scarborough 

African  Heritage  Educators' 
Network 

Ageda,  Belinda/Campbell, 
Brenda/Hanson,  Tom 

Aggarwal,  Saryu/Dunlnp, 
Chantellc 

Agincourt  Collegiate,  Music 
Parents'  Association,  Agincourt 

Aldrich,  Ray 

Aldridge.  Norma  Jean,  Simcot 

Alexander  Henry  High  School 

Alexander  Kuska  Parent  Group 

Algoma  District  Municipal 
Association 

Algonquin  College  of  Applied 
Arts  &  Technology.  School  of 
Businevs.  Retail  students.  Septan 

Algonquin  College  of  Applied 
Arts  &  Technology.  Academic 
Council 

Ali.S. 

Allan,  Marilyn 

Allan.  Richard  I 

Allen.  Betty 

Allen.  H..  WiltowdaU 

Allergy  &  Environmental  Health 
Association/Parents  for 
F.ducation  without  Pollution. 
Sfpran 


Alliance  for  Fxlucational  Kcnrwal 
hJobicokt 

Alliance  of  Trinidad  &  Tobago 
Alumni.  5ciirborouj;/i 

Alpha-Toronto,  Toronto 

Ambs,  Dale 

Amenta,  Salvatorc  A.,  Hon  MitU 

Amyutte,  Mireille/Cot<. 
Andreanne 

Anderson,  Percy/Brown, 
Riel/Gasparclli,  Rosanna 

Andr<,  Deborah,  .Sf.  George- 
Brant 

Anglican  Church  of  Canada, 
Ecclesiastical  Province  of 
Ontario,  London 

Anishinabek  C^irccr  Centre 

Annett,  loannc,  Bolhwell 

Anstey,  Sandra,  Toronto 

Anti-Racist  Multicultural 
Fxlucators'  Network  of  Ontario 
{ AM  f. HO),  Kitchener 

Alternative  Parent  Participating 
Ixindon  Elementary  (APPLE) 
Program,  Ijondon 

Applied  Scholastics  Canada, 
Toronto 

Apse,  Inta,  Oxford  Mills 

Archdiocese  of  Ottawa.  Ollawu 

Ana,  Rata 

Armenian,  Aiken.  Scarborough 

Armstrong,  G.  Grant,  Trenton 

Armstrong,  S.  W.,  Ingletide 

Arnold,  ludy,  Ijimbelh 

Arnold,  Ixona,  KIcKrrrow 

Arnold,  Marie,  Shelhurnr 


Art  (iailery  of  Ontario,  Toronto 

Arts  Education  Council  of 
Ontario,  North  York 

Ash,  Larry 

Ashroff,  Khazeena/Mohammad, 
Kalima,  Mininauga 

Aslanidis,  Christos,  Scarborough 

AsNcnibl^  dcs  centres  cuhurcls 
dc  I'Ontario,  Vanier 

Association  canadirnnr  frani;aise 
dc  {'Ontario  -  regional 
Hamilton,  Hamilton 

Assixiation  canadienne-fran^aise 
dc  I'Ontario  -  Huronie, 
I'eneianguiihene 

Association  canadienne-fran^ise 
de  I'Ontario  du  grand  Sudbury/ 
Alliance  pour  ics  colleges 
francophones  de  I'Ontario 

Ass<Kiation  canadiennc-fran^aise 
dc  I'Ontario,  Vanier 

AsscKiation  canadienne-fran^aise 
de  I'Ontario,  Conscil  regional  de 
Uindon-Sarnia 

Association  canadicnne-fran^aise 
dc  I'Ontario,  R^ionalc  de  la 
communaut^  urbainc  dc 
Toronto 

Association  canadicnnc-fran^aisc 
dc  rOnlario,  (!^nscil  r^ional 
dcs  Milles-lles,  Kingston 

Ass<Kiation  canadiennc-fran^iie 
dc  I'Ontario,  Oinseil  r^ional 
Ottawa-Cjrieton,  Vanier 

Association  de  parents  de  I'toilc 
Monseigneur  dc  l^val 

AtuKialion  dcs  agcnies  et  des 
agents  dc  supervuion  franco 
onlaricns  (ASFO) 


For  Vm  L0M  o<  Laammg 


Association  des  Chefs, 
enseignantes  et  enseignants  de 
commerce  de  I'Ontario,  Sudbury 

Association  des  directeurs  des 
d^partements  d'etudes  £ran<;:aises 
des  universites  de  I'Ontario, 
Guelph 

Association  des  directrices  et  des 
directeurs  d'ecole  et  de  service 
du  secondaire  d'Ottawa-Carleton 
(ADSOC),  Ottawa 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  responsables  de 
sports  inter-scolaires  (SPORT 
CfiPOC),  Vanier 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
unite  secondaire  de  Kirkland 
Lake,  Kirkland  Lake 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
unite  Kiridand  Lake- 
Timiskaming,  New  Liskeard 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
section  secondaire  publique 
(Niagara  Sud) 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
unite  Timmins  elementaire 
separee,  Timmins 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
unite  Sudbury  separee,  Sudbury 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
secteur  secondaire  publique, 
Sudbury 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens 


Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
unite  Rive-Nord  secondaire 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
unite  Renfrew  secondaire, 
Pembroke 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
Essex  elementaire  catholique, 

Windsor 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens 
d'Ottawa-Carleton  (CSLF, 
Section  catholique,  Palier 
elementaire),  Ottawa 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
unite  Lambton  secondaire 
catholique,  Sarnia 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
unite  Wellingto,  Guelph 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
unite  elementaire  publique 
d'Ottawa-Carlton 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
unite  secondaire  catholique 
Ottawa-Carleton,  Comite  de 
perfectionnement  professionnel, 
Ottawa 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
unite  regionale,  Nipissing 
elementaire 

Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco-ontariens, 
unite  Stormont,  Dundas  et 
Glengarry  secondaire 


Association  des  enseignantes  et 
des  enseignants  franco- 
ontariens,  unite  Nipissing 
secondaire.  Sturgeon  Falls 

Association  des  francophones  du 
Nord-Ouest  de  I'Ontario, 
Thunder  Bay 

Association  for  Bright  Children, 
Bruce  County  Chapter, 

Kincardine 

Association  for  Bright  Children, 
Markham  Chapter 

Association  for  Bright  Children 
of  Ontario,  Toronto 

Association  for  Bright  Children, 
North  York  Chapter 

Association  for  Bright  Children, 
Ottawa  Region 

Association  for  Bright  Children, 
Renfrew  County  Chapter,  Deep 
River 

Association  for  Choices  in 
Learning,  Ottawa 

Association  for  Media  & 
Technology  in  Education  in 
Canada  (AMTEC),  Ottawa 

Association  for  Media  Literacy, 
Weston 

Association  Foyer-Jeunesse 

Association  franc^aise  des  conseils 
scolaires  de  I'Ontario,  Region 
no.  1  (est),  Ottawa 

Association  fran(;aise  des  conseils 
scolaires  de  I'Ontario,  Region 
no.  4 

Association  fran(;aise  des  conseils 
scolaires  de  I'Ontario 

Association  franco-ontarienne 
des  conseils  d'ecoles  catholiques, 
Sudbury 


Association  franco-ontarienne 
en  education  technologique 

Association  francophone  des 
conseilleres  et  des  conseillers 
pedagogiques  de  I'Ontario, 
Oshawa 

Association  interculturelle 
franco-ontarienne,  Toronto 

Association  nationale  des 
editeurs  de  livres,  Montreal 

Association  of  Career  Centres  in 
Education  Settings,  Etobicoke 

Association  of  Chief 
Psychologists  with  Ontario 
School  Boards 

Association  of  Colleges  of 
Applied  Arts  &  Technology, 
Toronto 

Association  of  Educational 
Research  Officers  of  Ontario 

Association  of  Iroquois  & 
Allied  Indians,  London 

Association  of  Peel  Secondary 
School  Teacher-Librarians, 
Mississauga 

Association  ontarienne  de 
I'education  alternative.  Sturgeon 
Falls 

Association  ontaroise  des 
responsables  en  animation 
culturelle,  Unionville 

Association  regionale  de  parents 
de  Prescott-Russell,  Russell 

Atell,  Mary  Anne  S.,  Toronto 

Atfield,  Louise,  Deep  River 

Atfield,  Michael  D.,  Deep  River 

Atikokan  Board  of  Education, 
Atikokan 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


Aiikulun  Hoin«  &  Publh:  S*:htH>l 
AiMXMtion.  Alikpkan 

Atikokan  Public  Libfary. 
Rr^ing  Plu»  Progrwn.  Attkokan 

Alikukan  Women  Tcathcn' 
Auoculion.  Mikijiitn 

Aikin.  lohn 

Alkinson,  ludy.  Afox 

AlwatCT.  R.  C  Off<n*u 

Auchiiuchie,  Gwcn.  Brantfonl 

Aurura  Publii  Ubriry  Board. 
Aurora 

Autum  Society  Onurio, 
WiUowdaU 

Autism  Society  Onuria 
Hamihon  Wentworth  Chapter/ 
liKludc  Our  Children.  OunJas 

Autism  Society  Ontario,  Metro 
Toronto  (liapter.  Eiotneokt 

Aylan- Parker.  Ted.  (MUtUmia 

AMem.  Iffat,  Markham 

B'Nai  Briih  Canada.  League  for 
Human  Rights.  [Mfwntyiew 

Baphaw,  lean.  HunlmlU 

Rahlicda.  Robert  A.,  Newmarket 

Baier.  Mardelle.  Brantford 

Bailey,  N..  fViinjfrvi/t 

Baily.  lohn  M..  Don  MiUs 

Baird.  Ketth/Baird.  Florence. 
Burlinflon 

Bamociy,  Maruu  Toronto 

B«kcr.  Oiflbrd.  St.  CMthartnn 

Baker.  L  S..  OrM*.. 

Baker,  John  E-.  Prterborouth 

Baker.  Waher 

Bank,  leannc.  Brampton 


Banks,  lean  Marie.  Hamilton 

Barbeau.  Edward  I.,  Toronto 

Barel.  Conny.  Komokix 

Barker.  Kathryn  Chang.  Onati-n 

Barker,  Paul.  London 

Barker.  Sandra.  Elobkoke 

Barnes.  Margaret  L/Barnes,  leff. 
liuelph 

Baron.  Patricia  K..  Ancaster 

Barrette,  Louiselle,  Orleans 

Barne  Eastview  Secondary 
School.  OAC  Phviical  Education 
CJass,  Barrie 

Baster,  lohn,  Belleville 

Bates,  lohn 

Baxter,  (Dr.)  Stephen. 
Peterborough 

Baxter.  Carol.  Fergus 

Bay  Area  ArU  Cxillectivr. 
Hamilton 

Bay  Wellness  Centre.  North  Bay 

Baylen,  Hcrmine,  Toronto 

Bayvirw  Glen  Church,  Thomhill 

Bayview  Public  School.  Bayview 
School  (^immunity  Ouncil 
Midland 

Bayview  Public  School.  Parents' 
Advisory  (>»mmittce 

Bazylinski.  I.  L.  Pefferlaw 

Beal.  Pmny 

Beaton,  Brian.  Suuw  Ivokoui 

Beatsnn.  Barbara,  Waterloo 

Beauchamp,  hliane 

Beauchamp.  Michcl/Forgues. 
Oicar/Prevnst.  f  roficr 


Beaudry.  Emile/Daigle.  Brigitte 

Bedggood.  Susan 

Beer,  Charles 

Behrcr,  Unet 

Bclanger,  William  A.,  Ottawa 

B^langcr.  Nancy/Bergcvin. 
PalrickyUmoureux.  lacques 

Bell,  Donald  B..  Kanaia 

Bell.  Ron.  Kitchener 

Bellau.  Wallace 

Bencze,  |.  Larry 

Bennett.  (Dr.)  Paul,  Thomhill 

Bennett,  Leslie  ).,  Pike  Bay 

Bennett.  Mary.  Pickering 

Benoit.  Beth.  Hamilton 

Bentlcy,  Nancy 

Bergauer-Free.  Christiannc 

Berger-Pluvoise.  Maric-los^. 
Gloucester 

Bergeron,  Ron 

Bergcvin-Holock,  Rose.  Nepean 

Bergson,  Sheldon.  Thomhill 

Bernard  Betel  Centre  for 
Creative  Living 

Bernard,  leanne.  Hamilton 

Bernier.  Mark  V..  Scarborough 

Bernofsky.  Linda.  Thomhill 

Berrigan.  C.  I.,  Whitby 

Btruht,  Robert,  A;<uc 

Beswick,  Michael,  Toronto 

Bethel  Pentecostal  Church. 
TheJford 

Bethell,  Steve 


Bo'cridge.  Geri 

Beyak.  lason.  Fort  Frances 

Bhardwaj,  V.  Sagar.  Sarnia 

Bicker,  Gary.  Toronto 

Hieiniilcr.  Andrew/ 
Mcichcnbaum.  Donald 

Billing.  Helen  F./Batty.  Helen  P.. 
Toronto 

Bird.  Mike.  F.tohicoke 

Birnie,  1.  D./Birnic,  Mildred, 
Stroud 

Birta.  Dana.  Markham 

Bishop  Francis  Allen  School. 
Parent  FUlucation  c:*immittee, 
Brampton 

Bishop,  ludith.  Hamilton 

Bisichops.  lohn.  Sudbury 

Black  Action  Defence  Committee 

Black  Educators'  Working 
Group,  North  York 

Black  Parents'  C^immunity 
Group  of  Hamilton 

Blake.  H.  T  (Ted).  Thunder  Bay 

Blatiel,  Marilyn,  Ottawa 

Blaxall.  lanel.  London 

Bled.  Cynthia.  Ottawa 

Bloch- Hansen.  Peter,  Toronto 

Bloes.  Roy 

Bloor  Collegiate  Institute, 
History  Department 

Bloxsidgc,  Nallie.  Burgestxnlle 

Board  of  E<ducalion  for  the  City 
of  Toronto.  Special  F^ucalion 
Department,  romrtfo 


For  Vm  Low  o(  L«amln( 


Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  Toronto,  Student  Affairs 
Committee/Toronto  Association 
of  Student  Councils 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  Toronto,  Special  Education 
Advisory  Committee,  Toronto 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  Toronto,  Parent  Involvement 
Committee,  Toronto 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  York,  York 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  Toronto,  Youth  Alienation 
Project 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  Toronto,  Working  to  Learn 
Project,  Toronto 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  Toronto,  Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual 
Board  Employees  Group 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  Hamilton 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  Etobicoke,  Etobicoke 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  Toronto,  NDP  Trustees, 
Toronto 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  Hamilton,  Social  Work 
Department 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  London 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  Toronto,  Toronto 

Board  of  Trade  of  Metropolitan 
Toronto,  Toronto 

Boardwatch,  Brockville 

Bokya-Lokumo,  Monique, 
Toronto 


Boldt,  Victor,  North  Bay 

Bond,  (Ms.)  G.,  Scarborough 

Boone,  John 

Boots,  Deborah,  Mississauga 

Bordeleau,  Louis-Gabriel 

Borg,  Betty,  Peterborough 

Borovilos,  John,  Scarborough 

Bosman,  Ed,  Moorefield 

Boston,  Joyce,  Kirkland  Lake 

Bosveld,  Beverly  John,  London 

Bouchette,  Murray,  Sarnia 

Bourgeois,  Pierre 

Bourns,  (Dr.)  R.  E.,  Georgetown 

Bowley,  R.  E.,  Peterborough 

Boxen,  Gloria,  Richmond  Hill 

Boyagoda,  Ivor,  Oshawa 

Boyne  River  Natural  Science 
School/Albion  Hills 
Conservation  Field  Centre/Cedar 
Glen  Outdoor  Education 
Centre/Etobicoke  Outdoor 
Education  Centre/Mono  Cliffs 
Outdoor  Education  Centre/Pine 
River  Outdoor  Education 
Centre/Sheldon  Centre  for 
Outdoor  Education 

Boys'  and  Girls'  Clubs  of 
Ontario,  Provincial  Youth 
Council,  Hamilton 

Bradley,  T.  Juanita 

Branchflovkfer,  Jane,  Bolton 

Brands,  (Mr.  &  Mrs.)  M., 
Newmarket 

Brault,  Nicole  L.,  Mississauga 

Bray,  B.,  Wahmipitae 


Brechun,  Henry/Brechun, 
Elizabeth 

Brennan,  Dan 

Brewster,  Janet,  Guelph 

Bridlevifood  Community 
Elementary  School,  Parent 
Teachers'  Association,  Kanata 

Brien,  Robert,  Oakville 

Bright,  Donna 

Brill,  Mark/Tarn,  Katrina 

Brillinger,  Marc,  Sutton  West 

Brittain,  Sharon,  Peterborough 

Broadview  Community  &  School 
Association,  Ottawa 

Brock  University,  St.  Catharines 

Brock  University,  Faculty  of 
Education 

Brock  University,  Faculty  of 
Education,  EDUC  8F10  Pre- 
Service  students,  St.  Catharines 

Brockville  &  District  Association 
for  Community  Involvement, 
Education  Committee,  Brockville 

Brooks,  Barry 

Brooks,  Betty,  Loring 

Brooks,  Jennifer,  Oakville 

Broussard,  W.  A.,  Ottawa 

Brown,  (Dr.)  Marilyn,  Hamilton 

Brown,  Greg 

Brown,  Karen,  Kanata 

Brown,  Lorna  M. /Brown, 
Michael,  Peterborough 

Brown,  Robin,  Port  Robinson 

Brown,  Sherry,  Ajax 

Brown,  Verna/Brown,  Jessie, 
St.  Catharines 


Bruen,  Trevor 

Bruner,  Ronald  Douglas, 
Leamington 

Bryan,  Lanna  Kay,  Pickering 

Buchanan,  William,  Woodstock 

Buck,  Karen,  Toronto 

Buckley,  Michael,  Casselman 

Budden,  L.  ]. 

Bureau  conseil  en  equite  et  en 
integration  communaute  ethno- 
culturel  francophone 

Bureau  des  regroupements  des 
artistes  visuels  de  I'Ontario 
(BRAVO),  Vanier 

Burgess,  Angela,  Russell 

Burghardt,  Richard  J., 
Scarborough 

Burke,  Patricia,  Kingsville 

Burlington  Chamber  of 
Commerce,  Business  & 
Education  Issues  Committee, 
Burlington 

Burlington  Public  Library/ 
Halton  Hills  Public  Library/ 
Oakville  Public  Library/Milton 
Public  Library 

Burniston,  Barry  E.,  North  Bay 

Burns,  Ken/Burns,  Trudy,  Alliston 

Burns,  Trudy  J.,  Alliston 

Burton,  William  J.,  Ottawa 

Burwell,  Barbara,  Toronto 

Business  &  Professional  Woman's 
Club  of  Windsor 

CD.  Farquharson  Junior  Public 
School,  students,  Agincourt 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


Creating  Lifetime  Attiiu<i«  - 
Student  Safety  (CLA-S-S.) 
AJvitory  Committee.  Industrial 
Accident  Prevention  Auocution. 
Slissuittuga 

Calvin  ChrisUan  School  Society 

Cambrian  College  of  Applied 
Arts  &  Technology 

Cambridge  Street  School. 
Rucnti'  Advisory  Committee, 
Ottawa 

Cambridge  Youth  ServKes 

Cameron,  Benoit.  Kinpton 

Cameron.  Gary,  Ou^Uau 

Cameron  Heights  C.ollegute 
liulitute.  Phyucal  Exlucation 
Staff,  KiuhentT 

Cameron,  llm,  Bmnlford 

Cameron.  Wendy 

Campbell.  (Capt.)  Douglas  K.. 
Toronto 

Campbell.  Demsc/Rodiway, 
Mike 

Campbell,  lohn.  Port  Colbome 

Campbell.  Rose.  Leamington 

Campbell.  Slerhng 

Can-Am  Indun  Friendship 
Ontre.  Cxmimunitv  Fducjiion 
Committee 

Canada.  Office  f>t  ihc 
CommiMMiner  of  Official 
Langtii.  .vjnatdet 

langvK  ';r<nni 

Canadtan  AOuncc  of  Black 
Educator*  I  Ontario  i.  Toronto 

Canadian  Association  for  Health, 
ftiywcal  Education  ft  Recreation. 
Quality  (>aity  Phrucal  Fxlu.  V 
Program.  G40Mcafrr 


Canadian  Association  for  Health, 
Physical  Education  &  Recreation, 
Glouifsltr 

Canadian  Assoculiun  of 
Monlessori  Teachers.  Etobuokt 

Canadian  Association  of 
University  Teachers,  Ottawa 

Canadian  Book  Publishers' 
Cxiuncil,  School  (iroup,  Toronto 

Canadian  Braille  Authority, 
Orramt 

Canadian  Centre  for  Italian 
Culture  &  Education 

Canadian  Ckingress  for  Learning 
Opportunities  for  Women 

Canadian  Council  of  Montessori 
Administrators,  Burlington 

Canadian  Ethnocullural  Council, 
Ottawa 

Caiudian  Federation  of 
Independent  Business, 
Willowiiiilr 

Canadian  Federation  of 
University  Women,  Mississauga, 
Education  Committee, 
Misustauga 

Canadun  Federation  of 
University  Women,  Ontario 
(xiuncil,  Ottawa 

(^nadun  Guidance  & 
Counselling  Association,  Oltawn 

(.anadun  Hearing  Society, 
Toronto 

Canadian  Historical  Assocution, 
North  York 

Canadian  Home  ft  School  A 
Parent -Teacher  Federation, 
Ofltfini 

'anadian  Hunger  FouiMlalKin. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Conflict 
Resolution,  Educational 
Initiatives,  OrtaH'u 

Onadian-ltalian  Business  & 
Professional  Association  of 
Toronto,  Toronto 

(Canadian  National  Institute  for 
the  Blind,  Ottawa 

CaoJiiun  Parents  tor  French 
(Ontario),  Toronto 

Canadian  Vocational 
Association,  Ottawa 

Canadian  Youth  Foundation, 
Ottawa 

Canadians  Against  Violence 
Everywhere  Advocating  its 
Termination, 
Education  Committee 
(CAVEAT) 

Canterbury  High  School, 
Parents'  Advisory  Committee 

Cantin,  Pierre,  Or/Ainj 

CUpela,  Ann  K. 

CUrleton  Board  of  F^ucatinn, 
Nrptan 

(jricton  Cxiuncil  of 
Parcnt/School  Associations, 
Kanala 

Carleton  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Ncpcan 

(^rleton  I'nivrr^itv  Rank  &  File 
(CURF 

Cjrmichacl.  Ann.  Krtnptyille 

Carousel  Players 

Carpenter,  |an 

'  arr-Rraini,  Margaret,  I  indtay 

'  arr,  C.  W.  N.,  Toronto 

(^rvin,  Fred 


Carty,  larrcl,  Mrhalff 

Casas,  (Professor)  Francois  R. 

Cascade  Theatre 

Case,  ( Dr. )  Winslow  Aubre)' 
Sealcy,  Sudbury 

Cash,  Paul,  Ruhmond  Hill 

Casseriy,  Donna,  Norfh  Bay 

Cathedral  High  School, 
Wilma's  Place,  Hamilton 

Catholic  Business  Pers<jns  of 
London  8(  Middlesex 

Catholic  Principals'  Council  of 
Ontario,  Ottawa  Unit 

Catholic  Principals'  Council  of 
Ontario 

Catholic  Principals'  Council  of 
Stormont,  Dundas  &  Glengarry 
(FJementary) 

Otholic  Religious  Education 
Consultants  of  Ontario,  Wetland 

Catholic  School  Chaplains  of 
Ontario,  Waterloo 

(^thnlic  Women's  League  of 
Canada,  Ontario  Provincial 
Council,  London 

Cattani,  Don 

C^wcth,  Nathan,  Pelerhorough 

( jyenne,  C^nil 

Caiabon,  Benoit,  Ottawa 

Centennial  ■67/North 
Fxlwardshurg  Public  Schools. 
Sch<M>l  Oimmittee,  Spencerville 

Central  Algoma  Board  of 
Education 

Ontral  Algoma  Catholic 
Parishes 

Onlral  Ontario  Computer 
Ass<Kiation,  Hrllrville 


For  th«  Low  o(  LMming 


Central  Park  Senior  Public 
School,  Grade  7  &  8  students, 
Oshawa 

Centre  culturel  Frontenac  de 
Kingston,  Kingston 

Le  Centre  d'alphabetisation  Moi, 
j'apprends  du  comte  de  Russell 
Rockland 

Centre  de  ressources  familial 

Centre  franco-ontarien  de 
ressources  pedagogiques,  Vanier 

Centre  Jules-Leger, 
Regroupement  de  parents 
francophones  pour  les 
sourds 

Centre  Wellington  Principals, 
Fergus 

Cerisano,  Stanley 

Cestnik,  Lisa,  Toronto 

Chabot,  Anne 

Chamber  of  Commerce  of 
Kitchener  &  Waterloo,  Education 
&  Training 
Committee,  Kitchener 

Chan,  May 

Chang,  Suzi/Persichilli,  Pat 

Change  Your  Future  Program 

Channen,  (Dr.)  Eric  W.,  Windsor 

Chapleau  Board  of 
Education/Chapleau  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School 
Board/Hornepayne  Board  of 
Education/Michipicoten  Board 
of  Education/Michipicoten 
Roman  Catholic  Separate  School 
Board 

Charette,  Gerald 

Chase,  Lisa  A. 

Chasty,  Margaret 


Chatham  &  District  Chamber  of 
Commerce,  Education 
Committee,  Chatham 

Cheater,  Maxine,  Cambridge 

Checkeris,  Ernie,  Sudbury 

Chedoke-McMaster  Hospitals, 
Child  &  Family  Centre,  Hamilton 

Cheng,  Cindy,  Toronto 

Cherry,  Diana,  Waterloo 

Cheskey,  Edward,  Waterloo 

Child  Poverty  Action  Group, 
Ottawa-Carleton  Chapter, 
Ottawa 

Childnature  Schoolhouse, 
Mississauga 

Children's  Achievement  Centre, 
Windsor 

Children's  Aid  Society  of 
Metropolitan  Toronto 

Chin,  Grace-Marie,  Unionville 

Chinese  Lingual-Cultural  Centre 
of  Canada,  Toronto 

Chong,  E.,  London 

Choquet,  Joyce 

Christian  Education  Committee, 
London 

Christian  Parents'  Association, 
Rainy  River,  Rainy  River 

Christie,  Janice 

Christoff,  (Mrs.)  J.,  Ottawa 

Chumak,  Alex,  Toronto 

Churchill,  M.,  Simcoe 

Circosta,  Graz,  East  York 

Cirkovic,  Marele,  Toronto 

Cisse,  Vilma,  Weston 

Cite  collegiale,  Ottawa 


Citizens  for  Fair  Taxes,  Nepean 

Citizens  United  for  Responsible 
Education  (CURE),  Ottawa 
Chapter,  Stittsville 

City  of  Hamilton,  Department  of 
Culture  &  Recreation/Arts  &  the 
Cities,  Hamilton 

City  of  North  York,  Public 
Health  Department,  North  York 

City  of  Ottawa,  Mayor's  Task 
Force  on  Child  Hunger,  Ottawa 

City  of  Toronto,  Toronto  Young 
People's  Advisory  Board 

Clark,  (Dr.)  Roger  Allan, 
Waterloo 

Clark,  Bruce 

Clawson,  William,  Sarnia 

Cleator,  Diane 

Clemens,  Cindy,  Port  Colborne 

Clifford  Bowey  School,  Ottawa 

Cline,  John 

Cloutier,  Joanne,  Cochrane 

Club  Richelieu  de  Hamilton, 
Hamilton 

Coalition  for  Children,  Families 
&  Communities/Sparrow  Lake 
Alliance,  Toronto 

Coalition  for  Education  Reform 

Coalition  for  Lesbian  &  Gay 
Rights  in  Ontario,  Toronto 

Coalition  for  Student  Nutrition, 
Toronto 

Coalition  for  the  Arts  & 
Education,  Toronto 

Coalition  of  Ontario  Agencies 
for  School  Health  Education, 
Toronto 


Coates,  Linda 

Coburn,  Richard  W.  (Dick), 
Kenora 

Cochrane  High  School,  Project 
Excellence 

Colaiezzi,  Lyle,  Moose  Factory 

Coles,  David,  Owen  Sound 

Coll,  Philip,  Guelph 

CoUict,  Warren,  Thornhill 

Collier,  Ashley,  Kincardine 

Collins,  Monica,  Sudbury 

Combley,  Heather,  Merrickville 

Comerford,  Thomas/Comerford, 
Marie,  Toronto 

Comite  regional  de  Test  de 
I'Ontario,  Francjais  langue 
seconde,  Ottawa 

Committee  Against  Racial 
Discrimination,  Hamilton 

Committee  for  National  Literacy 
Standards 

Committee  of  Concerned 
Citizens  in  Education,  Toronto 

Community  Action  Group  for 
Quality  Daily  Physical  Education 

Community  Active  Living, 
Lambton  Committee 

Community-Based  Trainers  of 
the  Region  of  Waterloo  and  the 
Counties  of  Perth  &  Wellington, 
Kitchener 

Community  Child  Abuse 
Council  of  Hamilton- 
Wentworth,  Hamilton 

Community  Living  London, 
London 

Community  Living,  Stormont 
County 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


Onlri 

our  Sdwoit  I  (VirrboriHifih 

County).  LakefitU 

CoiKrnicd  Rntdcnts  of 
Scarboiough 

CiorKrriKid  Tupiym'  (jroup, 
ShebfinJowun 

Congms  oi  BUck  Women  of 
Canada,  York  Region  Ouplcr 

Conneil  &  i\>iuford  l>uirict 
School  Am  Board,  PtckU  Lake 

ConncUey,  Milo  M.,  Toronto 

Cornell  d'«du«.alion  de  Nugarj 
Sud,  Section  de  langue  Iranvaue 

Conteil  d'<ducation  du  district 
de  Michipicoim.  Section  de 
languc  tran^aue.  Wawtt 

Conicil  de  I'Mucaiion 
cathoJique  pour  les 
francophones  de 
I'OnUrMt 

Cornell  de  I'^ucalion 
d'tspanoia.  Section  de  langue 
frat^aiie.  EspanoUt 

Consei]  de  I'^ducation  or  u  viiir 
de  London,  Section  de  langue 
fran^ue.  LotUton 

C.on«al  de  t'^ucation  de  la  ville 
de  f  lamiltnn.  Sectmn  de  langue 
franfaue,  Hamilton 

Cxnucil  de  I'tducation  de 
Nipwun^  Section  de  langue 
fran^aite.  Sorth  fhty 

(.lomcil  de  I'^lucalion  de  Prcl. 
Comitt  comuliatif  de  langtie 
ttmnutt 

CofMcil  4k  I'fducaiion  dc  Sauli 
Sir.  Mane.  Comity  comullalif  dc 
Unfuc  frwHauc 


^  il  Jr  Teducaiiun  de 
^^KllHJr\.  Section  de  langue 
fransaise.  Sudbury 

Con>eil  dc  I'^ucalion  du  cumte 
dc  Simcoc,  Section  dc  langue 
fran^aise 

Con>eil  dc  I'educalion  du  comK 
de  l^mbtcin.  Section  dc  langue 
franv'aiic 

C^onteil  de  I'cducatiun  du  coml^ 
de  Kronlcnac,  Section  dc  langue 
fran^ aise,  Kingston 

C!on>cil  dc5  K'oln  catholiquc^  dc 
U>ndon  ct  du  coml^  dc 
Middlesex,  Section  dc  langue 
fran^aise 

Cunseil  de»  ^oles  catholiqucs  dc 
IHalton,  Section  de  langue 
franvaise,  Burlington 

(>>nseil  des  ^olo  catholiqucs 
dn  comt^  de  Stormont,  Dunda^ 
&  (llcngarry.  Section  dc  langue 
franf  aiie.  Cornwall 

Oinseil  dc5  ^ol«  catholiqucs  du 
(irand  Tornnio,  Section  dc 
langue  fran^aiie 

(>)nseil  des  6:oles  catholiqucs 
ronuincs  de  Windsor.  Section  dc 
langue  fran^aise.  Wiiuttor 

(.onseii  des  ^oles  calhollquc* 
t^ar^es  de  la  r^ion  dc 
Waterloo.  Section  de  langue 
fran^isc 

Onieil  des  ^oles  fran^aucs  dc 
la  communaul^  urbaine  dc 
Toronto  (CEKIUT).  Don  Mills 

Coiucil  des  feolcs  itTpartn 
calholiques  du  district  dc 
Timniins,  Section  dc  langue 
fraiHaiie.  Timminj 


t  ^oniieil  des  *colcs  s^par^es 
catholiqucs  du  district  de 
Sudbury.  Section  dc  langue 
fran^aise.  Sudbury 

Conseil  des  ^olcs  s^par^es 
catholiqucs  du  district  dc  Sault 
Stc.  Mane.  Section  dc  langue 
fran^aise,  Sault  Ste.  Mane 

C^inscil  des  ^coles  s^par^es 
catholiqucs  du  district  de 
Nipissing,  Education  parallf-K 
North  Bay 

Conscil  des  ico\ci  s*par*es 
catholiqucs  du  district  dc 
Timmins,  Section  majoritaire  dc 
langue  fran^ise,  Timmins 

Conseil  des  ^colcs  s^par^cs 
catholiqucs  rotnaincs  dc 
Dufferin  ct  Peel,  Section  dc 
langue  franf  aise,  Mississauga 

Conseil  des  ^oles  s^par^rs 
catholiqucs  romaines  du  district 
dc  Qichranc,  Iroquois  Falls, 
Klack  River- Matheson 

("onseii  des  ^oles  s^ar^es 
catholiques  de  Hamilton- 
Wcntworth,  Section  de  langue 
fran^aise,  Hamilton 

(xinscil  des  ^nles  s^ar^es 
^  .ilholiqucs  romaines  du  comtt 
iJc  Welland,  Section  de  langue 
fran^aise,  Welland 

C3onscil  des  ^olcs  s^ar^es 
catholiqucs  du  district  dc 
I  jkehead.  Section  dc  la  langue 
fran^aisc 

Onseil  des  ^olcs  »^ar<Jes 
catholiqucs  romaines  du  comt^ 
de  Simcoe.  Section  dc  langue 
fran^aise.  Barnr 

Cx)n»eil  des  ^olcs  t^ar^es 
catholiqucs  de  la  r^on  dc  York, 
Section  de  langue  franfiite 


Conseil  des  Kolcs  s^par^es 
catholiqucs  dc  la  region  dc 
Durham,  Section  dc  langue 
franvaise,  Oshawa 

(utnscii  des  ^olcs  s^par^cs 
ijlhiiliqucs  dc  Kent,  Section  dc 
langue  fran<,aise 

Conseil  des  6colcs  s^par^es 
catholiqucs  du  district  dc  Hearst, 
Hearst 

I.  onseii  des  ^olcs  s<!'par^ 
catholiqucs  dc  langue  franvaise 
dc  PrcscotI  Russell  LOngnal 

Conseil  des  icolcs  s^ar^es 
catholiques  des  comt^  dc 
Frontcnac-Lennox  &  Addington. 
Section  dc  langue  fran^aise, 
Kingston 

Conseil  des  ^olcs  s^ar^cs 
catholiques  du  comt^  de 
l,ambton.  Section  dc  langue 
fran(;aise 

Conscil  des  ccolcs  s^par^es 
catholiques  du  comt^  dc  Lincoln, 
Section  de  langue  fran^aise 

Conseil  des  ^olcs  s^par^es 
catholiques  du  comtd  d'Estex, 
Section  de  langue  fran^aise, 
Windsor 

Conseil  des  ^oles  s^arto  dc 
Wellington.  Section  dc  langue 
frani;aise,  Ciuelph 

Conseil  des  ^oles  s^ar^es  du 
district  de  Michipicotcn.  Section 
dc  langue  franvaisc 

Conseil  ontarien  sur  la 
formation  du  pcrMinncI 
cnscignanl.  (.omild  consultatif 
dc  langue  fran^iK,  Toronto 

(  Jinseil  scolairc  dc  la  Rive  Nord. 
Section  dc  langue  fran^aite 


Forth*  LoMotLMminc 


Conseil  scolaire  de  langue 
fraiK^aise  d'Ottawa-Carleton, 
Section  catholique,  Association 
des  directeurs  et  des  directrices 
d'^cole  et  de  service  de 
relementaire  d'Ottawa-Carleton 

Conseil  scolaire  de  langue 
fran<;aise  d'Ottawa-Carleton, 
Section  catholique,  Gloucester 

Conseil  scolaire  de  langue 
fran<;aise  d'Ottawa-Carleton, 
Section  publique 

Conseil  scolaire  de  langue 
fran(;aise  d'Ottawa-Carleton, 
Section  catholique,  parents, 
Navan 

Constantineau,  Rose-Anne, 
Rockland 

Consultants'/Co-ordinators' 
Association  of  Primary 
Educators 

Contact  North,  Management 
Committee,  Sudbury 

Continuing  Education 
Schoolboard  Administrators, 
Sault  Ste.  Marie 

Convey,  George 

Cook,  Roger  R.,  Lindsay 

Cooke,  G.  Robin,  Delhi 

Cooke,  Therese 
Cooke,  William,  Guelph 

Cooper,  Beth 

Cooper,  Caroline 

Cooper,  Noel/Cooper,  Patricia, 
Richmond  Hill 

Cooper,  Pam,  Bruce  Mines 

Cooper,  Roy  V.,  Kanata 

Cooperative  des  services 
educatifs  du  Nord  de  I'Ontario 


Copley,  Norman,  Hamilton 

Corindia-LaCivita,  Nancy, 
Brampton 

Corkett,  David/Corkett,  Darlene, 
Barrie 

Cormenu,  Jean-Marie 

Cornish,  Rob  A.,  Ajax 

Cornwell,  (Mrs.)  B.  R. 

Corporation  of  Little  Trinity 
Church,  Toronto 

Corporation  of  the  City  of 
Toronto,  Personnel  Services 
Division,  Outreach  Recruitment 
Section,  Toronto 

Corson,  David,  Toronto 

Corson,  David/Cummins, 
Jim/Heller,  Monica/Labrie, 
Normand,  Toronto 

Council  for  Exceptional 
Children,  Ontario,  Gloucester 

Council  for  Exceptional 
Children,  Chapter  503,  Sudbury, 
Sudbury 

Council  for  Exceptional 
Children,  Ontario  Division  for 
the  Physically  Handicapped, 

Toronto 

Council  of  African 
Organizations  in  Ontario, 
Etobicoke 

Council  of  Christian  Reformed 
Churches  in  Canada,  Burlington 

Council  of  Community  School 
Associations  for  Peterborough 
County 

Council  of  Directors  of 
Education,  Mississauga 

Council  of  Drama  in  Education, 
Guelph 


Council  of  Ontario  Deans  of 
Engineering 

Council  of  Ontario  Separate 
Schools 

Council  of  Ontario  Universities, 
Toronto 

Council  on  Human  Rights  & 
Race  Relations,  Toronto 

Cousins,  Jackie 

Cowan,  Harvey  J.,  Springford 

Cowper-Smith,  G.  Blair,  Toronto 

Coxwell,  Roy  R.,  London 

Craig,  Betty  Ann,  Ajax 

Craig,  Doug 

Craig,  Kathryn,  Waterloo 

Crawford,  Shelly 

Creating  Hope  and  a  New 
Generation  of  Equality 
(CHANGE) 

Crease,  H.  "Skid" 
ECONEXUS,  Orangeville 

Crechiola,  Ruth,  Millgrove 

Creech,  Cheryl 

Cremasco,  Karin,  Guelph 

Crestview  Elementary  School 

Croft,  Beverley,  Windsor 

Crooks,  Sarah  Merrick,  Castleton 

Cropp,  D.  T.,  Kingston 

Cross,  Dolores  E.,  Chicago 

Crysler,  Robert,  Collingwood 

CuUey,  Catherine 

Gumming,  Bonnie 

Cummings,  Sherry 

Cunniffe,  F.  Vida,  Aylmer 


Cunningham,  Barbara,  Windsor 

Cunningham,  David  N.,  London 

Cunningham,  Mary,  New 
Liskeard 

Curie,  Diana,  Ajax 

Curley,  Rita,  Ottawa 

Currie,  Stanley,  Ottawa 

D'Amore,  Lou,  Etobicoke 

D'Heureux,  Ellen/Singh, 
Patricia/Zimmer,  Andrea,  St. 
Catharines 

D'Orazio,  Eugenio,  Toronto 

Daenzer,  (Dr.)  Patricia  M., 
Hamilton 

Daigle,  Ronald,  Nepean 

Dale,  Margo,  Sault  Ste.  Marie 

Daly,  Jim,  Cambridge 

Daly,  Susan,  Scarborough 

Dancey,  Ron,  Oshawa 

Dare,  Malkin 

Davey,  Pat,  Deep  River 

Davidge,  Ken  W.,  Hamilton 

Davidson,  (Dr)  Alan  S., 
Bracebridge 

Davidson,  Diana 

Davidson,  John  H.,  Stoney  Creek 

Davies,  Heather,  Mississauga 

Davies,  Penny,  Mississauga 

Davis,  Eleanor 

Davis,  Kim  Sadler,  Sault  Ste. 
Marie 

Davis,  Maureen 

Davis,  Tom,  Markham 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


D«y,  CandK'c/Tjvior. 
AiMlm/Sinurd,  Raymumlc 

Day,  Yvonnr.  dc  LiKa.  Vince, 
St  Calhanna 

Dc  BasMcoun,  Mary 

[Van,  Ghi,  Burhnpon 

Deanery  of  Eucs  County, 
Tecumieh 

Draihe.  Susan  H.,  Micm 

Deer  Park  Ratepayrrt'  Group 
Inc.,  Toronto 

DeUney.  Mkhad 

Delome,  lean 

Demeter.  Anne  Rom,  Hamilton 

Denlow  Pubik  School,  Parents 
Group,  North  York 

Denyv  Laurent 

Deorksen,  Kem 

DePooter.  Kim/Gumsey, 
Karen/ lovanovKh, 
DavidAVUIUnu,  Sieve, 
St.  Cathannt} 

DeRoov  Henry 

DnRochcs,  Nicole,  Chebea 

DeutichkanadiKher  Ki>n|(reu 
( German -Onadian  (xin^rcM), 
Ottatm 

Dcvmbh,  Oem,  London 

DiCcnso,  Manaa 

Di  Cocco.  Caroline, 
B^tptit  GfW€ 

Di  Fonzo,  loc.  Starhorough 

Di  MaKio.  Camillo 

DKk.Mttzi  Ixe 

DickiiMan.  Trudy,  Gudlpfc 

DiMarco,  (Mn.)  Sirkka.  RaJaU 


[iimitrie,  David,  Windsor 

Dinner,  Karen,  Toronto 

Diocese  of  Peterborough, 
Peterttorough 

Diocese  calholique  d'Alexandru- 
C^omwall.  Cornwall 

Diplock,  lessica/Lang, 
Kristina/Parton,  David 

Dirks.  Christine 

Dixon,  Peter 

Dixon,  R.  Ci.  ( [)csl,  Toronto 

Dobell,  lane 

Dobson,  lennifer,  Toronto 

Dodgson,  Susan  Mary, 
BeamsvilU 

Dodgson,  Yvonne,  Chhawa 

Dolea,  Mina-Eugen,  Toronto 

Domenico,  Mark/Miyata,  Cathy 

Donato,  Helen 

Donnelly,  Carol,  London 

Dorion,  Basile,  Peneianguuhene 

Doncht,  ( Dr. )  Axel.  Ottawa 

Doucette,  Dean 

Douglas.  Derek/Douglas,  Donna, 
Prtrrtburg 

Dowell,  Christina,  Parry  Sound 

Dowic,  lanice,  Belleville 

Down  Syndrome  Association  of 
Metropolitan  Toronto,  Education 
C>>mmittce.  Toronto 

Dawn  Syndrome  Association 
of  Ontario 

Down  Syndrome  Associatuin  of 
Ontario,  Naliorul  Capital 
Rcfion,  Ottawa 


Doyle,  Helen,  Toronto 

Doyle,  Mary  Rose,  Kingston 

Doyon,  Nicolas 

Drolel,  Estelle,  Nepean 

Drouin,  Pierre.  OrUans 

Drover,  Annie 

Drydcn  Board  of  Fducation, 
/)r>'iiefi 

Dryden,  Veronica 

Dubeau,  Marjorie,  Perkinsfield 

Dubois,  Diane 

DufTerin  County  Board  of 
Education,  Orangeville 

DufTerin -Peel  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  (kiard,  Teacher- 
Librarians,  Elementary  Panel, 
Mississauga 

Duffcrin-Peel  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Student 
Senate,  Mississauga 

DuRcrin-Pcel  Roman  ( Jlholn. 
Separate  School  Board 

DufTerin -Peel  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board. 
Association  of  Principals  &  Vice- 
Pnncipals,  EJemenlary  Schools, 
Mississauga 

Dunn.Vikki,  Ballon 

Dunrankin  Drive  Public  School 

Duquette,  Cieorges,  Sudbury 

Durham  Board  of  Education 

Durham  Board  of  Education, 
Area  2  Administrators 

Durham  Board  of  Education. 
Area  2  Teachers 


Durham  Board  of  Education, 
Health  &  Physical  (-.ducation 
Department.  Whilby 

Durham  Board  of  Education, 
Supervisory  Officers 

Durham  Catholic  Principals'/ 
Vice- Principals'  Association 

Durham  C>)llcge  of  Applied  Arts 

6  Technology,  Pre-Employmcnt 
Program  students,  Oshawa 

Durham  Elementary  School 
Administrators,  Oshan-a 

Durham  Geography  Heads' 
Association,  Cannington 

Durham  Region  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board.  Special 
E.ducation  Advisory  Committee 

Durham  Region  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board. 
Secondary  School  Cjouncil 
Presidents 

Durham  Region  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  SchtK)l  Board 

Durham  Regional  Catholic 
Parent  Teacher  Association, 
Oshawa 

Durham  West  Parent  (>)uncil, 
Afox 

Durksen,  Peter,  hergus 

Dyck,  Nelson,  Sutton  West 

Eadie,  (Dr.)  Susan  |.,  Toronto 

Ejdie,  C^rol,  Newmarket 

Eagle  River  Public  School,  Grade 

7  &  tt  students,  pMgle  Riirr 

Earl,  (Dr.)LomaM 

F.arlscourt  Child  &  Family 
Ontre,  Toronto 

Early  Literacy  learning, 
Scarborough 


For  Ow  LoiM  Of  LMmmg 


East  York  Board  of  Education, 
East  York 

East  York  Home  &  School 
Council 

East  York  Principals'  Association 

Eastern  Ontario  Co-operative 
Education  Curriculum  Advisory 
Committee 

Eastern  Ontario  Medical 
Association,  Child  Welfare 
Committee 

Eastern  Ontario  Staff 
Development  Network,  Kingston 

Eastern  Ontario  Technological 
Education  Council 

Easton,  Barry,  Kenora 

Easton,  Carolyn,  Kenora 

Ecole  secondaire  Georges-F- 
Vanier,  Conseil  des  eleves 

Ecole  Cadieux,  Association  de 
parents  et  d'enseignant(e)s, 
Vanier 

Ecole  des  Voyageurs,  Association 
parents-enseignants,  Orleans 

Ecole  elementaire  Horizon- 
Jeunesse,  Cornwall 

Ecole  elementaire  publique 
leanne-Sauve,  Association  des 
parents,  Orleans 

Ecole  Gaston -Vincent, 
Association  des  parents,  Ottawa 

Ecole  Immaculee-Conception, 
Personnel  enseignant,  Ignace 

Ecole  Lamoureux/Ecole  Ste. 
Marguerite  Bourgeoys, 
Association  des  parents,  Ottawa 

Ecole  Monseigneur-de-Laval, 
Comite  des  parents,  Hamilton 


Ecole  Monseigneur-Remi- 
Gaulin,  Association  de  parents, 
Kingston 

Ecole  publique  Carrefour 
Jeunesse,  Comite  de  parents, 
Rockland 

Ecole  publique  de  la  Riviere 
Castor,  Comite  de  parents- 
enseignants,  Russell 

Ecole  publique  Nouvel  Horizon, 
Comite  de  parents,  Hawkesbury 

Ecole  publique  Nouvel  Horizon, 
Personnel,  Hawkesbury 

Ecole  Sainte-Marguerite 
Bourgeoys,  Association  de 
parents,  Merrickville 

Ecole  secondaire  catholique 
Marie- Rivier,  Conseil  etudiants 

Ecole  secondaire  Etienne  Brule, 
etudiants.  North  York 

Ecole  secondaire  Garneau, 
Association  des  parents  et 
enseignants 

Ecole  secondaire  I'Essor,  eleves 

Ecole  secondaire  Macdonald- 
Cartier,  Association  generale  des 
etudiants 

Ecole  secondaire  Mgr.  Bruy^re, 
Conseil  des  eleves,  London 

Ecole  secondaire  publique  De  La 
Salle,  Association  parents-eleves- 
professeurs 

Ecole  secondaire  regionale 
Glengarry,  eleves 

Ecole  St-Jean  d'Embrun, 
Association  parents-enseignants, 
Embrun 

Ecole  Ste-Jeanne-d'Arc,  Comite 
d'education,  Brampton 


Ecoles  Frdre  Andre  et  Mgr 
Bruyfere,  Associations  de  parents, 
London 

Ecumenical  Study  Commission 
on  Public  Education,  London 

Ecumenical  Support  Committee 
for  Refugees,  Education  Sub- 
Committee,  Hamilton 

Educational  Centre  for  Aging  & 
Health/Northern  Education 
Centre  for  Aging  &  Health, 
Hamilton 

Educational  Computing 
Organization  of  Ontario,  Essex 

Educational  Computing 
Organization  of  Ontario,  Special 
Interest  Group,  Elementary 
(ECOO  -  SIGLEM),  Drumbo 

Educational  Media  Producers'  & 
Distributors'  Association  of 
Canada,  Toronto 

Educators  of  the  Gifted  in 
Ontario  (EGO),  Dublin 

Educators'  Association  for 
Quality  Education,  Thornhill 

Edwards,  John  F. 

Elamad,  Fozieh,  Markham 

Elbanna,  Gamal  A. 

Elementary  &  Secondary 
Teacher-Librarians,  Ottawa  & 
Carleton  Boards  of 
Education/Queenswood  Public 
School,  School  Advisory 
Council,  Orleans 

Elgin  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board 

Elgin-St.  Thomas  Health  Unit, 
Healthy  Schools  Program, 
St.  Thomas 

Ellis,  Bill,  Kanata 


Ellis,  R.  S.,  Pickering 

Ellis,  Robert  E.,  Corbyville 

Emberley,  Peter 

Engell,  Anne  K.,  Collingwood 

English  Language  Arts  Network 

Environment  Canada, 
Environmental  Citizenship 
Directorate,  Ottawa 

Equay-wuk 

Erent,  (Ms.)  J.  H.,  Etobicoke 

ESL/ESD  Resource  Group  of 
Ontario 

Essex  County  Parents  for  Quality 
Education 

Essex  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Religious 
Studies  Department  Heads 

Essex  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Junior  & 
Senior  Kindergarten  Association, 
Tecumseh 

Essex  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Essex 

Essex  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  English 
Principals'  Association 

Ethnocultural  Council  of 
London,  London 

Etobicoke  Board  of  Education, 
Adult  &  Continuing  Education 
Department,  Etobicoke 

Etobicoke  Board  of  Education, 
Mathematics  Department 

Etobicoke  Chamber  of 
Commerce,  Technology 
Development  Group,  Etobicoke 

Evans,  Peter  J.  A.,  Nepean 

Everitt,  Katherine,  Chatham 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


Evo)r,  Anrvi/MjcPhcnon.  Donna, 
Ptnh 

Eyiotbon,  Bewriy.  Thunder  Bay 

Eyre.  (Dr.)  Dean  P.  OrroMa 

Families  for  Religious  Equality  in 
Education 

Faunily  Lilmcy  Interest  Group, 
Knifiton 

Fanshawre  College  of  Applied 
Aru  &  Technology,  (x>ntinuing 
Education  Advisory  Committee, 
London 

Fanthawe  College  of  Applied 
Arts  &  Technology,  Futum 
Program  IraiiKev  Simroe 

FanUu«»e  College  of  Applied 
Aru  &  Technology.  London 

Farber.  Kelly,  Thomhill 

Fana,  Tito/Faru,  Isabel 

Famworih,  Manlyn,  Brampton 

Farrar,  Bcmice  Lever, 
Richmond  HtU 

Farrell,  )ohn,  Starborough 

FafTow,  David 

Father  Brcsuni  Catholic  High 
School,  AthlctK  CouiKil. 
WoodbrtJgt 

Father  Henry  Can  Secondary 
Schcxil.  Student  Cx>unci], 
Etolncokr 

Father  |ohn  Redmond  High 
School.  Sludent  Council, 
Fjotncokt 

Faukovic,  M..  Toronto 


Federation  of  CJlhulic  Parent - 
Teacher  Assoculions  of  Unlariii. 
Windsor/Euex  Regional 
CouncilFederation  of  Cathuli>. 
Parent -Teacher  Associations  of 
Ontario,  London 

Federation  of  Chinese  Canadians 
in  Scarborough,  Scarborough 

Federation  of  Sikh  Societies  of 
(  anada,  Ottawa 

Federation  of  Tnnidad  8t  Tobago 
1  'r.Mni/jtions  of  Ontario, 

Federation  of  Women  Teachers' 
AvuKialions  of  Ontario,  Anti- 
Kacisi  F^ucaiion  Committee, 
iMSalle 

Federation  of  Women  Teachers' 
AsstK'iations  of  Ontario 

FM^ration  des  aln<(e)s 
francophones  de  I 'Ontario, 
Region  du  Moycn- 
Nord/('oalition  sur 
I'analphab^tismr  chez  les 
aln^(e)>  franco-ontaricns 

FM^ration  des  a\nis 
francophones  de  I 'Ontario 

F^^ration  des  asscKiations  de 
parents  francophones  de 
I'Onlano 

F^d^ralion  des  caisscs  populaires 
de  I'Onlario,  OrtdHti 

F^d^ation  des  ^l^ves  du 
tecondaire  franco-oniarien 
(FF^K)),  V'flfiier 

Ftd^ration  des  enseignantes  ri 
dct  enscignants  des  <cola 
wtondairrs  de  I'Ontario,  C^miic 
de  langue  fran^aise 

Fedrock.  Debra,  Pant 

Fciao.  Carole/(>as,  Ian 


Ferguson,  Robert,  Septan 

herron,  Monique/Barton,  Mary 

Feuervcrger,  Cirace,  Toronto 

Fiddes,  Ciraham  R.,  Norrfi  York 

Filopovich,  Ifka 

Fink,  Dean.  Amaner 

Finlay,  Barry,  Oakville 

Finley,  Helen  S.,  Kingston 

Finn,  Maureen,  Kingston 

I  SI  Woodbridge  Girl  Guides, 
Woodbridge 

Fish,  Ann  Marie,  Richmond  Hill 

Fish,  Patrick 

Fitzgerald, ).  Terry,  Point  Edward 

Fitzgerald,  Mary,  BowmanviUe 

Fitzsimmons,  Tom 

Flamborough  Chamber  of 
(^mmercc,  Waterdown 

Flear,  Sandra,  Toronto 

Fleming,  Leslie 

Fletcher,  lohn  C,  Kitchener 

Fletcher,  Susan,  Orfuiva 

FIcurcn,  Peter/Fleuren,  Idith, 
Rodney 

Fleurie,  Des  I.,  Fort  Frances 

Fligg,  Mel,  Barrte 

Flood,  (Ms.)  L  A.,  \Villo\t-dale 

Florescu,  Viorica,  Kanala 

Mono,  Marnie,  BurUngton 

llynn,  |.  Kathleen,  Mtstissauga 

Flynn,  Maureen.  Ottawa 

Fondation  ARTES,  Conteil 
d'administration,  Ottawa 


Fonds  canadien  du  film  ct  de  la 
vid6>  ind^pendants,  Orratvu 

Foote,  lack,  CampbelUroft 

Force,  Dora,  Woodstock 

Forest  Manor  Public  School, 
W'illowdale 

Forster,  (Dr.)  David  R.,  Maple 

Forsyth-Sells,  Lee  Ann 

Fort  Frances- Rainy  River  Board 
of  Education,  Education 
Cx>mmittce,  Fori  Frances 

Fort  Frances-Rainy  River  Board 
of  Education,  ftirf  Frances 

Forum  for  Higher  Education  in 
the  Public  Inlcrcsl/Our 
Schools/Ourselves 

Forum  on  Responsible 
Education  (FORE) 

Foster,  lason/Russell,  Robert 

Foundation  for  the  Advancement 
of  Aboriginal  Youth,  Toronto 

Fournier,  Natalie/Burry,  Julie 

Frame,  (Mr.)  A.  G..  Samia 

Frame,  I.  D.,  Exeter 

Frankland  (immunity  Sch<x>l, 
Parent-StafT  Association,  Toronto 

Franluon,  A.  Gregory,  Kingston 

Fransham,  Richard,  Gloucester 

Fraser,  Cathy 

Fraser,  Sheila  G.,  Sauli  Sle.  Mane 

Freedman,  (Dr. )  |«e.  Red  Peer 

Frew,  Alexander  F.  Peep  Risrr 

Fromeni,  Phil,  Nepean 

Frommer,  loan  Barbara.  Ottawa 


For  lit*  Lovw  of  Uamint 


Frontenac  County  Board  of 
EducationFrontenac  County 
Board  of  Education,  Special 
Education  Advisory  Committee, 
Kingston 

Frontenac  County  Board  of 
Education,  Parent  Groups 

Frontenac  County  Quality  Daily 
Physical  Education  Action  Team 

Frontenac  County  Women 
Teachers'  Association/Ontario 
Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  Frontenac 
District/ Association  of 
Elementary  School 
Administrators  of  Frontenac 
County 

Frontenac-Lennox  &  Addington 
County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Special 
Assignment-Learning  Resources 
Committee,  Kingston 

Frontenac-Lennox  &  Addington 
County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Kingston 

Frontier  College,  Toronto 

Frudd,  Susan,  Ajax 

Fulford,  Celine  M.,  Aurora 

Fung,  Ellen,  Witlowdale 

Furey,  Patrick,  Port  Elgin 

Furlong,  Edward,  Rosseau 

Fuykschot,  Cornelia,  Gananoque 

Gaensbauer,  loan,  Peterborough 

Galardi,  Sharon 

Galliene,  Christina,  Whitby 

Gallivan,  Robert  J.,  Thornhill 

Garbutt,  W.  Terry 

Gardner,  John  R.,  Toronto 


Gardos,  Paris  Cameron, 
TorontoGarrett,  Marjorie 
Mallory,  Prescott 

Garton,  Wilma  A.,  Ottawa 

Garvin,  Nora,  Thornhill 

Gaudaur,  Charles/Gaudaur, 
Darlene,  Perth 

Gaudet,  Claudette  G.,  Orleans 

Gaul,  John  A.,  Hamilton 

Cause,  M.,  Parry  Sound 

Gavin,  Frank 

Gedeon,  (Dr.)  Steven  A.,  Toronto 

General  Motors  of  Canada 

George  Brovv-n  College  of 
Applied  Arts  &  Technology, 
Committee  on  Special 
Needs/Ontario  Articulation 
Network,  Toronto 

George  Brown  College  of 
Applied  Arts  &  Technology, 
Toronto 

George,  Rina  E.,  Markham 

Georgian  College  of  Applied  Arts 
&  Technology,  Academic 
Management  Team,  Barrie 

Gerin-Lajoie,  Diane 

German-Canadian  Congress, 
Ontario  Chapter,  Toronto 

Gerner,  Malcolm,  Dundas 

Gervais,  Robert 

Get  Involved  in  Volunteer  Efforts 
Program  (G.I.V.E.),  North  Bay 

Giannandrea,  C,  Mississauga 

Gibb,  Dave 

Gibbs,  Keith,  Gloucester 

Gibson,  Sandi,  Windsor 

Giesbrecht,  Brenda 


Gigg,  Ed 

Gilbertson,  Diane,  Guelph 

Gill,  (Dr.)  Stephen,  Cornwall 

Gilmour,  Brad  W.,  Ottawa 

Ginou,  Alex 

Girard,  April,  Atikokan 

Girls  &  Women  in  Sport  Liaison 
Committee,  Nepean 

Giroux,  Dominic,  Gloucester 

Given,  R.  Wayne,  Guelph 

Givens,  C.  R.,  Barrie 

Glen  Cairn  Community 
Resource  Centre,  Stay  In  School 
Program,  London 

Glendon,  Margaret 

Glenforest  Secondary  School, 
OAC  English  Students, 
Mississauga 

Glengarry  District  High  School, 
Parent-Teacher  Committee 

Glueheisen,  Jonathan 

Godin,  Gaetan 

Gold,  (Dr)  loseph 

Golden  Avenue  Public  School, 
Parent  Advisory  Committee, 
South  Porcupine 

Goldstein,  Dian,  Willowdale 

Goldstein,  Paul,  Toronto 

Golish,  Kenneth/Golish,  Pamela, 
Windsor 

Gollert,  Norman  D. 

Gollinger,  Robert  G.,  Prescott 

Gontier,  Hazel,  Toronto 

Gorbold,  Donna,  Etobicoke 

Gordon,  Pamela,  Kemptville 


Gorrie,  Donna,  Meaford 

Gouin,  Gisele 

Goulet,  Andre,  Orleans 

Grace,  (Dr.)  Noelle,  Toronto 

Graham,  Alda,  Monkland 

Graham,  Ralph,  London 

Grand  Council  Treaty  #3 

Grand  River  Collegiate  Institute, 
Student  Executive,  Kitchener 

Granger,  Jean-Claude,  Orleans 

Granger,  Matthieu/Davey, 
Michelle 

Grant,  loanne.  North  York 

Gray,  Dianne,  Windsor 

Gray,  Linden,  Beeton 

Greater  Metro  Co-operative 
Education  Association, 
Scarborough 

Greater  Metropolitan  Toronto 
Co-ordinators  of  Music, 
Etobicoke 

Greater  Peterborough  Chamber 
of  Commerce,  Peterborough 

Greater  Welland/Pelham 
Chamber  of  Commerce, 
Education  Committee 

Green,  Martin 

Greer,  Anne,  Thornhill 

Gregorini,  Lucy,  Lively 

Grey  Bruce  Community 
Industrial  Training  Advisory 
Committee  Inc.,  Owen  Sound 

Grey  County  Board  of 
Education,  Markdale 

Gribben,  John,  Weston 

Griffiths,  William  R., 
St.  Catharines 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


( irulloli,  U>uuc,  SuJbury 

Gnibcr.  Hdcn  D.,  Unomi 

Gueiph-WeUington  Auocution 
(or  Community  Livmg. 
EJucalKin  ('ommmec,  Huelph 

Guettj,  Antoki 

Guiiun,  Sandra.  RtchmonJ  Hill 

Gunner,  Marni« 

GupU,  M^  Starbonnigh 

Gurdiral.  Tania.  MarUuim 

Gutman,  Mory/Gulman. 
C:a(hcrinc.  Ruhmond  HiU 

Giuik.  Pauline,  Powassan 

Habi.  Ludi,  OakvtlU 

Hach^,  Denu/Bousonnrault. 
lulie 

Haddon.  Michael  A.,  Mustssauga 

Hagar,  Aubrey,  Guelph 

Hahn,  Sybille  B..  Tonmio 

({albentadt.  Alan 

HaU.  Beatrice  L,  Thombury 

Hall.  Beverly  L.  Sioux  Lookout 

Hall.  Clirutiitc/Trcasure. 
Stephen,  Aurora 

Halpern.  Gerald.  Onawa 

Halion  Auoctation  for  Young 
Children.  Burlington 

Haiion  Board  of  Education. 
Special  Education  Advisory 
Committee,  Burlinpon 

Halion  C^Mincil  of  Home  & 
School  AMociation*.  Oakville 

Halton  Industry  Education 
(iouncil.  Carter  Onirc. 
ourUrtgton 


Mallon  Roman  i  jlh»li>.  Vp.iralr 
Schuol  Board,  Rcligiiin/Family 
Life  Subject  Council,  Burlinpon 

Hamilton  &  Dislrii.'!  Chamber  of 
l!«>mmcrce,  Hamilton 

Hamilton  Community  Group, 
Hamilton 

Hamilton  Council  of  Home  & 
School  Associations 

Hamilton  Teacher-Librarians 
Association,  Hamilton 

Hamilton  Township  Ratepayers' 
Auociation,  Port  Hope 

Hamilton-Wentworth  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
St.  (Jiarles  Adult  Continuing 
Education  Centre 

Hamilton-Wentworth  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
Secondary  School  Library  Heads, 
Hamilton 

Hamilton-Wentworth  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board 

Hamilton-Wentworth  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
Catholic  Student  Council 
Presidents"  Association 

Hamilton-Wentworth  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
Instructional  Services 
Department 

Hamilton  Women  Teachers' 
Auocution,  Hamilton 

Han,  loannc 

Haner,  Vonnie,  WelletUy 

Hanlin,  Ealher,  Fonthill 

Hanson,  jean,  Uvrly 

Hanson,  Kathryn  S.,  Ixmdon 


IUrjmt>cr  I  mire's  i^nada, 
National  Capital  Region,  OritiH-u 

Harel,  Ziv,  Thomhill 

Harris,  Betty  A.,  Sriffsvi/le 

Harris,  Heather.  Lindsay 

Hams,  Margaret 

Harrison,  Mary  W./Harrison. 
Anthony  ].,  Markham 

Harrison,  Tony/Harrison,  Mary, 
Markham 

Harvey,  M.  Elaine,  Kingston 

Hastings  &  Prince  Edward 
(Uiunty  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board 

Hastings  County  Board  of 
EUlucation 

Hastings  Women  Teachers' 
Association,  Belleville 

Haswcll,  Kathleen,  Brampton 

Hatch,  Wilfred  T,  Brantford 

Hawken,  lill,  Ottawa 

Hay,  Roger  L.,  Sarnia 

Head,  Tammie  L. 

Heart  &  Stroke  Foundation  of 
Ontario,  Toronto 

Hedman,  Jack,  Fort  Frances 

Heighington,  G.,  Scarborough 

Hcil,  Marcy,  St.  Catharines 

Hrlirnic-C^nadian  Federation  of 
Onlann 

Helmcr,  loan,  Oshawa 

Hclmus,  Bill.  Hemmert.  R.. 
Scarborough 

Henderson,  Hugh,  Kingston 

Henley.  FJfrcda,  Toronto 

Hennessy.  Peter.  FJginburg 


llrnnings,  Dean/Matt,  Dave 

Mcrdmiller,  Mary,  Waterloo 

Heritage  Renfrew  Home 
Children  Committee,  Renfrew 

Herster,  Doris,  St.  Catharines 

Hewitt,  (Dr.)  jean 

Hcydorn,  Bernard  1.,  Newmarket 

Heyns,  (Mr  &  Mrs.)  Arie, 
Atlenford 

Hibbert.  Terrence  G.  S.,  Toronto 

Higgins,  David  A.,  Barrie 

High,  Steven 

Highland  Secondary  School, 
Alternative  Education  Program 
Students 

Hill,  Danuta,  Caledon  East 

Hill,  Frances  E.,  Newmarket 

Hill,  Nancy 

Hillesheim,  Susan 

Histed,  Roberta,  L'Orignal 

Hobbs,  Anne/Bean,  loann. 
Walerdown 

Hi>bbs,  Ian  A./Hobbs,  Roseanne 

Hochner,  Sydney  V.,  Brantford 

Hodgins,  Alex  A.,  Kapuskasing 

Hodgkinson,  E.,  Peterborough 

Hogan,  Brian  E. 

Hogarth,  Marlene,  Thunder  Bay 

Holland.  Cjrmll,  Ottan-a 

Holland  Marsh  District 
Christian  School.  Board  of 
Directors,  Newmarkrt 

Hollingsworth,  Silvina,  Ti^fofito 

Holub.(DT.)B.  I,  GuWp/i 


For  ttw  Lov*  of  LMminc 


Holy  Cross  Catholic  Secondary 
School 

Holy  Cross  Parent-Teacher 
Association 

Holy  Family  Catholic  School, 
Catholic  Parent-Teacher 
Association,  Ottawa 

Home  School  Legal  Defense 
Association  of  Canada, 
Peterborough 

Honsberger,  Lynn,  Ottawa 

Honzatko,  Barbara  J.,  Keewatin 

Hook,  (Dr.)  Richard,  Etobicoke 

Horvath,  (Mrs.)  H.,  North  York 

Horvath,  Louis/Horvath,  Maria, 
Don  Mills 

Hotte,  Denis  A./Hotte,  Lucille 
M.,  Gloucester 

Hough,  Catherine,  Scarborough 

Houghton,  Meghan/Barton, 
Debbie 

Howard,  Al,  Sioux  Lookout 

Howe,  L.,  Leamington 

Howell,  Evelyn,  Burk's  Falls 

Howes,  Deborrah,  Pickering 

Hughes,  Karlene,  Markham 

Hughes,  Susan,  Picton 

Hughes,  Wendy 

Hugli,  Maggie,  Oshawa 

Humber  College  of  Applied 
Arts  &  Technology 

Humberview  School, 
Student  Group,  Bolton 

Humewood  Community  School, 
Cherrywood  Alternative 
Program,  Toronto 


Humphries,  Mark  P./Humphries, 
Deborah  M.,  Tirnmins 

Hundert,  Ken,  Etobicoke 

Huron  County  Board  of 
Education 

Huron  County  Health  Unit 

Huron -Perth  County  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
Dublin 

Huron  Women  Teachers' 
Association 

Huschka,  Bob 

Hussain,  Glenys 

Huston,  Emily,  Combermere 

Hutt,  Jackie,  Lakefield 

Hux,  Allan,  Toronto 

Hynes,  Douglas 

Hynes,  William  A.,  Don  Milts 

Iga,  Julia/Collins,  Chris/ Arango, 
Nicholas 

Ignatius,  Susan,  Cornwall 

Imbeault,  Jean-Claude 

Immaculate  Conception  Catholic 
School,  Parent  Advisory 
Committee,  Port  Perry 

Immanuel  Christian  School 
Society 

Improving  School  Discipline 
Project 

Independent  First  Nations' 
Alliance,  Sioux  Lookout 

Industrial  Training  Centre  for 
Women/Zalco  (ITCH/ZALCO) 

Information  Technology 
Association  of  Canada, 
Education  Committee, 
Mississauga 


Inglis,  Norine,  Peterborough 

Institute  for  Enterprise 
Education,  St.  Catharines 

Institute  of  Electrical  & 
Electronics  Engineers,  Toronto 
Section,  Brampton 

Integration  Action  Group, 
Etobicoke 

Integration  Action  Group, 
London  &  Area,  London 

Integration  Action  Group, 
Sudbury  Chapter 

Inter-Franco  scolaire  du  Sud  de 
rOntario 

Interfaculty  Council  of 
Technological  Education 

Interfaith  Advisory  Group  on 
Religious  Education,  London 

International  Network  of 
Performing  &  Visual  Arts 
Schools,  Niagara-on-the-Lake 

Irons,  Aileen,  Curve  Lake 

Islamic  Co-ordinating  Council 
of  Imams,  Toronto 

Islamic  Schools  Federation  of 
Ontario,  Ottawa 

Izatt,  John,  Thunder  Bay 

lackman,  Richard,  Ottawa 

Jackson,  John  A.,  Scarborough 

Jackson,  Norah 

Jacques,  Celine 

Jahn-Cartwright,  Cindy, 
Port  Elgin 

Jakes,  Howard,  Kingston 

Jamaican  Canadian  Association, 
Toronto 

James,  Jan-Elizabeth, 
Sault  Ste.  Marie 


Janes,  Paul,  Watford 

Janhunen,  Eric/Janhunen, 
Virginia,  Sarnia 

Janssen,  (Mr.)  G.,  Orangeville 

Janzen,  WaUy 

Jardine,  Lorraine,  London 

Jefford,  Art 

Jefkins,  Ron 

Jelenic,  Venanzio,  Cambridge 

Jellie,  Hugh,  Waterloo 

Jemmott,  Marva  M.,  Toronto 

Jesuit  Refugee  Service  Canada, 
Toronto 

Joblin,  Fred,  Parry  Sound 

Joffe,  Marion 

Joffe,  N./Joffe,  Marion,  Thornhill 

John  Brooks  Community 
Foundation  &  Scholarship  Fund, 
Youth  Council,  Toronto 

John  F.  Ross  High  School, 
Guelph 

John  Howard  Society  of  Durban 
Region,  Oshawa 

John  Wanless  Parents' 
Association 

Johnson,  Cheryl  D.,  Cambridge 

Johnson,  Ginette,  Kingston 

Johnson,  Kathleen  M. 

Johnson,  Margaret,  Chesterville 

Johnston,  K./Leatham, 
R./McAndless,  D./McClenaghan, 
Tom 

Johnston,  Lorna  M.,  Ancaster 

Johnston,  Marilyn,  Stittsville 

Johnston,  Susan,  Ottawa 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


loiKv  Bjrtxr*  1..  WootlvilU 

luncs.  Carl,  ThorM 

loncv  Doroihy,  LoruUm 

loncv  Ciwm  S.,  Etohttoke 

lono,  Lduri«.  Brampton 

\one%,  Limla,  B<i(>i 

lonn,  Pat,  Smii/brd 

lothi.  Mar^garct 

Joyce,  Dan,  Peterborough 

loyce,  Sturon,  Sewmarket 

Kabli,  laisy,  Murti^m 

KaethlcT,  Alfred.  Sioux  Lookout 

Kaiura,  Gail.  Hamilton 

Kalin.  Myrr,  Gloucester 

Kamal.  Gamal 

Kammerer.  Fredenka, 
Mount  Hopf 

Karimuddin.  Ahmcr'forrctt. 
Matt/Ttc.  Andrcw/lani.  Bharti 

lUaaam.  Shdina.  Sorth  York 

Kavanagh.  Barry  F..  ThomhiU 

Kavanagh.  Sun,  Kinpton 

Kawarlha  World  Imuo  Centre 

%xM.  WUJum.  MIevilU 

Keating.  (Dr.)  Daniel  P..  Toronto 

Keewaytinook  Okimakanak 
TnKal  Clnuncil.  Sioux  Lookout 

Keith.  PatricM  R.,  Toronto 

KcOjr.  P.  Grcyory/Bame*.  Qivc. 
Setvborvufn 

Kemi  •  '«f 

Ar'  'logy.  B«Mc 

kiUsCounc 


KriiJall.  harry.  Sorth  Hay 

Kendall,  lohn  D..  Si'<>r()orouj;/i 

Kennedy,  Bruce,  CtimhnJge 

Kennedy,  Dave/Kennedy,  Pam. 
Combrulge 

Kenner  (Collegiate  &  Vocational 
Institute,  Technical  Service 
Studio  Department 

Kenora  &  District  Chamber  <'t 
Commerce 

Kenora  Board  of 
Education/Kenora  District 
Roman  Catholic  Separate  Sch(K>l 
Board,  Kenora 

Kenora  District  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board/Ontario 
F.nglish  Catholic  Teachers' 
Association,  Kenora  District, 
Kenora 

Kenora- Kccwatin  &  District 
Labour  Council,  Kenora 

Kenora  Women  Teachers' 
Association 

Kent  County  Board  of  Fxlucation 

Kent  CUiunty  Women  Teachers' 
Association 

Keown.  Howie,  Dundas 

Keown,  Pam.  r>uruhu 

Kerr.  Bernard  D..  Misstsuiuga 

Keuentini.  Salda.  Brampton 

Ket  waroo-  Nanoo, 
SharlerM/lulien, 
Leona/Dcchaiuay.  Nodinc 

Khan.(Dr.)Yaqoob 

Khan.  Anne.  Sarnia 

Killaloc  Public  School.  Home  & 
School  AMociation.  KUIalot 

King  Edward  School,  students 


Kingsbury,  Linda.  Orr<tHti 

Kingston  &  District  Ass<xution 
for  Community  Living,  Board  ot 
Directors,  Kmgston 

Kingston  Area  School  to 
Employment  Council.  Kingston 

Kingston  District  Chamber  of 
tU>mmcrce.  Kingston 

Kingston  Lmploymeni  St  Youth 
Services 

Kingston,  Frontcnac  and  Lennox 
and  Addington  Health  Unit 

Kingston  Literacy,  students. 
Kmgston 

Kingston  Public  Library.  Board. 
Kingston 

Kingston  Township  Industrial 
Landowners'  Association. 
Kingston 

Kinoshameg,  James  L, 
Wikwemikong 

Kirkland  Lake  (Collegiate  & 
Vocational  Institute 

Kirsh.  Fran,  Richmond  Hill 

Kitchener-Waterloo  Association 
for  Community  Living. 
Integrated  F.ducation  1j*I'  lor. r 
Kitchener 

Kitchener- Waterloo  Association 
for  txjmmunity  Living,  Kilthrner 

Kitchener-Waterloo  F.nglish 
School 

Kitchener- Waterloo  Symphony 

Klein.  Pierre  M. 

KnilK  Anna.  Waterloo 

Knill.  Paul 

Kollaard.  (ieorge.  Bowmanyillr 


kondor,  (Dr.)  C!eorge  A.. 
I'h under  Hay 

Koski,  Beverley,  Bngden 

Kostantin,  Walter,  Kenora 

Kostiuk.  Andrew/Kostiuk.  IXiris, 
Weston 

Kolras,  Danicllc/Marynick.  Kas 

Kovnats,  Tom,  U'ififti;>ejj 

Kowulchuk.  William.  Huntsville 

Kraft,  David,  roronfo 

Kraftcheck,  Ijurie.  Zuruh 

Kraus.  Mary 

Krciner-l>ey,  Heidi 

Kretschman,  Uwc 

Kronick,  Dorecn.  Torofiw 

Kutac.  (Mr.) 

L' Association  de  parents  et 
instituleurs  catholiques 
francophones  de  Sudbury. 
Sudhur)' 

Ijbate.  ludy,  Vtnemount 

1  jberge,  Susan.  Brampton 

Ijcavera.  Donna 

Lachapelle.  Ren<  H.,  Onllui 

Uird.  Mctiasa/Bradlcy.  Stacy 

I  jke  Superior  Board  of 
Fducalion,  Marathon 

I  jkehead  Association  (or 

<  .4>mmunity  Living,  Education 

I  ask  Force 

Ijkehead  Board  ..I  Iduulion. 
Til  under  Ray 

I  jkehead  R<iard  of  Fducalion. 
Adult  Education  Centre 


For  tha  Lov«  of  L«amin( 


Lakehead  Board  of  Education, 
School  Improvement  Council, 
Thunder  Bay 

Lakehead  Board  of  Education, 
Special  Education  Advisory 
Committee,  Thunder  Bay 

Lakehead  Council  of  Home  & 
School  Associations/Ontario 
Federation  of  Home  &  School 
Associations  Inc.,  Region  A  West 

Lakehead  District  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
Thunder  Bay 

Lakehead  District  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
Special  Education  Advisory 
Committee 

Lakehead  Environmental  Youth 
Alliance 

Lakewood  Intermediate  School, 
Kenora 

Lalas,  Miroslaw,  Aurora 

Lalonde,  Melissa/Bertrand, 
Sebastien/Pare,  Dominique/ 
Bourdon,  losianne 

Lalonde,  Tanya/Pineault, 
Genevieve 

Lamarche,  A.  J.  M.  (Art),  Kanata 

Lambrou,  Linda/Belle-Isle,  Guy 
Hawkesbury 

Lambton  County  Board  of 
Education 

Lambton  County  Principals' 
Association,  Sombra 

Lambton  County  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board 

Lambton  Health  Unit 

Lanark,  Leeds  &  Grenville 
County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board, 
Smith  Falls 


Lanark,  Leeds  &  Grenville 
County  Roman  Cathohc 
Separate  School  Board, 
Principals  &  Vice-Principals, 
Brockville 

Lander,  Jean,  Osgoode 

Langen,  Roger,  Toronto 

Laprairie,  Dinah 

Laramee,  lulien,  St-Albert 

Larocque,  Louise,  Chelmsford 

Laryea,  Edwin 

Laubach  Literacy  Ontario  Inc., 
Kitchener 

Laurila,  Edith,  Scarborough 

Laverty,  Matthew/Beardy, 
Tracy/Maud,  Amanda/Trout, 
Norma  Jean/Moran, 
Kristopher/Rundle, 
Dan/Hovifard,  Sonya/Hoppe, 
Esther 

Law,  lames  A.,  North  Bay 

Lawrence  Park  Collegiate, 
Curriculum  Committee,  Toronto 

Lawrence,  Virginia,  Mississauga 

Lawson,  George,  Thornhill 

Le  Clerc,  Pierre 

Lea,  Joseph  William,  Etobicoke 

Leaders-In-Action 

Learning  Consortium,  Toronto 

Learning  Consortium  Summer 
Institute,  Participant  Group 
1993,  Scarborough 

Learning  Disabilities  Association 
of  Chatham-Kent,  Chatham 

Learning  Disabilities  Association 
of  Cornwall  &  the  United, 
CountiesLeaming  Disabilities 
Association  of  Hamilton- 
Wentworth,  Hamilton 


Learning  Disabilities  Association 
of  Kingston,  Kingston 

Learning  Disabilities  Association 
of  Ontario,  Toronto 

Learning  Disabilities  Association 
of  Ottawa-Carleton 

Learning  Disabilities  Association 
of  Peterborough,  Peterborough 

Learning  Disabilities  Association 
of  Sault  Ste.  Marie 

Learning  Disabilities  Association 
of  South  Niagara 

Learning  Disabilities  Association 
of  St.  Catharines,  St.  Catharines 

Learning  Disabilities  Association 
of  Thunder  Bay,  Ad  Hoc 
Committee 

Learning  Disabilities  Association 
of  Windsor  &  Essex  County 

Learning  Disabilities  Association, 
Oshawa  Chapter,  Oshawa 

Learning  Disabilities  Association 
of  London-Middlesex 

Learning  for  a  Sustainable 
Future,  Ottawa 

Learnxs  Foundation,  Toronto 

Leary,  Daniella,  Mississauga 

Leblanc,  Melanie 

Leclerc,  Wilbrod,  Ottawa 

Lee,  Mary 

Leeds  &  Grenville  County  Board 
of  Education,  Counties  School 
Committee,  Brockville 

Leeds  &  Grenville  County 
Board  of  Education,  Brockville 

Lefebvre,  Lise,  Iroquois  Falls 

Leger,  Heather/Leger,  Rosaire, 
Cornwall 


Lehman,  Hugh/Lehman, 
Barbara,  Guelph 

Lehtiniemi,  L.,  Ottawa 

Lenaghan,  Lome  Albert,  Toledo 

Lennox  &  Addington  Family  & 
Children's  Services,  Board  of 
Directors,  Napanee 

Lennox  &  Addington  Women 
Teachers'  Association,  Napanee 

Lesbian  &  Gay  Youth  of  Toronto, 
Toronto 

Lessard,  Marc 

Levac,  Claude,  St-Isidore 

Levin,  Sanford,  London 

Lewis,  Michael,  Elliot  Lake 

Lin,  Jason  C. 

Lincoln  County  Board  of 
Education 

Lincoln  County  Board  of 
Education,  Team  Arts/Lakebreeze 
Public  School 

Lincoln  County  Catholic 
Principals'  Association 

Lincoln  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board 

Lincoln  County  School  of 
Performing  Arts, 
Niagara-on-the-Lake 

Lincoln  County  Women 
Teachers'  Association 

Linden  School 

Lindner,  Christine,  Kettleby 

Lindsay,  Joni 

Linklater,  M.  E.  (Peggy)/Rigg, 
Carol 

Linney,  Grant,  Georgetown 

Lipinski,  (Mr.)  T,  Oakville 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


Li^K^r  CoUcfpjIc  ln%tilutc,  Parent 
Ailvutiry  Committee 

Link.  Phillip  P..  Toronto 

Little  Red  Reading  Society 

Link  Red  Theatre.  Tonmio 

Link.  Roy,  Kingilon 

LiiAtM,  .\Urc,  Toronto 

Locken,  ludy,  Gloucester 

Logan.  Beatrice.  Samut 

Logan.  Dora  Taylor.  Ptrry  SounJ 

Loggu.  Mike/NcNiece,  Malt 

Uindon  &  District  Academy 
of  MedKine,  London 

London  &  Middlesex  County 
Roman  Catholic  School  Board 

London  &  Middlesex  Cx>unty 
Roman  OlholK  School  Board, 
Adult  &  (>>ntinuing  Education, 
Lonthn 

Ijtndon  &  .Middlesex  Cx>unly 
Roman  Catholic  School  Board. 
Special  Education  Advisory 
Committee 

l^ndon  &  Middlesex  County 
Roman  CUiholic  Secondary 
Schools.  Student  Council  Prime 
Ministers 

London  Chamber  of  Commerce 

London  Cxiuncil  for  Adult 
Education 

London  CouikiI  for  Adult 
Education.  Literacy  Committee 

Ijondon  Council  of  F^L  Families 
Ixmdon  Counal  of  Home  ft 


AMocialions 


London  Crou-l  ullurjl  Irjrnrr 
C'enirc,  LonJon 

l^ndon  Elementary  Public 
SchtMil  Adminislralurs' 
Auocijtion 

London  Home  Educators. 
LonJon 

London  Local  Planning 
Committee.  School-to- Work 
Sub-committee,  London 

London -Middlesex  Taxpayers' 
Coalition.  Education  Committee 

Ixindon  Public  Library  Board 

London  Regional  Catholic 
Parent -Teacher  Associations 

London  Science  Educators' 
Council 

London  Waldorf  School 

London  Women  Teachers' 
Association.  London 

Long,  lames  R.,  Kingston 

Long,  Thea.  Rodney 

Loraine.  Nancy  Threan. 
Sunderland 

Loraine.  Trish.  Toronto 

l^oranger,  Pierre,  Kockland 

Lord.  lohn/Hulchison,  Pegx^ 
Kitchener 

Lordan.  Meredith.  FJohicokr 

U>rento,  l^avid.  Renfrew 

Lorenz.  Robert.  Sudbury 

Love,  Maureen.  Downsview 

Lovcgrovc.  Fiona 

Ixnwc.  Dan 

Ixiwc,  Susan 

Ixiwrrison.  ]m\r.  iwiiKn 


lover,  Bcn/l oyer,  (iluru,  \irnui 

Lucas,  Helen,  Richmond  Hill 

Luis,  Derek 

l.unci,  Ruth  A.,  Scarborough 

Lurie,  Tania,  Thornhill 

1  u/a.  William  S..  Scarborough 

Lyman,  Bonnie,  Ottawa 

Lyons.  Simonc.  Scarborough 

M.  F.  McHugh  School, 
Parents' Group,  Ottawa 

Macdonald,  Hu 

Macdonald,  Kim,  Branlford 

Macdonald.  Marthe 

Macdonald-Simons. 
Dorothy/Simons.  William  M., 
Hastings 

MacDonald.  David 

MacDonald,  Linda  K., 
Scarborough 

MacDonald.  K.  MacDonald, 
Sandi 

Macfarlane,  Clyde,  Kingston 

MacGrcgor,  Colin,  CMmbridge 

Mackay,  Rory,  Gananoque 

MacKendrick.  Mo.  Surrey 

Mackcn7ie,  Dave 

Mackenzie,  Gordon,  Nipigon 

MacLean.  William  N.,  Hunisville 

Maclxllan,  (Mrs.)  S..  .Sioux 
l-ookoul 

MacLeod,  Douglas  G. 

Macnaughtnn.  Richard/ 
Macnaughton,  l><irolhy/ 
McNeely,  lane/McNeely.  Robert, 
Saull  Sie  Mane 


Macrae,  (.jiul,  iiuflpti 

Mader,  Anne,  J>frii»/iri>)' 

Madore,  lordic/Meeking,  Charles 

Maged,  Hussein,  Orleans 

Magic  des  iellres,  Vanirr 

Maiden,  ludith,  Niagara  Falls 

Majic,  Charlotte,  Port  Hope 

Maki,  Bob,  Oahille 

Malcolm.  M.  Ruth,  Don  Mills 

Malikail,  j.  S.,  Ottawa 

Malloy,  Ruth  A..  Toronto 

Maloney,  Gretta, 
.Sf.  Andrews  West 

Mansfield,  Bcate,  Belleville 

Manthci,  Rcnale  I.,  Hamilton 

Manuel,  Kendra 

Manzl,  Helmut  F..  Oakville 

Maple  View  Fxlucation 
Mennonite  (Church,  Education 
(ximmittee,  GadshiU 

Marath«,  FJinath  V.. 
Sf.  (Mtharines 

Marcottc,  Margot,  Pelawawa 

Mark,  Hugh  W.,  Ottawa 

Mark,  Ken 

Mark,  Ken/lohnson, 
Dawne/Shapiro,  Isaac/Huggin. 
lames 

Markham  Ad  Hoc  Oimmittee 
for  Race  &  Klhnocultural  Fx]uity. 
Downsview 

Marks.  Elysta.  Toronto 

Marlcau,  Gilles,  Orient 

Marquardi,  FJeonor.  Atikokan 


For  ttw  Lov«  of  Learning 


Marquardt,  Susanne, 
Thunder  Bay 

Marquis,  Vincent 

Marshall,  (Mr.)  W.  T.,  Kingston 

Marshall,  Lisa,  Ottawa 

Marshall,  Nancy 

Martel,  Marie-Josee,  Ottawa 

Martin,  Barbara 

Martin,  Danika/Giroux, 
Guylaine 

Martin,  Judy,  Pickering 

Martin,  Lawrence 

Martin,  Rosalind,  Mississauga 

Martino,  Loreen,  Don  Mills 

Martinoski,  Michelle,  Markham 

Marx,  David,  Weston 

Mascotto,  Bill,  Geraldton 

Masny,  Diana/Lajoie,  Mario 

Mason,  David  G. 

Mathematics,  Science  & 
Technology  Education  Group, 

Kingston 

Mather,  Bruce 

Mathwani,  (Dr.)  Shirish  H., 
St.  John's 

Matrican  Learning  Systems  Ltd., 
Willowdale 

Matson,  Dianne,  Thunder  Bay 

Maudsley,  Donald  B.,  Toronto 

Mawson,  Cathy/Mawson,  Mark, 
Ottawa 

May,  Fred,  Bolton 

May,  Ruth,  Bolton 

Mayes,  Shirley,  Barrie 

Mazmanian,  Raffi  N.,  Fonthill 


McCaffrey,  Jack/Hicks,  Lome, 
Toronto 

McCaskill,  (Mrs.)  A.,  Dalkeith 

McColl,  J.  Stewart 

McCormick,  Betty,  Maxville 

McCuaig,  Jim,  Thunder  Bay 

McCusker,  Thomas 

McDiarmid,  Garnet  L., 
Port  Colborne 

McDonald,  Carol,  Scarborough 

McDonald,  John  R,  Amherstburg 

McDougall,  Scott  A.,  Newmarket 

McElgunn,  Barbara,  West  Hill 

McElhone,  Wayne 

McEwen,  Tracie 

McFadden,  John,  Toronto 

McGann,  Kathie 

McGee,  Wayne  L.,  Oakville 

McGill,  G.  H.,  Ncpean 

McGregor- Hunter,  Susan, 
Cochrane 

McGregor-Morris,  Elaine,  St. 
Thomas 

McGuinty,  Greg 

McHugh,  Kim 

Mclntyre,  Edith,  Peterborough 

Mclntyre,  Keith 

Mclntyre,  Sally  M.,  Kars 

McKellar,  Donald  A. 

McKenna,  Joan,  Toronto 

McKenzie,  Duke 

McKeown,  Hugh 

McKinnon,  Lynn,  Hillsburgh 

McKinnon,  Madeline,  Madoc 


McLarty,  Peter 

McMaster  University,  Hamilton 

McMaster  University  Students' 
Union  Inc.,  Hamilton 

McMillan,  John.,  Scarborough 

McMiUen,  Beth,  Scarborough 

McNabb  Park  Elementary 
School,  Home  &  School 
Association 

McNair,  Lyle 

McNairn,  (Mrs.)  Ken, 
White  Lake 

McPhee,  Betty,  Scarborough 

McRandall,  Roderic  A.,  Bancroft 

Meaghan,  (Professor)  Diane 

MediaWatch 

Medwin,  Bob 

Menard,  Monique,  Ottawa 

Mercier,  Lori 

Metro  Principals'  Council,  Adult 
Day  School  Credit  Programs 

Metro  Renaissance,  Scarborough 

Metro  Special  Education 
Advisory  Committee  (SEAC) 
Networking  Committee, 
North  York 

Metro  Toronto  Secondary 
Teachers'  Organization,  Toronto 

Metropolitan  Separate 
School  Board,  Toronto 

Metropolitan  Toronto 
Association  for  Community 
Living,  Education  Committee, 
Toronto 

Metropolitan  Toronto  Police, 

Toronto 

Metropolitan  Toronto  Principals' 
Council,  Toronto 


Metropolitan  Toronto  School 
Board/Etobicoke  Board  of 
Education/Scarborough  Board  of 
Education/Board  of  Education 
for  the  City  of  Toronto 

Metz,  Robert 

Meyer,  (Dr.)  John  R. 

Meyers,  Beverly  J.,  Campbellford 

Meyers,  Mary,  Toronto 

Mezouri,  Ahmed,  Toronto 

Michaud,  Pierre 

Miclash,  Frank 

Middlesex  County  Board  of 
Education 

Middlesex  Women  Teachers' 
Association/Ontario  Public 
School  Teachers'  Federation, 
Middlesex  District 

Miguil,  Samatar,  North  York 

Mikrovica,  Darlene 

Miles,  Michael  C,  Orillia 

Millar,  Donna 

Millen,  David,  Ottawa 

Miller,  (Rev.)  Jim,  Wallaceburg 

Miller,  Jack 

Miller,  Jasper  J.,  Toronto 

Miller,  Joan,  Deep  River 

Miller,  Judith,  Ottawa 

Miller,  Maria,  Toronto 

Miller,  Walter  C,  Brooklin 

MiUs,  Dale,  Vankleek  Hill 

Mills,  Nicole,  Cornwall 

Mills,  Stephen  J.,  Mississauga 

Milne,  Kenneth,  Guelph 

Milnes,  John  E.,  Cornwall 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


Mtncrv  Pofolhy,  Niagant  MU 

Minulik  PuMk  School 

Minutik  School  Suff 

Mintatry  of  Culture.  Tourism 
and  Recrraiion.  Torvnio 

Minutry  of  (lullurc,  Tourum 
an«l  Rrcrnlion,  The  Librarm 
and  Community  Iniormalinn 
Branch,  Toronto 

Ministry  of  Education  & 
Training,  Eastern  Ontario 
Rcpon,  fSl.  Curriculum 
Advisory  Committee.  Ntptan 

Ministry  of  Education  & 
Training  Advisory  (^uikiI 
of  Special  Education 

Minoque.  Sherry 

Minry,  I.ee,  Scarborough 

Mississauga  Aru  (^uncil, 
Missujdufa 

Mississauga  Board  of  Trade, 
Education  &  Training 
Committee,  Musiuauga 

Mississauga.  .Mayor's  Youth 
Advisory  ( j>mmittec.  Ad  Hoc 
Onnmittee  on  Education. 
Munstauga 

Mitchell.  Frances,  RKhmond  Hill 

Mitchell,  Richard.  Iroifuots  Falb 

Mobile  Business  Start -Up 
Program,  Sonh  York 

Modem  languages  fxnincil, 
Sarhofough 

•■r.  Parent  Advisory 

Mohammed.  Tracy,  S4arkluim 

V(on«igfK>r  Eraser  College, 
•tiMlcnt*.  Toronto 


Mcintgomery,  ( Dr. )  William  R. 
H.,  Smithville 

Montpcllier.  Ryan 

Moon,  Peter.  Toronto 

Moore.  Tom.  Collmgwood 

Moose  Crce  Education  Authority 

MiMite  Factory  Home  and 
School  Working  (j^mmitiee 

Morello,  ( IJr. )  Murray 

Morgan.  (Dr.)  Griffith  A.  V., 
Guelph 

Morgan,  lonathan,  Kcmptvtlle 

Morison  School,  Parent -Teacher 
Group,  Deep  River 

.Morley,  Minou.  Ottawa 

Morrell.  (Sr.)  Kay,  Toronto 

Morrison.  Kenneth  L, 
Thunder  Bay 

Morrison.  Sheila.  Toronto 

Morro,  Sheila.  5c<irfiorou;/i 

Morse,  Alison/Heath,  Sharen, 
Ttllionburg 

Mortley,  Marlene,  Hillburgh 

Moscley-Williams.  Betty, 
North  Bay 

Moss,  J.  Gerry,  Port  Elgin 

Motiar,  Ahmed,  Thomhill 

Mrosovsky.  N.,  Toronto 

Muir,  WillUm  A.,  Woodtto,  k 

Muller,  Norman.  Toronto 

Mulligan.  (Rev.)  lames  T. 

'  Council  of 
'  um 

Muhicullural  History  Socict. 
of  Ontario,  Toronto 


Munn,  Eric 

Munro,  Julia 

Munro.  William/Munro,  janel, 
Gim/<ichir 

Murphy-Massc,  Patricia. 
Thornhill 

Murray- Ijwrencc,  Alana,  I'htiley 

Murray,  Roy  V. 

Muslim  Educational  Institute 
of  Ontario,  Unionville 

Muslim  Network  for  Education 
&  Research,  North  York 

Mussard,  Trudy 

Musselman,  Ken,  Elora 

Myers,  John,  Toronto 

Nadeau,  Andr*,  Caprfol 

Nagra,  Manroop,  Markham 

Nair,A.S.  (Krishna) 

Nakogee,  Karen,  Moose  Factory 

Nathoo,  Zahra/Visnani,  Fcnrana 

National  Access  Awarencs*  Week, 
Provincial  Education 
Subcommittee,  Toronto 

National  Capital  Alliance  on 
Race  Relations.  Ollttwii 

National  ('ongrcss  of  Italian 
Canadians,  Ontario  Region, 
Toronto 

National  Oiuncil  of  Canadian 
I  ilipinn  Associations,  (ireatcr 
Toronto  Region.  Toronto 

Nelsjin,  Fiona,  Toronto 

Network  for  F.ducalion 
Without  Pollution,  Toronto 

Ncuman.  Carolyn,  A»H'r»i<if»»'iWr 

New  Tecumseh  &  Area  Arts 
(  4>uncil,  AlUtton 


Newman.  Eleanor.  Smith  Fallt 

Newman.  Tracy,  Brampton 

Newmarket  Chamber  of. 
Commerce 

Niagara  O>alition  for  F^ucation 
Reform,  Niagara-on-lhelMke 

Niagara  Falls  Chamber  of 
Commerce,  Education 
Committee.  Niagara  halls 

Niagara  South  Board  of 
Education,  Welland 

Niagara  South  Women  Teachers' 
A.sstM.iation,  Port  (.olborne 

Niagara  Symphony  Association, 
Education  Cx)mmitlee, 
St.  Catharmes 

Nicholls,  Gordon,  (Mmbndge 

Niels,  Richard  |.  E. 

Nielsen,  D.,  Barrie 

Nipigon-Red  Rock  Board  of 
Education,  Red  Rock 

Nipissing  Board  of  Education 

Nipissing  Board  of  FUJucation 

Nipissing  (^immunity  School, 
students.  North  Bay 

Nipissing  District  Roman 
C:atholic  Separate  v1iim>1  Hojrd. 
FSL,  Programs 

Nipissing  University.  Faculty  of 
Flducatlon 

Nipissing  Women  Teachers' 
AsscKialion.  North  Bay 

Nippel,  Bill.  Kitchener 

Nishnawbe  Aski  \jimn 
Thunder  Bay 

Nishri.  Ruth.  Willowdale 

Nixon,  Deborah/lgnatieff, 
Nicholas 


For  th«  Lo«»  o(  Lccmmg 


Nokee  Kwe  Adult  Education 
Centre,  Chatham 

Nolet,  Lise 

Norfolk  Board  of 
Education/Haldimand-Norfolk 
Regional  Health  Department, 
Healthy  Lifestyles  Committee, 
Simcoe 

Norfolk  Women  Teachers' 
Association,  Simcoe 

Norkum,  Joan,  Caledon  East 

North  Bay  and  District 
Association  for  Community 
Living 

North  Bay  Immigrant  Support 
Services,  North  Bay 

North  of  Superior  District 
Roman  Catholic  Separate  School 
Board,  Special  Education 
Program,  Terrace  Bay 

North  York  Board  of  Education, 
North  York 

North  York  Board  of  Education, 
Special  Education  Advisory 
Committee,  North  York 

North  York  Board  of  Education, 
Secondary  School  Principals 

North  York  Inter-Agency  & 
Community  Council,  North  York 

North  York  Parent  Assembly, 
Wittowdale 

North  York  Principals' 
Association,  North  York 

North  York  Women  Teachers' 
Association,  Thornhill 

Northern  Nishnawbe  Education 
Council,  Sioux  Lookout 

Northlea  Public  School,  Home  & 
School  Association 


Northumberland  &  Newcastle 
Board  of  Education 

Northumberland  &  Newcastle 
Board  of  Education,  Outreach 
Project 

Northumberland  Christian 
School  Society,  Cobourg 

Northumberland-Clarington 
Board  of  Education,  Cobourg 

Nowak,  Mary,  Kitchener 

Nowlan,  David  M.,  Toronto 

O'Connell,  (Dr.)  Colin/Schultz,, 

Thomas 

O'Dwyer,  Gary 

O'Farrell,  Lawrence,  Kingston 

O'Leary,  Denyse,  East  York 

O'Mahony,  Siobhan,  LaSalle 

O'Shea,  M.  Isabella,  Wolfe  Island 

O'Sullivan,  Patrick/O'Sullivan, 
Sandra,  Sudbury 

Obeda,  Marian,  London 

Oertel,  Patricia,  Dundas 

Association  for  the  Advancement 
of  Visual  Media  (OFA),  Etobicoke 

Office  provincial  de  I'education 
de  la  foi  catholique  de  I'Ontario, 
Hearst 

Officer,  Donald  R.,  Gloucester 

Ogden,  Steve,  Aylmer 

Ojibway  Tribal  Family  Services, 
Kenora 

Okonkwo,  Clem,  Scarborough 

Oliver,  Rosemary,  Scarborough 

Olmsted,  Bob,  Orangevilie 

Olsen,  Lynda,  Belleville 


Ontario  Ad  Hoc  Committee  on 
Juvenile  Delinquency  &  Crime, 
Gravenhurst 

Ontario  Advisory  Council  on 
Disability  Issues,  Toronto 

Ontario  Advisory  Council  on 
Women's  Issues/Conseil 
consultatif  de  I'Ontario  sur  la 
condition  feminine,  Toronto 

Ontario  Alliance  of  Christian 

Schools,  Ancaster 

Ontario  Arts  Council,  Toronto 

Ontario  Association  for  Child 
Care  in  Education,  North  York 

Ontario  Association  for 
Community  Living,  North  York 

Ontario  Association  for 
Continuing  Education,  London 

Ontario  Association  for 
Counselling  &  Attendance 
Services 

Ontario  Association  for 
Counselling  &  Attendance 
Services/Sault  Ste.  Marie  Board 
of  Education,  Attendance 
Counsellors 

Ontario  Association  for 
Geographic  &  Environmental 
Education,  London 

Ontario  Association  for 
Mathematics  Education/Ontario 
Mathematic  Co-ordinators' 
Association 

Ontario  Association  for 
Supervision  and  Curriculum 
Development,  Kitchener 

Ontario  Association  for  the 
Supervision  of  Physical  &  Health 
Education,  St.  Catharines 

Ontario  Association  of  Adult  & 
Continuing  Education  School 
Board  Administrators 


Ontario  Association  of  Catholic 
School  Students'  Council 
Federation 

Ontario  Association  of  Deans 
of  Education,  London 

Ontario  Association  of 
Junior  Educators,  Stratford 

Ontario  Association  of 
Professional  Social  Workers, 
School  Social  Work  Committee, 
Toronto 

Ontario  Association  of 
Professional  Social  Workers/ 
Ontario  Association  of  Speech/ 
Language  Pathologists  & 
Audiologists/Ontario 
Psychological  Association, 
Torotrto 

Ontario  Association  of  School 
Business  Officials,  Toronto 

Ontario  Association  of  Speech- 
Language  Pathologists  & 
Audiologists,  School  Speech- 
Language  Pathologists' 
Committee,  Scarborough 

Ontario  Association  of  Speech 
Language  Pathologists  & 
Audiologists,  Wellington- 
Dufferin  Regional  Chapter 

Ontario  Association  of  Speech 
Language  Pathologists  & 
Audiologists,  Hamilton  Regional 
Group,  Stoney  Creek 

Ontario  Association  of  Teachers 
of  Italian 

Ontario  Association  of  the  Deaf, 
Toronto 

Ontario  Association  of  Youth 
Employment  Centres 


Vol,  IV     Appendices 


'iiiTator  t 
'  '  \iJoculion 

ol  BuuiWM  FdtK'aliun 
Dtrtcton/Onuriu  Astocuium  ol 
BuancM  Ethicaior'i  Co- 
oniintton 

OnunoCilholic  Supcrvivirv 
Offken'  AstocUtion 

Onlario  (^tholw  Suprrvuury 
OtTicm'  Auoculion.  Am  2 
Meeting  Pankiptnts,  WiUowtUiit 

OnUrio  Chainber  of  Commrrcc 

Ontario  Classkal  Auociation. 
Siarborough 

Onlxiio  Co-opcralive  Education 
Aiiociation,  Concord 

Onlano  Coaiition  of  Children 
&  Youth,  Toronto 

Ontaru)  (.onfederation  of 
L'nivmily  Fatully  Auociationt. 
Tor  on  10 

Ontario  (.<»nfcTcnce  of 
CaihoiK  BuhofH 

Ontario  Council  for  Children 
with  Behavioural  Ouorden 

Onlano  Council  of  French  as  a 
Second  language  Consultancy 

Ontario  CourKil  of  Regents  for 
CoUegn  of  Applied  Arts  & 
Technology 

Onurw  Council  of  Sikhs. 
Toronto 

Onlano  Cuhural  Society 
ofthcDcaf.NDrt/irM 

Ontario  DyilcxM  Aitocialion. 
Otmim 

Oniwio  Educational  Leadenhip 
CenlT'  "Wn  of 

OntA-  •  f.Ki 


l>nijrio  Hcmcniary  (^tholic 
Irachrrt'  AsstKiatiun,  Brant 

Ontario  Elementary  (^iholic 
Irachers'  Assocution.  Nipiuing 
Unit 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association,  I  >t(>iwj 
Unit 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Asu>cialion,  North  ol 
Superior  Unit/Onlario  English 
(Catholic  Teachers'  AsMK'iation, 
Mornepjyne-Michipicolcn  Unit, 
Sitinitouwiuigf 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  AsstKiation, 
Metrnp«)litan  Toronio 
EJemenlary  Unit 

Oniario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  AsMKiation,  Oxford 
tjiuniy  Unit/Oxford  County 
Roman  (Utholic  Separate  School 
Board.  Woodstock 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association.  Niagara 
Secondary  Unit 

Oniario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association,  Windsor 
Elementary  Unit 

Onlano  Fjiglish  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association.  Toronio 
Secondary  Unit.  Religious  Affairs 
C^mmiltec,  Scarborough 

i^h  Catholic 
•-  ijiion.  Wetland 
Unit.  \^rUan,i 

Ontario  English  (  atholii. 
Teachers'  Associalion,  Toronio 
Secondary  Unit 

Ontario  English  C^lholk 
Teachers'  Aatociation.  York  Unit, 
Markham 


Ontario  English  l^atholic 
Teachers'  AsMKiation,  Stormont, 
Dundas  &  Glengarry  Unit, 
Comwull 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association,  Windsor 
Secondary  Unit 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association,  Lambton 
Unit,  Samm 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association,  Drydcn- 
Sioux  l.ookout  Unit, 
Sioux  Lookout 

Ontario  English  (.atholic 
Teachers'  Association,  UufTerin- 
Peei  Elementary  Unit, 
Mtistsuiuga 

Oniario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Associalion,  Carleton 
Unit 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association,  Brock 
Secondary  Unit,  St.  Calhanna 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association 

Oniario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Associalion,  DufTerin- 
Peel,  Secondary  Unit 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association.  Durham 
UnilOnlario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association,  lanark, 
Leeds  fk  ( irenvillc  Unit/ 
AsMKialion  des  enseignanles  el 
des  enseignants  franco-ontarien* 
-  (>iml6k  de  l,anark,  Ixeds  & 
Grenville 

Onlann  English  Cjlholic 
Teachers'  AsMKialion.  Wellington 
Unit 


Ontario  English  (^iholic 
Teachers'  AsstKiation,  Hamilton 
Secondary  Unit.  Hamilton 

Ontario  English  (.atholic 
Teachers'  AsstKiation,  Erontenac- 
Lennox  &  Addington  Unit, 
Kingiton 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association,  Lincoln 
Unit 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
I'eachers'  AsstKiation,  London- 
Middlesex  Unit 

Ontario  English  (^tholic 
1'cachers'  AsstKiation,  Sudbury 
Elementary  Unit,  Sudbury 

Oniario  English  CUlholic 
Teachers'  AsstKiation.  Eisex  Unit, 
Euex 

Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association,  Sault  Sle. 
Marie  Unit.  .S<iu/r  .S(e.  Mane 

Oniario  Family  Studies/Home 
Economic  Educators' 
AsstKiation,  Guelph 

Ontario  Federation  of  Home  & 
School  Associations,  Inc., 
Toronto 

Ontario  Federation  of  Home  & 
School  Associations,  Regit>n  I, 
C/inr^omOntario  Federation  of 
Home  and  SchrmI  Associations, 
Inc.,  TtifortrtJ 

Ontario  Federation  of 
Independent  Schtvils,  Ottawa 

Ontario  Federation  of  Labour, 
I  km  Millt 

Onlano  Federation  of  School 
Athletic  AswKiations.  Barrif 

Ontario  Federation  of 
Symphony  Orchestras.  Sudbury 


For  tt««  LOM  o<  LMmtnc 


Ontario  Foundation  for 
Educator  Exchanges,  North  York 

Ontario  Guidance  Co- 
ordinators' Association, 
Mississauga 

Ontario  Historical  Society 

Ontario  History  &  Social  Science 
Teachers'  Association 

Ontario  History  Consultants' 
Association/Ontario  Geography 
Consultants'  Association, 
Scarborough 

Ontario  Literacy  Coalition, 
Toronto 

Ontario  March  of  Dimes, 
Toronto 

Ontario  Medical  Association, 
Committee  on  Child  Welfare 

Ontario  Modern  Language 
Teachers'  Association,  Toronto 

Ontario  Moral/Values  Education 
Association,  Scarborough 

Ontario  Multi-Faith  Coalition 
for  Equity  in  Education, 
Scarborough 

Ontario  Museum  Association, 
Toronto 

Ontario  Music  Educators' 
Association,  Brockville 

Ontario  Native  Women's 
Association,  Thunder  Bay 

Ontario  Peer  Helpers' 
Association,  Brockville 

Ontario  Physical  &  Health 
Education  Association/ 
University  of  Ottawa  Heart 
Institute,  Nepean 

Ontario  Prevention 
Clearinghouse 


Ontario  Principals'  Association, 
Toronto 

Ontario  Psychological 
Association,  Section  on 
Psychology  in  Education 

Ontario  Public  Library 
Association 

Ontario  Public  School  Boards' 
Association,  Toronto 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  Lincoln 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  Hamilton  District, 
Hamilton 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  Durham  District, 
Whitby 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation  Toronto 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  Stormont,  Dundas 
and  Glengarry  District 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  Victoria  District, 
Lindsay 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  York  Region 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  Peterborough 
District,  Peterborough 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  North  York  District, 
North  York 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  Ottawa  District 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  Toronto  District, 

Toronto 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  Frontenac  District, 
Kingston 


Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  London  &  Oxford 
County  Districts 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  Thunder  Bay 
District/Ontario  English 
Catholic  Teachers'  Association, 
Thunder  Bay,  Elementary 
Unit/Ontario  English  Catholic 
Teachers'  Association,  Thunder 
Bay  District,  Secondary 
Unit/Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachers'  Federation,  Thunder 
Bay  District/Lakehead  Women 
Teachers'  Association, 
Thunder  Bay 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  Sault  Ste.  Marie 
District,  Sault  Ste.  Marie 

Ontario  Public  School  Teachers' 
Federation,  North  Bay  District 

Ontario  Public  Supervisory 
Officials'  Association,  Belleville 

Ontario  Public  Supervisory 
Officials'  Association, 
Southwestern,  Ontario  Region 

Ontario  School  Board  Reform 

Network,  Thornhill 

Ontario  School  Counsellors' 
Association 

Ontario  School  Library 
Association,  Toronto 

Ontario  Science  Centre, 
Don  Mills 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Principals'  Council,  Central 
Region,  Scarborough 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Principals'  Council 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association, 
Northeastern  Region 


Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  Western 
Region 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association, 
Northeastern  Region 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  London 
Region 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  Western 
Region,  Sarnia  Cabinet 
Members,  Sarnia 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  Central 
Metro-West  Region,  Tliornhill 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association, 
Northeastern  Region 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  Eastern- 
South  Region 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  Eastern- 
South  Region 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachers'  Federation,  District  7, 
Niagara  South,  Welland 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachers'  Federation,  District  8 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachers'  Federation,  District  48 
(Dufferin),  Orangeville 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachers'  Federation,  District  56 
(North  Shore),  EHioflflite 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


iiUf*  VhtH>l 
\rjiion,  Dulrict  42. 
UuuuL.  iuiinh  Falts 

Ontario  SccofMUry  School 
Trachm'  Folcraiion.  Thunticr 
Bay  Dtvuton 

OnUrio  Secondary  School 
Trachm'  Fedrration,  Red  Lake 
DutrKl.  fUti  Lake 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachm'  Federation,  Nipigon- 
Rcd  Rock  Ptviuon.  Local  29, 
fteJRxk 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Trachen'  Federation,  Kirkland 
Lake  I>ivi»ion  of  Dutrici  32. 
Kirkland  Ijtke 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachen'  Federation.  Dutricts  t 

Ontario  Secottdiry  School 
Teachen'  Federation,  District  2 1 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Trachen'  Federation,  District  10. 
Profcuional  Students'  Support 
iVnoni>el 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachen'  Federation.  District  20. 
Frontcftac,  Kinpion 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachen'  Federation,  District  18, 
fVlcrborough/Oitano 
Secondary  School  Teachen' 
Federation.  Disinci  49. 
North umberbnd  &  Newcastle/ 
^  hool 
[hstrict  50. 
Vta.ti<rkt-  i  Uliburlun 


I  10. 


RcgiLrn  at  PccU  MiuuMiuga 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachen'  Federation.  Toronto 


Onuriii  Scvoiiiljry  Vhinil 
Tcaihcfi'  Federation 

Onianu  Secondary  School 
Teachen'  Federation,  District  27. 
Simciie,  Biirrif 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachen'  Federation,  District  26 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachen'  Federation.  District  1 7. 
Whitby 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachen'  Federation, 
Pntfeuional  Student  Services 
Personnel 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachers'  Federation,  Maniloulin 
Secondary  School  West  Bay, 
Mamloulin  liland 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Tcjihcn'  Federation,  District  M). 
Algoma 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachers'  Federation,  District  31, 
Su4yfrur>Ontario  Secondary 
School  Teachen'  Federation, 
District  24.  Waterloo 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachen'  Federation,  District  - 
Brant 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Teachen'  Federation,  District  51, 
East  York.  Toronto 

Ontario  Separate  School 
Trustees'  Association.  Toronto 

Ontario  Separate  School 
Trustees' Association.  ToriwK. 

Ontario  Separate  School 
Trustees'  Association.  Toronto 

Ontario  Separate  Supervisory 
BusincM  Official  Asaocialion 

Ontario  Society  for  FducalHin 
Through  Art.  Mi»nuiufii 


Dnurio  S«Kicty  lor  hducjiion 
I'hruugh  Art 

Ontario  Teachen'  Federation. 
7i>rt>/ifi) 

Ontario  Technical  Directors' 
Association,  AUanburg 

Ontario  Technological  Education 
Co-ordinators'  Council 

Ontario  Tourism  Education 
C^ouncil.  Board  of  Directors. 
Toronto 

Ontario  Traffic  Conference 
Safety  &  Education  (Committee, 
Burlington 

Ontario  Training  &  Adjustment 
Board 

Ontario.  Inlcrministerial 
Committee  on  Gender  Equity  in 
Education  &  Training,  Toronto 

Ontario,  Ministry  of  Citizenship, 
Ontario  Anti- Racism  Secretariat, 
Toronto 

Ontario,  Ministry  of  (;ulturc. 
Tourism  &  Recreation, 
Recreation  Division,  Toronto 

Ontario,  Ministry  of  Culture, 
lourism  &  Recreation.  Toronto 

Ontario.  Ministry  of  Fxlucation 
&  Training.  Office  of  Bilingual/ 
Bicultural  Education  for  Deaf 
(Children.  Milton 

Ontario,  Planning  & 
Implementation  Commission, 
Toronto 

'  <nlario.  Workplace  Health  & 
Safety  Agency,  Toronto 

Orangeville  District  Secondaty 
Sch(K>l.  .Modern  languages  & 
Associates  I>epartment, 
Orangeville 


Organization  lor  Quality 
FUlucation,  Hastings- Prince 
Edward  (Aiunties 
C'hapter/Sidncy  Township  Rate- 
Payers'  AssiKiation 

Organization  for  Quality 
Education.  I  jmblon  Qiunty 
Branch 

Organization  for  Quality  in 
Education.  Waterloo  Chapter 

Organization  for  Quality  of 
Education 

Organization  of  Canadian 
Symphony  Musicians 

Organization  of  Parents  of  Black 
(Children 

Organization  of  Parents  of  Black 
Children  (OPBC). 
TorofiMOrganization  of  Spanish- 
Speaking  Educators  of 
Ontario/Hispanic  Council. 
Education  Committee/Spanish- 
Speaking  Parents'  Liaison 
(^immiltec.  Toronto 

Oriole  Park  School,  Curriculum 
(ximmittee 

Orr,Cjrl 

Orrctt,  I  June 
(xincord 

Orton, /Dr.  I  Maureen  |..  loronto 

Osborne.  Helen.  Bancroft 

Oshawa  &  District  Association 
for  Community  Living. 
F^ducalion  Oimmiltee.  Ofhawa 

Oshawa  Taxpayen'  Cxialition. 
(hhatva 

Ottawa  Board  nt  Mucation, 
Ottawa 

Ottawa  Board  of  FJucation 
Ratepayers'  Association.  Ottawa 


Hti  Vm  Unw  of  Learning 


Ottawa  Board  of  Education, 
Adult  High  School,  Teachers, 
Onawa 

Ottawa  Board  of  Education, 
Alternative  Schools  Advisory 
Committee 

Ottawa  Board  of  Education,  Arts 
Advisory  Committee 

Ottawa  Board  of  Education, 
Computers  Helping  the 
Instructional  Program  Advisory 
Committee,  Ottawa 

Ottawa  Board  of  Education, 
Continuing  Education 
Department,  Ottawa 

Ottawa  Board  of  Education, 
Joint  Council  of  Elementary  & 
Secondary  School  Advisory 
Committees 

Ottawa-Carleton  Coalition  for 
Literacy,  Ottawa 

Ottawa-Carleton  ESL  Support 
Coalition,  Ottawa 

Ottawa-Carleton  Immigrant 
Services  Organization,  Ottawa 

Ottawa-Carleton  Inner-City 
Education  Association,  Ottawa 

Ottawa-Carleton  Learning 
Foundation,  Kanata 

Ottawa-Carleton  School  Day 
Nursery  Inc.,  Ottawa 

Ottawa  Christian  School 
Association,  Ottawa 

Ottawa  Elementary  Principals' 
Association,  Ottawa 

Ottawa  ESL  Community,  Ottawa 

Ottawa  Roman  Catholic  Separate 
School  Board,  Parent  Advisory 
Committee,  Ottawa 


Ottawa  Roman  Catholic  Separate 
School  Board,  Ottawa 

Our  Lady  of  Fatima  School, 
Parent-Teacher  Advisory  Group 

Our  Schools/Our  Selves, 
Editorial  Board,  Toronto 

Outward  Bound 

Overland  Adult  Learning  Centre, 
Advisory  Committee,  Don  Mills 

Owen,  David,  Catnnore 

Page,  Irene 

Pai,  Dinesh,  Kanata 

Palestine  House,  Mississauga 

Palmer,  B.  A.,  Sarnia 

Panar,  (Dr.)  Joshua,  North  York 

Panel  on  Learning  (Shaw  Cable 
TV),  St  Thomas 

Pangle,  Lorraine  Smith,  Toronto 

Pankiw,  Olga,  Etobicoke 

Pape  Adolescent  Resource  Centre 

Papineau,  L./St.  Cyr, 
Paul/Bordeleau,  Andre 

Parents  &  Citizens  for  Christian 
Education,  Simcoe 

Parents  Against  Teachers'  Strikes 
(RA.T.S.),  Sarnia 

Parents  Against  Violence 

Parents  Assisting  Students  to 
Succeed  (PASS),  Burlington 

Parents,  Families  &  Friends  of 
Lesbians  &  Gays  (P-FLAG) 

Parents  for  a  Christian  Public 
School,  Waterloo 

Parents  Improving  Education  in 
Peel,  Brampton 

Parents  in  Action,  Newmarket 


Parents  In  Action 

Parents  of  Project  90 

Park  Street  Collegiate  Institute, 
Teaching  staff,  Orillia 

Park,  Sue 

Parmar,  Sudha,  Markham 

Parry  Sound  High  School, 
students.  Parry  Sound 

Partners  in  Change  Pilot  Project 

Partners  Initiating  Quality 
Educational  Directives 
(PIQUED),  Gloucester 

Partnership  in  Education 
Program 

Patel,  Shetal,  Markham 

Patel,  Vinodchandra  J., 

Mississauga 

Paterson,  Josh/Clermont, 
Gabrielle/Barthel,  Katharine 

Pathansen,  Helen 

Pathyil,  Joseph,  Mississauga 

Patterson,  John  W.,  Ottawa 

Patterson,  Renton  H.,  Pembroke 

Paul,  (Sister)  M.  Catherine, 
Sauk  Ste.  Marie 

Pawliszyn,  Barbara 

Pawlowski,  Carol,  North  Bay 

Payne,  D.  H.,  Markham 

Payne,  Stephen  C. 

Peace,  Donna/Peace,  Walter 

Peel  Board  of  Education, 

Mississauga 

Peel  Educators'  Association 

Peel  Family  Studies'  Association, 

Mississauga 


Peel  Multicultural  Council, 
Mississauga 

Peel  Physical  &  Health  Education 
Heads'  Association,  Brampton 

Peer  Power  Centre,  London 

Pelletier,  (Dr.)  J.  Wick,  Toronto 

Pelletier,  Marise 

Pelletier,  Natasha 

Peninsula  Association  of 
Supervisory  Music  Personnel, 
Simcoe 

Pentney,  Ian,  Thunder  Bay 

People  Working  for  a  Positive 
Future,  Toronto 

Pepper,  Lianne/Grant,  Jonathan, 
Newmarket 

Percy,  John  R.,  Mississauga 

Perdue,  Dorothy,  Indian  River 

Performing  Arts  Organization 
Network  for  Education 
(PAONE) 

Performing  Arts  Organization 
Network  for  Education 
{PAONE),  Stratford 

Periwinkle  Project,  North  York 

Perkovich,  John,  Burlington 

Perras,  Raymond  R.,  Orleans 

Perry,  Phyllis,  Nepean 

Personnel  de  I'ecole  Frere  Andre 

Personnel  in  Positions  of 
Additional  Responsibility  for  the 
Fort  Frances-Rainy  River  Board 
of  Education/Positions  of  Added 
Responsibility  Association,  Fort 
Frances 

Perth  County  Board  of 
Education,  Stratford 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


FVrth  Woin«i  Tri«;h«»' 
Auoculion.  UlratforJ 

i^rtrr.  Danid 

iVtcrboruugh  County  Board  of 
Etlucation 

Peterborough  County  Board  of 
Education.  Family  Studin 
Subfcvt  CoutKil,  Pttrrborough 

Peterborough  County-City 
Heahh  Unit.  Pnerborough 

Prtrrborough  County  Women 
Teacher*'  AuociationA'ictoria 
County  Women  Teachers" 
AsMxution  Peter  bo  rough, 
V'tctoru,  Northumberland  & 
Newcastle  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board, 
Peterborough 

Prtenon,  Carol.  Bellevtlle 

Pctenon,  Carol  Louise,  Harwood 

Pctiquan,  Francine 

Pctunon,  Rod,  Windsor 

Philip,  M.  Nourbe»e/ 
Chamberlain.  Paul,  Toronw 

Phillips.  William  |.,  Toronto 

Pickering  Public  Library  Board. 
Piekenng 

Piercy,  Btodwm,  GUnteeiter 

Piitis,Glcn.  Dundtu 

Piker.  Mfry,  Ktnpton 

PiUbld  ScwcU,  Leonora/Sewell, 
(Rev.)  E.  ITDavis,  lohn/Scoit. 
Nancy,  St  CUrtharma 

Pine  Tree  Nalrvr  Centre  of  Brani. 
Branlford 

Pineglow  School.  Parent 
Covnmtttec.  K^rwm 

Pino(a.S«ara 


Pitman,  Connie 

Pituiko,  Katherine,  Windsor 

Ptzzey.  Kathryn,  Halibunon 

Planned  Parenthood  of  Toronto, 
Toronto 

Planned  ParenlhixHi  l>nljrio, 
Toronto 

Plover  Mills  Home  &  School 
Association,  Thorndale 

Plumiey,  K.  D.,  Samm 

Ftoirier,  Catherine,  Windsor 

Poirier,  E.  Andr*,  Cuelph 

Polconzie.  Edward/ Pokonzie, 
Paulette  Integration  Action 
Group,  Sudbury  Chapter 

Pokomy,  Amy,  Perth 

Police  Community  Advisory 
Committee 

Pollard,  Dave,  Agincourt 

Pongray,  Michael 

Porco,  Nancy 

Portengen,  Michael/Crate, 
Kari/Pulia,  Siomonn 

Porter,  Ruth,  ft>rf  Hope 

Portuguese-Canadian  National 
Congress 

PostriM.  lohn  F.,  Spencerville 

Ptttok.  Dave 

Potvin,  Bernard  A. 

Pratt,  David,  Kingston 

Prendergasl.  Stephen.  Ijondan 

PrentKe,  Debbie,  Brampton 

Presbyterian  Church  in  Canada. 
InterSynod  Committee  on 
Prrvate  &  Public  F^ducation  in 
Ontario.  Pudtnch 


Prescott-Kussell  C!ounly  Board  of 
FUlucdtiun.  English  Language 
Seclion/Conseil  dc  I'educjliun 
dc  Prcscott- Russell.  Section  de 
languc  franv'disc  Hawkesbury 
Prescolt- Russell  County  Roman 
Catholic  English -Language 
Separate  School  Board  Rockland 

Prcscott -Russell  Reading 
Program,  Vankleek  Hill 

Prcscott -Russell  Women 
Teachers'  Association 

Presswalla,  Shaila,  Toronto 

Prince  Edward  Cxjunty  Board  of 
Education 

Prince,  Stephen  Lawrence, 
Toronto 

Pringlc,  Bruce/Pringle,  loycc. 
Oxford  Station 

Pritchard,  Eric,  Hamilton 

Professional  Engineers  Ontario 

Professional  Engineers  Ontario, 
York  Chapter 

Professional  Engineers  Ontario, 
Niagara  Chapter,  Thorold 

Professional  Engineers  Ontario, 
North  Bay  Chapter 

Professional  Engineers  Ontario, 
Timiskaming  Chapter 

Professional  Student  Services 
Personnel,  North  York  Board  of 
Education.  Ontario  Secondary 
School  Teachers'  Federation, 
District  1 13,  Nforr/i  York 

Program  Council  East,  Marathon 

Project  2000  Committee  of 
Victoria  County,  Lindsay 

Proicci  Hope.  St.  Catharines 

Pronger.  R.  C.,  Euex 


Provincial  Alliance  for  the 
Fxlucation-Work  Connections 
(EWC)  Project.  Toronto 

Provincial  C^)uncil  of  Women  of 
Ontario,  l^ndon 

Pupo,  Sam,  Woodbrtdge 

Purchase,  ( Dr. )  John  E., 
Hracrhridge 

Putkowski,  Sharon,  Brantford 

Quality  Daily  Physical  Education 
Cximmittee  of  Scarborough, 
Scarborough 

Quality  Education  Network, 
Richmond  Hill 

Quality  Education  Network  of 
Peel,  Brampton 

Qualiiy  Education  Network, 
Hamilton  (Chapter 

Queen's  University,  Kingston 

Queen's  University,  FactJty  of 
Flducalion,  Student  Teacher 
F^ucalional  Plan  (STEP) 

Queen's  University,  Faculty  of 
Education,  Principals'  Cx>urse 
students 

Quinct,  Fflix.  Ottawa 

Quinlan.  Stephen  E..  North  York 

Quintc-St.  Lawrence  IxKal 
Apprenticeship  Committee  for 
the  Electrical  Trade,  Kingston 

R.  Samuel  Mclaughlin  Centre 
for  (~>cn>nlological  Health 
Research.  Faculty  of  Health 
Sciences.  McMaslcr  I'nis-ersity. 
Hamilton 

R.  D.  Scott.  Richmnnd  Hill 

R.  H.  King  Academy,  students. 
Scarborough 


For  ttw  Low  of  Laaming 


Rachlis,  (Dr.)  Lome  M.,  Ottawa 

Racine,  Lorraine/Racine,  Annick, 

Embrun 

Radcliffe,  (Dr.)  John  G.,  Toronto 

Raes,  Ron/Raes,  Deborah,  Sarnia 

Raging  Independent  Student 
Educational  Group  (RISE) 

Rajsic,  Susan,  Orillia 

Ramsay,  David 

Randon,  Gaida  K.,  Toronto 

Rands,  Joy,  Napanee 

Raphael,  (Dr.)  Dennis,  Toronto 

Rapp,  (Dr.)  Doris  J.,  Buffalo 

Rasenberg,  Chris,  Cloyne 

Rasmussen,  Anita,  London 

Rasokas,  Peter,  Simcoe 

Rassemblement  pour  I'education 
pubhque  en  frani^ais,  Ottawa 

Raston,  H.  A.,  Toronto 

Rathan,  David,  Scarborough 

Rawcliffe,  David  R,  Thornhill 

Rawls,  Don,  Wingham 

Ray,  (Dr.)  Ajit  Kumar,  Gloucester 

Raymond,  Mary  R,  Etobicoke 

Rayner,  E.,  Brampton 

REAL  Women  of  Durham, 
Oshawa 

Red  Lake  Board  of  Education, 
Red  Lake 

Red  Lake  Indian  Friendship 
Centre,  Red  Lake 

Reddam,  Ronald  J.,  Essex 

Redeemer  College,  Ancaster 

Reeve,  Jill,  Don  Mills 


Regina  Street  Public  School, 
Parent  Advisory,  Ottawa 

Regional  Multicultural  Youth 
Council,  Thunder  Bay 

Regional  Municipality  of 
Hamilton-Wentworth, 
Department  of  Public  Health 
Services,  Hamilton 

Regiopolis/Notre-Dame  Catholic 
High  School,  parents  &  friends, 
Kingston 

Registered  Nurses'  Association  of 
Ontario 

Regroupement  des  associations 
de  parents  des  ecoles  publiques 
d'Ottawa-Carleton 

Regroupement  des  groupes 
francophones  d'alphabetisation 
populaire  de  I'Ontario 

Rehoboth  Reformed  School 
Society  at  Norwich 

Reichman,  Karl  H.,  Brechin 

Reidel,  (Dr.)  G.,  Ottawa 

Reimer,  Mark,  Kitchener 

Reinsborough,  Arleen,  Oakville 

Reiss,  Evelyn,  Thornhill 

Renfrew  County  Board  of 
Education,  Pembroke 

Renfrew  County  Board  of 
Education,  Curriculum 
Department 

Renfrew  County  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board 

Repetski,  Michael 

Reseau  de  formation  et  de 
programmation  du  Nord-Est, 
North  Bay 


Reseau  des  femmes  du  Sud  de 
rOntario,  Comite  d'intervention 
de  la  region  de  York, 
Richmond  Hill 

Reseau  ontarien  des  services  de 
garde  francophones,  Mississauga 

Reynolds,  John  P. 

Reynolds,  Sadie  M.,  Belleville 

Rhody,  Brian,  Kincardine 

Richard,  Tina/Belanger,  David 

Richmond  Hill  Chamber  of 
Commerce 

Rickard,  June,  Belleville 

Rideau  District  High  School, 
School  Committee,  Elgin 

Rideau  Public  School,  Parent's 
Advisory  Council,  Kingston 

Rideau  Valley  Home  Educators' 
Association 

Riley,  Helen,  Toronto 

Rimmer,  Alan 

Ritondo,  Edward,  Fonthill 

Rivers,  Dustin 

Rizvi,  Acia,  Markham 

Rizzo,  Ryan 

Robb,  Brian,  Sheffield 

Robb,  Kenneth  D.,  Fonthill 

Robert  E.  Wilson  Public  School, 
staff 

Robineau-Rank,  Gaetane, 

Sudbury 

Robinson,  Paul,  Toronto 

Rockland  Home  &  School 

Association,  Rockland 

Rockwood,  Dorothy  S., 
Brampton 


Rodd,  Catherine,  Toronto 

Rodd,  Jane,  Guelph 

Rogerson,  Pat,  Sudbury 

Rolph  Road  Elementary  School, 
Home  &  School  Association 

Romain,  Andrew,  Ottawa 

Roodnick,  Brian 

Roos-Broderick, 
Gisela/Broderick,  Bill, 
Shannonville 

Roper,  Dawn 

Rose,  Carl  T.,  Thunder  Bay 

Rose,  Clyde,  St.  John's 

Rose,  Eraser  D.,  Trenton 

Rosen,  JoAnne,  Uxbridge 

Rothwell-Osnabruck  District 
High  School,  staff,  Ingleside 

Rotino,  Lucien,  Woodbridge 

Roulet,  R.  Geoffrey,  Kingston 

Rowe,  Roger,  Toronto 

Rowland,  Jan 

Rowlands,  (Mayor)  June,  Toronto 

Roy,  Patty,  Kakabeka  Falls 

Royal  Astronomical  Society  of 
Canada,  Toronto 

Royal  Commonwealth  Society, 
Toronto  Branch,  Youth  & 
Education  Committee,  Islington 

Royal  Military  College  of 
Canada,  Kingston 

Rozeluk,  Sharon 

Rudolph,  Katja 

Russell,  Jesse 

Russell,  Kathleen, 
Sault  Ste.  Marie 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


Rim«U.  KalhWen  A.. 
.<Miu/(  Su.  Mane 

RuucU.  Rulh.  Kitchener 

Rulhertortl.  Naulie, 
VankUtk  mi 

Ruuika,  Kay,  Branlfoni 

Ryan.  Elkm  B..  Hamilton 

Ryan,  Tom 

Rymon  l\)lyiechnic  Univcnity, 
l>cpi.  of  C^oniinuing  Education, 
Program  m  Intcrgcncrational 
EdiKation,  roronloRyrnon 
(H>lylechnK  University,  School  of 
Earty  Childhood  Education. 
Toronto 

Saari,  Eunice 

Saanmaki,  iVter,  Scarborough 

Sabourm.  DominiqueAVaito, 
Marc 

Sacher,  Rodney/Sacher, 
Marianne  (and  family) 

Safe  School  Task  Force.  Toronto 

Sagastizado,  Xiomari 

Sage,  Margaret 

Saint  dare  of  Assist  School. 
SlonfyCrrrk 

S«int  fttrick  Catholic  Secondary 
School.  Parent -Teacher 
Asaociation.  Toronto 

Sakzar.  Fdii  M..  Reuiair 

Sandcrt,  Theme 

Scndmon.  Christine,  Gome 

Sandmofv,  loan 

FMe. 
rSaiKls,  NaiKy 

S«mty  Lake  Education 
Amhority/Thomas  Fiddler 
Memorial  School.  Sandy  Lake 


Saraga.  HeleneySaraga.  Mair, 
Miutiuiuga 

Sault  College  of  Applied  Arts  & 
Technology,  Special  Needs  Office 

Sault  Ste.  Marie  Board  of 
Education,  Secondary  School 
Core  French  Teachers  languages' 
Subject  Committee, 
Sault  Ste.  Mane 

Sault  Ste.  Marie  Board  of 
Education,  Co-operative 
Education  Program, 
,S<jm/i  Ste.  \farte 

Sault  Ste.  Marie  Board  of 
Education,  Special  Education 
Advisory  Committee. 
Sault  Ste.  Mane 

Sault  Ste.  Marie  Board  of 
Education 

Sault  Ste.  Marie  Chamber  of 
Commerce,  Sault  Ste.  Mane 

Sault  Ste.  Marie  District  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  SchiKtl  Board, 
English  Language  Section, 
Sault  Ste.  Marie 

Sault  Ste.  Marie  Public  School 
Principals'  Association 

Sault  Ste.  Marie  Women 
Teachers'  AsMKiation, 
.S<jii/f  Ste  Mane 

Saunders,  [). 

Saunders  Secondary  5>chool, 
Advisory  Committee 

Saunders.  Terry 

Savory,  Kathleen.  Toronto 

Sawdon,  Brian 

Saiby,  Grc^ry 

Scahill,  Duna.  Othawa 

Scarborough  Black  Educators 


Sv.jrtHiriiugh  liojrd  ot 
Education,  l>rpjrtnient  Heads  ol 
History  &  Contemporary 
Studies,  Sc<ir(>orou|;'i 

Scarborough  Board  of 
Education,  Partners  in 
leadership  Council 

Scarborough  Board  of 
Education,  Secondary  School 
Principals'  Association 

Scarborough  Board  of 
Education,  Supervisory  Officers' 
Association 

Scarborough  Centre  for 
Alternative  Studies 

Scarborough  Ellcsmere 
Community  Meeting/David 
Warner,  Toronto 

Scarborough  Needs  Accountable 
Politicians  (S.N.A.R) 

Scarborough  Secondary  SchoiiU' 
Athletic  Association.  Agtncouri 

Scarborough  Village  Public 
School,  Parent  Croup 

Scarborough  Women  Teachers' 
Association.  Scarborough 

Scarborourgh  (ieography  Heads 
Association,  Scarborough 

Scase,  (Mrs.)  Irene,  Sharon 

Schiff,  Allan,  Toronto 

Schinkel,  Lori,  Caledon 

Schmalz,  Kathleen,  Guelph 

Schmidt,  Royal  D./Schmidt, 
loycc.  Scarborough 

Schneider,  Vicky,  Wingham 

Scholtz.  (Mr  &  Mrs.)  Matthew. 
Tilltonburg 

School  Board  Sector  Working 
(iroup 


Science  &  Technology  in 
Education  Alliance  Etobicoke 
Science  Co-ordinators'  & 
Consultants'  AssiKialion  of 
Ontario 

Science  Teachers'  Association  of 
Ontario 

Scoii.  I).  Lynn,  Dunrobm 

Scott,  losir.  OrruH-d 

Scott,  Ray,  Alluton 

Scott,  Walter,  Cambridge 

Seaway  Arts  (Council.  (^>rnw<i// 

Sebenas.  Ron 

Scrdanncc.  Hilda/Yanez,  Giselle 

Sccpcrsad.  Rolian,  Miirkham 

Segal.  Dorothy,  Siouffville 

Seigel,  Orl.  Thunder  Bay 

Self- Directed  Studies  Literacy 
Program 

Shalaby,  Kamal  S.,  Toronto 

Shanlin,  Norman  T,  Orleans 

Shapton,  Robert,  Claledon 

Sharen.  Robert  M..  Grand  Bend 

Shar|>c.  Karen.  (A)Uingwood 

Shaw.  (Dr.)PaulI..  Odivil/e 

Shaw  Festival  Theatre 
Foundation 
Niagara-on-the-lakr 
Shaw,  (iretchen,  Ottawa 

Shaw.  Steven 

Shay.  lean.  OrriiH-d 

Sheffield  Area  Bussing 
(!ommillce 

Shepard.  Boxriy.  Ancaiter 

Sheppard.  Linda.  Toronto 

Sheprak.  Sam.  Harrow 


ai* 


For  ttw  I.OVW  tX  Laammg 


Sheridan  College  of  Applied  Arts 
&  Technology,  Oakville 

Sheridan  College  of  Applied  Arts 
&  Technology,  Brampton 
Campus,  Critical  Thinking  and 
Problem  Solving  (TKP  1 100) 
students,  Ancaster 

Sheridan,  Dr.  Stephen/Sheridan, 
EUie,  Toronto 

Sherkin,  Loni,  Thornhill 

Shields,  lohn,  Ottawa 

Shilhan,  Caroline 

Short,  Sandra,  Orleans 

Shortt,  Ken 

Shuster,  Judy 

Sim,  Herman,  Markham 

Simcoe  County  Board  of 
Education,  Special  Education 
Advisory  Committee,  Midhurst 

Simcoe  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Barrie 

Simcoe  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Special 
Education  Advisory  Committee, 
Barrie 

Simcoe  County  Women 
Teachers'  Association,  Barrie 

Simner,  Marvin  L.,  London 

Simonsen,  Peter,  Ajax 

Simpson,  Olive  M.,  Lucan 

Sims,  D.,  Dalkeith 

Singh,  Himani,  Thornhill 

Sionov,  Roshel 

Sir  Adam  Beck  Junior  School, 
Home  &  School  Association, 
Etobicoke 

Sir  Sandford  Fleming  College  of 
Applied  Arts  &  Technology, 
Peterborough 


Sitch,  Bert,  Kakabeka  Falls 

Skeoch,  Alan,  Mississauga 

Skillen,  Ruth 

Skrypuch,  Marsha,  Brantford 

Slavin,  A.  J.,  Peterborough 

Sly,  William  H.,  Arnprior 

Small,  George  (Jr.) 

Smalldon,  John  L.,  Elmira 

Smedick,  (Dr.)  Lois 

Smeenk,  Brian  P.,  Toronto 

Smith,  A.  Bruce,  Mississauga 

Smith,  Barbara  J./Fawcett,  Don, 
Toronto 

Smith,  Bryan  T,  Woodstock 

Smith,  Doug,  Kitchener 

Smith,  E.  Suzanne,  Kingston 

Smith,  Grange,  Toronto 

Smith,  Howard  A.,  Kingston 

Smith,  J.  S.  H.,  Ennismore 

Smith,  Jennifer  L.,  Toronto 

Smith,  Larry  H.  S./Smith, 
Delores,  Barrie 

Smith,  Philip  J.  Powel,  Ottawa 

Smylie,  Erin 

Smyth,  Joseph,  St.  Catharines 

Snyder,  (Dr.)  Donna 

Snyder,  Helen,  Cambridge 

Snyder,  Helen  M.,  Cambridge 

Soady-Easton,  H.,  North  York 

Sobchuk,  Helene,  Iroquois  Falls 

Socha,  H.  Norman,  Waterloo 

Social  Planning  Council  of 
Niagara  Falls,  Junior  Social 
Planning  Council,  Niagara  Falls 


Societe  Internationale  du 
Programme  de  Diminution  des 
Tensions  Inc.,  Longueuil 

Somers-Beebe,  Maureen 

Somerville,  (Mrs.)  J.  E., 
Hamilton 

Sorab,  Mehru,  Thornhill 

Sorel,  Gerry 

South  Asian  Teachers' 
Organization 

South  Central  Ontario 
International  Languages 
Administrators,  Elementary 
(SCOILA) 

South  Grenville  District  High 
School,  Parent  Advisory 
Committee,  Prescott 

Southgate,  J.  Robin,  Wallaceburg 

Spade,  Lizabelle,  Sioux  Lookout 

Spaling,  Harry/Spaling,  Trudy, 
Drayton 

Sparks,  Louise,  Fort  Erie 

Special  Interest  Group  for 
Telecommunications,  Toronto 

Spence,  David  W./Spence, 
Pamela  D.,  Pickering 

Spiller,  (Dr.)  Aidan  E.,  London 

Spina  Bifida  &  Hydrocephalus 
Association  of  Ontario,  Toronto 

Sri  Guru  Singh  Sabha  Canada 
(Malton),  Mississauga 

Srigley,  Len,  Scarborough 

St-Jean,  Daniel,  Hamner 

St.  Jean  de  Brebeuf  School, 
students 

St-Laurent,  Mouna,  Orleans 

St.  Aloysius  School,  Parent 
Advisory  Council,  Stratford 


St.  Anthony's  Catholic  School, 
Education  Community, 
Chalk  River 

St.  Casimir's  Catholic  School, 
Parent-Teachers'  Association, 
Round  Lake 

St.  Catharines  Association  for 
Community  Living 

St.  Clair  College  of  Applied  Arts 
&  Technology 

St.  Germain,  Kathleen,  Sudbury 

St.  James  School,  Eganville 

St.  James  School,  Parent 
Advisory  Council,  Windsor 

St.  Jean  de  Brebeuf  Secondary 
School,  Parents'  Association 

St.  Jerome  School,  Parent 
Education  Committee/St.  Jerome 
School,  Student  Council 

St.  John  Catholic  High  School, 
etudiant(e)s  de  FLS,  Perth 

St.  John,  Richard 

St.  John,  RichardAVhittaker, 
Bette-Jean 

St.  Joseph's  Elementary  School 

St.  Joseph's  School,  Catholic 
Parent-Teacher  Association, 
Grimsby 

St.  Lawrence  College  of  Applied 
Arts  &  Technology,  Board  of 
Governors 

St.  Lawrence  High  School, 
Student  Council 

St.  Leonard  Catholic  School, 
Brampton 

St.  Louis,  Ron 

St.  Luke  Elementary  School, 
Parent  Teacher  Committee 

St.  Luke  Separate  School,  School 
Association 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


St.  Martin  of  Toun  SefMratc 
School.  Whtniey 

St.  Mary  VSt.  Thomas  More 
School,  Parent -Teacher 
Auoculiun.  Weil  Lome 

St.  Michad't  College  School 

St.  Norbert  Separate  School, 
Parent -Teacher  Aisocialion, 
Nr;rr>i  Vort 

St.  Patnck'i  Catholic  Secondary 
School,  itudents,  Tonmlo 

St.  Paul's  Sccofxiary  School, 
students 

St.  Prter  Canisius  School 
Community 

St.  I^cter  School  Community 

St.  Peter's  Secondary  School, 
Mudiant(e)s  d'un  cours 
d'immenion  de  comp^cnce 
mMutique(FME3AF), 
PeteThorm4gh 

St.  RKhard  School,  Committee 
on  Learning.  Musissauga 

S(.  Seitastien  Separate  School, 
Catholic  Parent  Teacher 
Aiaociation,  Toronto 

Si.  Stephen's  Youth  Employment 
CouiudUng  Centre,  Staff, 
TofOftto 

Suck.  David.  Arthur 

Suff  OSkials'  AstocUtion  of 
North  York.  WiUowdaU 

Sufford.  loc 

SUfflford  Collegiate  Institute 

Stance.  Ursula.  North  B4tf 

Suple»,  Richard 

Starr,  (Dr.)  Sandra.  Pusiinc/i 

Suruchcr.  Kathleen.  flWJr  Rntr 


Steele,  lame*,  Ottawa 

Stem,  I.  A.,  Catedon  East 

Stephens,  Ronald,  Windsor 

Sterback,  David,  Toronto 

Stevanus,  Linda/Stevanus,  Dale, 
Waterloo 

Stevens,  Carol  Lyn 

Stevenson,  Howie 

Stewart,  Catherine 

Stewart,  Cheryl,  Bolton 

Stidscn,  Catherine  Berry,  Cayuga 

Stinson,  lefTery,  Toronto 

Stirtzinger,  (Dr.)  Ruth,  Toronto 

Stocker,  Maureen,  Toronto 

Stokman,  Marjorie/Stokman, 
Tony,  Guelph 

Stone,  Nancy,  Thorold 

Stoney  Creek  Adult  High  School 
&  Learning  Centre,  students, 
Ancaster 

Stormont,  Dundas  &  Glengarry 
Board  of  Education 

Stormont,  Dundas  &  Cilengarry 
Board  of  Education.  Secondary 
Principab'  Assocution 

Stormont.  Dundas  &  C}lengarry 
Industry- Education  (xmncil, 
Fxlucational  Opportunities 
Committee 

Stormont,  Dundas  &  dlengarrv 
Prmcipals'  &  Vtce-PrincipaU 
Association 

Stormont.  Dundas  &  Glengarry 
Women  Teachers'  Association 

Stott,  LaurcTKc,  Uniortyille 

Stover.  Garry.  IngletuU 

StradKrtto,  Mm  D.  Atikokan 


Straight  Stitching  Pn>ductions, 
Toronto 

Straight  Talk  Program,  Kingtion 

Slrathroy  &  Area  Association  for 
Community  Living,  Strathroy 

Struyk,  Christine  Wesley 

Sts.  Martha  &  Mary  School, 
Parents'  Education  Committee, 
Subcommiltcc/Sts.  Martha  & 
Mary  School,  staff,  Mississauga 

Stuart,  Winnie,  Goderich 

Student  School,  Toronto 

Students'  (Commission,  SarriKi 

The  Students'  Commission, 
Samia 

Stutt,  Tim 

Sudbury  &  District  Chamber 
of  Commerce 

Sudbury  &  District  Health  Unit, 
Physical  Activity  Planning 
(kimmittec,  Sudbury 

Sudbury  &  District  l.abour 
C^ouncil,  Sudbury 

Sudbury  Board  of  Education, 

Sudbury 

Sudbury  Board  of  Education, 
Adult  (^earning  Centre 

Sudbury  District  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
English  Language  Section, 
Sudbury 

Sudbury  Multicullural/lolk  Arts 
\vsocialion 

Sudbury  Women  Trachcr*' 
Association,  Sudbury 

Sullivan,  Edmund,  Toronto 

Summitview  Public  School, 
Parent -Staff  AM<KUtifin 


Sumner,  |udy  A. 

Superannuated  Teachers  of 
Unlario.  District  23,  North  York 

Superintendents'  Curriculum 
Co-operative.  Toronto 

Sussmann.  Margaret 

Sutherland,  Ian,  Surnui 

Sutherland,  lamie/Morrison, 
fl/<iir 

Sutton,  Elizabeth,  Hnghts  Grove 

Swainson,  ludy,  Milton 

Swan,  Paul/Lalhani.  Hill. 
Dorchester 

Swayze,  Marct  Liivamae, 
Gloucester 

Sweeney,  Brian.  Peterborough 

Swit7jr,  C. 

Sylvan  learning  Systems 
Columbia 

Symc,  Gail 

Table  f^minisle  francophone  de 
concerlation  provinciale 

Talan,  Vesna,  Oakville 

Tare.  Andy 

Talc,  Fay,  Norlhbrook 

Taxpayers'  (x>alilion  Niagara 

Tayler,  Felicity,  Toronto 

Taylor,  (Dr)  Larry  I.,  Orleans 

Taylor,  (^te/Prue,  Kathy, 
Kingston 

Taylor,  Cynthia,  Hamilton 

Taylor,  Florence.  Jordan  Station 

Taylor,  Frank,  fcirrrM 

Taylor,  John  H..  (>/(u«ii 

Taylor.  Mary,  Lambeth 


foi  Vm  low  of  lj»aminc 


Taylor,  Peter,  Pickering 

Teachers  &  Parents  at  Elgin 

Teachers  Affiliated  with  the 
Speech  &  Drama  Programme  of 
Trinity  College,  London,  England 

Teachers'  Federation  of  Carieton 

Technological  Education  Liaison 
Group 

Teens  Educating  Against  & 
Confronting  Homophobia 
(TEACH),  Toronto 

Teitel,  Murray  I.,  Toronto 

Teloka,  Elaine,  Lindsay 

TESL  Ontario,  Toronto 

Teuwen,  Robert 

Tew,  Gina,  King  Kirkland 

TG  Magazine,  Toronto 

Thain,  (Dr.)  Mary  E. 

Thakur,  Reena,  Markham 

Thames  Secondary  School,  staff, 
London 

Thatcher,  Joan,  Chatham 

The  Royal  Conservatory  of 
Music/The  RCM  Pedagogy 
Institute,  Toronto 

Theatre  Action,  Table  sectorielle 
du  theatre  en  milieu  scolaire, 
Vanier 

Thomas  A.  Stewart  Secondary 
School 


Thomas  A.  Stewart  Secondary 
School,  Student  Council/ 
Crestwood  Secondary  School, 
Student  Council/St.  Peter's 
Secondary  School,  Student 
Council/Kenner  Collegiate  & 
Vocational  Institute,  Student 
Council/ Adam  Scott  Collegiate 
&  Vocational  Institute,  Student 
Council 

Thomas,  B./Thomas,  E. 
Agiricourt 

Thomas,  Camille 

Thomas,  Lewis  L.  Downsview 

Thomas,  M.  A.,  Toronto 

Thompson,  John  C.  W.,  Toronto 

Thompson,  Kenneth  S.,  Sooke 

Thompson,  M.  H. /Thompson, 
W.  X,  Kingston 

Thompson,  Melissa,  Markham 

Thompson,  R. 

Thompson,  W.  G.  B. 

Thomson,  Edith  E.,  Wasaga 
Beach 

Thornhill  Secondary  School, 
Community  Liaison  Group, 
Thornhill 

Thunder  Bay  &  District  Injured 
Workers'  Support  Group 

Thunder  Bay  Chamber  of 
Commerce 

Thunder  Bay  Christian  School 
Society,  Thunder  Bay 

Thunder  Bay  Co-ordinating 
Committee  on  Family  Violence 

Thunder  Bay  Council  on  Positive 
Aging,  Educational/ 
Intergenerational  Committee, 
Thunder  Bay 


Thunder  Bay  Immigrant  & 
Visible  Minority  Women's 
Organization,  Thunder  Bay 

Thunder  Bay  Symphony 
Orchestra 

Tilk,  Olga 

Tillsonburg  &  District 
Association  for  Community 
Living,  Children's  Support 
Services  Committee,  Tillsonburg 

TUson,  David 

Tilson,  Herbert,  Mississauga 

Timiskaming  Board  of 
Education,  New  Liskeard 

Timmins  Board  of  Education 

Timmins  Board  of  Education, 
Special  Education  Department, 
Titrmiins 

Timmins  District  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
students/Conseil  des  ecoles 
separees  catholiques  du  district 
de  Timmins,  etudiants 

Timmins  District  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
English  Language  Section, 
Timmins 

Timmins  Learning  Centre, 
Timmins 

Timmins  Native  Friendship 
Centre 

Timmins  Public  Library  Board, 
Timmins 

Tissot,  Georges,  Ottawa 

Tobin,  Barbara,  Kemptville 

Todd-Deschamps,  Shirley  Kars 

Toffanello,  Paul  J., 
South  Porcupine 


Toivonen,  Nicole/Longworth, 
Jocelyn/Newell,  Chris/Goode, 
Kevin/Jarvis,  Stephanie/Keenan, 
Steve/Hie,  Ryan/Nevrton,  Dave 

Tomaszewski,  Kathy,  London 

Toprak,  Sema,  Etobicoke 

Toronto  Area  Library/Media  Co- 
ordinators' &  Consultants' 
Association,  Whitby 

Toronto  Arts  Council,  Toronto 

Toronto  Attention  Deficit 
Disorder  (ADD)  Parent  Support 
Group,  Steering  Committee, 
Toronto 

Toronto  Board  of  Education, 
Parents'  Environmental  Action 
Group,  Toronto 

Toronto  Council  of  Teachers  of 
English/ Association  of 
Secondary  School  Special 
Education  Teachers  for  Toronto, 
Toronto 

Toronto  Educator  Group, 
Toronto 

Toronto  Secondary  School 
Principals'  Association/Toronto 
Public  School  Principals' 
Association/Toronto  Secondary 
School  Vice-Principals' 
Association,  Toronto 

Toronto  Supervisory  Officers' 
Association,  Toronto 

Town  of  Haldimand  Public 
Libraries  Board,  Cayuga 

Township  of  Johnson 

Township  of  Plummer 

Tran,  Dien  N.,  London 

Tremeer,  Don,  Seaforth 

Trent  Valley  Literacy  Association 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


TkwMon,  Liaa/CauUuzzo,  Lema 

Trillium  School,  P»rtn<f»  in 
EiliKation,  Slilton 

TrumbW.  Oara  EUen,  Sttmia 

Tung  Fahev.  Sarah  Y.  W.. 
North  York 

Tuplin.  Linda.  Holland  UinJing 

Turcotte.  Paacale/Carri^re. 
Aniotne 

Turcolte,  Pucak/Laporte, 
Manhieu/Cairi^re,  Anioine 

Twin.  lim/Manilowabi,  Shannon 

TwoK.  M..  Toronto 

Tyion.  Margarrt.  OrroHu 

Ubnaco,  Rita.  Thumier  Bay 

Ulrichicn.(Dr.)  B.  I.. 
CopptrOiff 

Union  of  Ontario  Indunt 

Unionvillc  High  School,  Aru 
Yorii  Parents'  Advisory 
Committee  Study  Group 

L'nionvtile  ilate|>aym' 
AMOciation.  Unionville 

United  Oiurth  of  Canada. 
Co-ordinating  Committee  of 
Ontario  Conferences.  Pownmew 

Uniir'  inada,  North 

Bay  I'  ifchand 

Soacty  bubcommincc,  Callander 

United  Coloun  of  Merivaie 

United  Way  of  Greater  Toronto 

Uni«er«i<  d'Oitjwa.  Faculty 
d'^ucatKin,  Mudunts  et  les 
ftudiantei  en  Formation  initialc 

Vnrmuti  d'OlUwa.  Faculty  dcs 
icicnca  dc  la  wnl^.  Ottawa 

■•nne.  Centre 
.cnie 


Univenit^  Ijurcntirnne,  Fcoir 
des  iciencn  dr  {'education 

Univeniiy  of  Ottawa.  Computer 
Science  Department,  Education 
Commillcc,  Ottawa 

University  of  Ottawa.  Faculty  of 
Education,  students 

University  of  Ottawa,  Faculty  of 
Arts,  Ad  Hoc  Committee,  Ottawa 

University  of  Otlawa.  Women's 
Studies  Programme 

University  of  Toronto  Schools, 
Toronto 

University  of  Toronto  Schools, 
Parents'  Association,  Toronto 

University  of  Toronto, 
Continuing  Education  students 
( Design  &  Technology.  Part  II ) 

University  of  Toronto,  Faculty  of 
Education  with  the  Future 
Teachers'  Club,  Toronto 

University  of  Toronto,  Faculty  of 
Nursing,  Undergraduate 
Admissions  Committee.  Toronto 

University  of  Toronto.  Faculty  of 
F^ucation.  Institute  of  Child 
Study.  Toronto 

University  of  Toronto,  Faculty  of 
Fxlucation 

University  of  Toronto,  Faculty  of 
Education/University  of  Toronto, 
Faculty  of  Library  & 
Information  Science.  Toronto 

University  of  Toronto.  Faculty  of 
Education.  Course  3161,  Section 
52  ft  72  students,  Toronto 

University  of  Western  Ontario 

Unnrersity  of  Western  Ontario, 
Ontre  for  Actnnty  flc  Ageing. 
Lortaon 


University  of  Windsor,  Faculty  of 
Education,  Course  207  students 

University  of  Windsor,  Faculty  of 
Education,  {'ommillee  for 
Response  to  the  Royal 
Commission,  Windtor 

L'pper  Canada  College,  /i>r<>Mf<i 

Urban  Alliance  on  Race 
Relations.  Education  Committee 

Usselman,  Trixie,  Ailsa  Craig 

Utilities  Training  Directors' 
Ciroup 

Vachon,  Roscanna,  Ponlypool 

Vailiancourt,  Daniel/Marion, 
lean -Luc 

Vallinga,  Roy 

Vandermeulen.  Catherine 

Van  Dyke,  (Mrs.)  L.  Brotlnille 

Van  Loon,  lames,  Mississauga 

Van  Vliet,  loanne,  Queenston 

Vandcn  Hoven,  |ohn  M. 

VandenAkker,  lulie/ 
VandenAkker,  lohn,  Sapanee 

Vandenberghc,  Maureen. 
Tillionhurg 

Vanderwagen,  loell.  Toronto 

Vanderwolf.  (Dr.)  Case  H., 
iMndon 

Vanderwyst.  Alba.  Etobicoke 

Vangilst.  Katrina 

Vayda,  Elaine  |. 

Venncr.  A.  K..  Unionville 

Vernon.  ( Dr. )  Foster,  Heamfvillc 

Vice,  Claire,  Aneaitcr 

Vickers,  Colin.  Inglmde 


Victoria  County  Association  for 
Community  Living,  Lindtay 

Victoria  County  Board  of 
Education,  Linduiy 

Victoria  County  Board  of 
Education,  Teacher- Librarians' 
Association,  Unduly 

Viewmount  Christian  Academy 

Villa  Nova  I'arcnl  Advisory 
Committee 

Villanova,  Marcello 

VOICE  for  Hearing  Impaired 
('hildren,  Toronto 

VOICE  for  Hearing  Impaired 
Children.  Ottawa  Chapter, 
Ottawa 

Voll,  Coiutance,  Kiuhcner 

von  Bezold.  Ernest 

Vreeswijk.  (Mr.  &  Mrs.)  lohn, 
Prtuott 

Waddell.  Don 

Wagamese.  (^.harlesAVagamese. 
Ix)ri 

Wagner,  (Dr.)  lim,  St.  (Utthannes 

Wahsa  Distance  Fxlucation 
Centre 

Waite,  Andrew/Waite,  Cheryl. 
Kilihrncr 

Waksman -Cooper,  Mary,  Toronto 

WaIke,  Kimberly 

Walker,  Deborah  Ann,  North  Bay 

Walker,  Glenn  A.,  Wclland 

Wall,  Bymn  E.,  Toronto 

Wall.  Sarah,  Markham 

Walsh,  Anne.  Wtndior 

Walter  &  Duncan  (Charitable 
Eoundalion,  Toronto 


For  ttm  Low  of  Ijeammg 


Wand,  David,  Toronto 

Wansbrough,  M.  B.,  Hamilton 

Ward,  Richard,  City  of  York 

Ward,  Stephen,  Grimsby 

Warren,  Alan,  Toronto 

Warren,  Don/Monaghan, 
Dennis,  Elgin 

Waterloo  County  Board  of 
Education,  Kitchener 

Waterloo  County  Board  of 
Education,  Teacher  Assistants' 
Association,  Kitchener 

Waterloo  County  Board  of 
Education,  Student  Conference 
Planning  Committee 

Waterloo  County  Board  of 
Education,  History  Heads' 
Association 

Waterloo  County  Board  of 
Education,  Physical  &  Health 
Education  Subject  Association, 
Baden 

Waterloo  County  Board  of 
Education,  Stay-in-School 
Initiatives,  Kitchener 

Waterloo  County  Principals' 
Association 

Waterloo  County  Women 
Teachers'  Association 

Waterloo  Region  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
Welcoming  Centre 

Waterloo  Region  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
Co-operative  Education 
Department/Waterloo  County 
Board  of  Education, 
Co-operative  Education 
Department 

Waterloo  Region  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board 


Waters,  Allan  G.,  Toronto 

Watson-Bonsall,  Mary-Anne, 
Port  Elgin 

Watson,  lim,  Etobicoke 

Watson,  Ken,  Hamilton 

Watt,  Rob,  Tilbury 

Watt,  William  R.,  Nepean 

Weaver,  Ruth 

Webb,  Gary  J.,  London 

Weeks,  Ron  C,  North  Bay 

Weglarz,  Mark  J. 

Welch-Cutler,  Jessie,  Weston 

Welch,  Manuela/Clutterbuck, 
Loretta 

Welland  &  District  Association 
for  Community  Living,  Welland 

Welland  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board, 
Principals'/Vice-Principals' 
Association 

Welland  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Program 
Department 

Welland  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Dept.  of 

Student  Services 

Welland  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board 

Welland  County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Conflict 
Resolution  Committee,  Welland 

Wellington  County  Board  of 
Education  and  Wellington 
County  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board, 
Co-operative  Education 
Department 

Wellington  County  Board  of 
Education,  Guelph 


Wellington  County  Board  of 
Education,  Race  Relations 
Committee,  Guelph 

Wellington  County  Board  of 
Education,  Professional  Student 
Services  personnel,  Guelph 

Wellington  County  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board 

Wellington  County  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
Program  Department 

Wellington  County  Task  Force 
on  Youth  Violence,  Guelph 

Wellington  County  Women 
Teachers'  Association 

Wentworth  County  Board  of 
Education 

Wentworth  Women  Teachers' 
Association 

Werner,  Barb,  Stratford 

Wesley,  Daniel  James 

West  Humber  Collegiate 
Institute,  Etobicoke 

Westdale  Home  &  School 
Association,  Hamilton 

Western  Ontario  Region 
Committee  for  Gifted  Learners, 
London 

Western  Technical-Commercial 
School,  History  Department, 
Toronto 

Westside  Baptist  Church, 
Hamilton 

White,  Wendell  E.,  Tweed 

Whitehead,  LeRoy  E.,  Kingston 

Whitney  Public  School,  Parent- 
Student  Association 

Widdop,  (Dr.)  James  H. 

Wierzbicki,  Claire 


Wight,  Steve,  Perth 

Wightman,  Mary  Jean,  Ottawa 

Wilkie,  Catherine,  Allenford 

Wilkinson,  (Mrs.)  J. 

Wilkinson,  Cyril,  Ay/merWilliam 
Lyon  Mackenzie  Collegiate 
Institute,  Parent  Advisory 
Committee 

William  R.  Kirk  School,  Parent 
Advisory  Committee 

Williams,  Carol,  Merrickville 

Williams,  Jasmine,  Ottawa 

Williams,  John,  Burlington 

Williamson,  TashaAVilliamson, 
Mandy 

Wilson,  (Dr.)  Sybil, 
St.  Catharines 

Wilson,  Gary 

Wilson,  Paul  A.,  East  York 

Wilson,  R.  J.,  Kingston 

Winder,  C.  Gordon,  London 

Windigo  Education  Authority, 
Sioux  Lookout 

Windsor  &  District  Chamber  of 
Commerce,  Windsor 

Windsor  Board  of  Education 

Windsor  Catholic  School 
Principals'  Association,  Ad  Hoc 
Commmittee 

Windsor  Council  of  Home  & 
School  Association 

Windsor-Essex  County  Active 
Living  Coalition 

Windsor-Essex  County  Health 
Unit 

Windsor  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Ad  Hoc 
Consultant  Group,  Windsor 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


WiiMlsor  Roman  Calholic 
^irpiralc  School  Board 

Windtor  Roman  CatholK 
Scparalc  School  Boaril. 
Co-opcralivr  Fducation 
Progranu 

Wlnilior  SchiH'i  Pjrcni» 
Auocution,  WtnJior 

Windsor  Secondary  School 
Prinapab'  Association 

Windsor  Symphony  Orchestra 

Wirtdsor  Women  Teachers' 
Aatociation 

Wink,  Richard.  Pnerborough 

Winston  Churchill  Collegute 
Institute,  Student  Group 

Winter.  Bruce.  Mususauga 

Winter*.  Larry.  Sftallorytown 

Wise.  James  W./Wise.  Barbara  E.. 
Kitchener 

Wismer.  Gladys,  Bame 

Wodlinyrr.  ( Dr. )  Michael 

Women  Alive,  Social  Concerns 
Working  ( iroup.  Barrie 

Women  into  ApprentKcship. 
Sorth  Bay 

Won>en  Teachers'  Association  of 
Ottawa.  Orumi 


Women's  Employment 
Networking  Group, 
St.  Cathannes 

Woo,  George  Woo.  Simon. 
Markham 

Wood,  (Dr)  Eric 

Wooden.  |.,  Exeler 

Woodlands  School.  Woodlands 
Musical  Arts  C^ouncll 

Woodroffe  Avenue  Public 
School,  Parent  Advisory 
Education  Committee,  Orrmvij 

Word  Shop.  South  River 

Workplace  Health  and  Safety 
Agency.  Toronto 

Wright,  Penny 

Wright.  Penny.  Brampton 

Wright.  Raymond  S..  l^ndon 

Wright.  Rob.  Toronto 

Wright.  Timothy,  Hannon 

Wylie.  Dennis/Chilton.  Robert 

Wynne.  Kathleen  O..  Toronto 

Wyoming  Public  School.  P 
arent  Group 

Yardley.  Anne/Yardlcy,  Dave, 
Waterloo 

Yates.  Robert.  Enn 

York  Onire  for  ("hildren.  Youth 
&  Families.  Richmond  Hill 


York  Community  Services. 
Toronto 

York  Region  Board  of  Education 
York  Region  Board  of  Education, 
Physical  Education  Hradt, 
Richmond  Hill 

York  Region  Board  of  Education. 
History  Heads,  Aurom 

York  Region  Catholic  Students' 
Council 

York  Region  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Ikiard, 
Secondary  School  Principals' 
Association 

York  Region  Teacher- Librarian>' 
Association.  Newmarket 

York  Region  Technical  Directors' 
Association.  Stouffville 

York  Technology  Association. 
Education  Committee 

York  University.  North  York 

York  University.  Faculty  of 
Education  Students'  Association, 
North  York 

York  University,  Faculty  of 
ELducation.  T)owns\'iew 

York  University,  Faculty  of 
Education.  Fxlucational 
Foundations  Cx)urse  students, 
North  York 

York  University,  Faculty  of 
Fxlucation,  Educational 
Foundations  Oursc  students 


Young,  Errol 

Young  Men's  Christian 
Association  of  Greater  Toronto, 
Toronto 

Young.  Paul.  Shelburnt 

Young  People's  Theatre,  Toronto 

Young  Women's  Christian 
Association  of  Canada  (^"WCA 
of  Canada) 

Yi>ulh  2(KK) 

Youth  in  Cjre  Connections 
Across  Ontario,  Toronto 

Youth  Involvement  Ontario 
Youth  Summit  ("ommittee  of 
World  Council  for  Gifted  & 
Talented  Children  Inc.,  Toronro 

Youth  to  Youth  Network,  Anti- 
Kacism  Youth  Working  (iroup 

Ypma,  Simon/Ypma.  CUthy, 
Thunder  Bay 

Zcssner,  Walter  W.,  Toronto 

Zimmerman.  Blaine 

Ziraldo.  Lynn.  Richmond  Hill 

Zobel.  Alicja  M.,  Peterborough 

Zouganiolis,  Helen 

Zypchyn.  Karen.  Sudbury 


For  \h»  Lo««  of  Lcamtng 


Appendix  B:  Youth  Outreach 


Part  1:  Presentations  at 
public  hearings  -  Fall  1993 

Student  organizations: 

Adam  Scott  Collegiate  Vocational 
Institute  students,  Peterborough 

Algonquin  College  of  Applied 
Arts  &  Technology,  School  of 
Business,  Retail  students,  Nepean 

Barrie  Eastview  Secondary 
School,  OAC  Physical  Education 
Class,  Barrie 

Board  of  Education  for  the  City 
of  Toronto,  Student  Affairs 
Committee/Toronto  Association 
of  Student  Councils 

Brock  University,  Faculty  of 
Education,  Pre-Service  students, 
St.  Catharines 

CD.  Farquharson  Junior  Public 
School  students,  Agincourt 

Central  Park  Senior  Public 
School,  Grade  7  &  8  students, 
Oshawa 

Change  Your  Future 
Program,  Metro  Toronto 
Dufferin-Peel  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board,  Student 
Senate,  Mississauga 

Durham  College  of  Applied  Arts 

6  Technology,  Pre-Employment 
Program  students,  Oshawa 

Durham  Region  Roman  Catholic 
Separate  School  Board, 
Secondary  School  Council 
Presidents 

Eagle  River  Public  School,  Grade 

7  &  8  students.  Eagle  River 

Fanshawe  College  of  Applied 
Arts  &  Technology,  Futures 
Program  Trainees,  Simcoe 


Father  Bressani  Catholic  High 
School.  Athletic  Council, 
Woodhridge 

Father  Henry  Carr  Secondary 
School  Student  Council, 
Etobicoke 

Father  John  Redmond  High 
School,  Student  Council, 
Etobicoke 

Glenforest  Secondary  School, 
OAC  students,  Mississauga 

Grand  River  Collegiate  Institute, 
Student  Executive,  Kitchener 

Hamilton-Wentworth  Roman 
Catholic  Separate  School  Board, 
Catholic  Student  Council 
Presidents'  Association 

Highland  Secondary  School, 
Alternative  Education  Program 
students,  Cambridge 

Humberview  School  student 
group,  Bolton 

Jarvis  Collegiate  Institute 
students,  Toronto 

Kemptville  College  of 
Agricultural  Technology,  Basic 
Language  Skills  Course  students, 
Kemptville 

King  Edward  School  students, 
Windsor 

Kingston  Literacy  .students, 
Kingston 

London  &  Middlesex  County 
Roman  Catholic  Secondary 
Schools,  Student  Council  Prime 
Ministers 

McMaster  University  Students' 
Union  Inc.,  Hamilton 

Monsignor  Eraser  College 
students,  Toronto 


Nipissing  Community  School 
students.  North  Bay 

Ontario  Association  of  Catholic 
School  Students'  Council 
Federation 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  Deputy 
Premier's  council 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  Central 
Metro-West  Region,  Thornhill 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  Western 
West  Region 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  London 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  Western 
West  Region,  Sarnia  Cabinet 
Members,  Sarnia 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  Eastern- 
South  Region 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association,  North  York 

Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students'  Association, 
Northeastern  Region 

Parry  Sound  High  School 
students.  Parry  Sound 

R.H.  King  Academy,  students, 
Scarborough 

Raging  Independent  Student 
Educational  Group  (RISE), 
Metro  Toronto 

Scarborough  Centre  for 
Alternative  Studies  students 

Sheridan  College,  Critical 
Thinking  and  Problem  Solving 
students,  Brampton  campus 


St-Jean-de-Brebeuf  School 
students,  Brantford 

St.  Jerome  School  Student 
Council,  Mississauga 

St.  Joseph  High  School  students, 
North  Bay 

St.  Lawrence  High  School, 
Student  Council,  Cornwall 

St.  Patrick's  Catholic  Secondary 
School  students,  Toronto 

St.  Paul's  Secondary  School 
students,  Trenton 

Stoney  Creek  Adult  High  School 
&  Learning  Centre  students, 
Ancaster 

Students  from  the  following  five 
Peterborough-area  high  schools 
came  together  to  make  one 
presentation  to  the  Commission: 
Thomas  A.  Stewart  Secondary 
School,  Student  Council, 
Peterborough;  Crestwood 
Secondary  School,  Student 
Council,  North  Monaghan;  St. 
Peter's  Secondary  School, 
Student  Council,  Peterborough; 
Kenner  Collegiate  &  Vocational 
Institute,  Student  Council, 
Peterborough;  and  Adam  Scott 
Collegiate  &  Vocational  Institute, 
Student  Council,  Peterborough. 

The  Student  School,  Metro 
Toronto 

The  Students  Commission, 
Toronto 

The  Students  Commission, 
Sarnia 

United  Colours  of  Merivale, 
Hawkesbury 

University  of  Ottawa,  Faculty  of 
Education  students 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


l'nivcr»ily  o(  loronu*,  hjiulty  of 
Eilucation  iludcnts,  Toronto 

Uiuvmity  of  Toroalo, 
Continuing  nliKalion  ttudrnlt 
(Dmgn  &  Icchnulogy.  Part  II ) 

Univcnity  of  Toronto,  Faculty  of 
Education,  Future  Tcachrrt' 
Qub,  Toronto 

Univcruty  of  Windsor,  Faculty  of 
Education,  ttudrnti 

Winston  Churchill  Collcgutc 
Institute  itudent  group, 
Scarborough 

York  Region  Catholic  Students' 
Otuncil  York  L'nivenity,  Faculty 
of  Education.  Educational 
Foundalioiu  Counc  students. 
North  York 

York  Univenity,  Faculty  of 
Education,  Educational 
Foundatioru  Course  Students 

York  L'niveTsity.  Faculty  of 
Education  Students'  AsMxiation, 

\,jrth  Y.trk 

Amaoclation  d'*Mv*s/ 
miuiUanii*)*: 

Conseil  des  ^oles  s^ar^es 
cathotiques  du  dtstnct  de 
Timmins 

Ecole  tecondaire  catholique 
Marie- Rivier,  Conseil  des  tl^vcs, 
Kinpton 

(((At  ircnntlairr  Ftienne  tir(i\t, 
Etudunts,  North  York 

Ccole  (ccondairr  Cicorgo-  P 
Vanier,  Comeil  da  Stra 

Ecote  wcondairc  Macdonald- 
Carlirr,  Sudbury 

Ccok  Kcoftdairc  Mgr.  Brvytrr. 
Cornell  da  dtvct,  L<»wion 


FJ^vo  dc  I'fvolc  sccundaire 
I'Essor,  St.  Clair  BfOih 

FJ^vn  dc  I'teole  secundaire 
r^iunale  Glengarry 

F^d^ratiun  des  ^l^ves  du 
secondaire  franco-ontarien 
(FESFO),  r^ion  du  centre 

FM^ralion  des  ^Itvcs  du 
secondaire  franco-ontarien 
(FESFO),  rtgion  du  sud 

FM^ralion  des  ^l^es  du 
secondaire  franco-oniarien 
(FESFO).  r^wfi  d'Ottawa- 
CarUton 

FMeration  des  ^l^es  du 
secondaire  franco-ontarien 
(FESFO),  la  commission  jeunesse 

FM^ration  des  ^l^ves  du 
secondaire  franco-ontarien 
(FESFO),  r<fionde/'«f 

F^d^ration  des  ^l^es  du 
secondaire  franco-ontarien 
(FESFO),  region  du  nord 

Inter-Franco  scolaire  du  Sud  de 

rOntano,  Toronto 

Youth  ott/itnizaXl9n%: 

1st  Woodbridge  Girl  Guides, 
Woodhndge 

Board  of  Fducation  tor  the  City 
of  Toronto,  Youth  Alienation 
Project 

Board  of  hduiaiion  tor  ihr  (.iiy 
of  Toronto,  Working  to  Learn 
ProKCl 

Boys'  and  Girb'  Clubs  of 
Ontario,  Provincial  Youth 
C^ouncil.  Hamdton 

Canadian  Youth  Foundation, 
Ottawa 


City  of  Toronto,  loronto  Young 
People 'i  Advisory  Board 

Creating  Hope  and  a  New 
Generation  of  Equality 
(CHANGE).  Vort  Region. 
Miirkham 

lohn  Brooks  Community 
Foundation  &  Scholarship  Fund, 
Youth  Council,  Toronto 

Lakehead  Environmental  Youth 
Alliance,  Thunder  Bay 

leaders- In- Action,  Hamilton 

Lesbian  &  Gay  Youth  of  Toronto, 
7"orofifo 

Mayor's  Youth  Advisory 
Committee,  Ad- Hoc  Committee 
on  Education,  Miutuauga 

Ontario  Educational  Leadership 
Centre.  Student  Ixraders  of 
Ontario,  Ixyngford  Mills 

Pape  Adolescent  Resource 
Centre,  Toronto 

Social  Planning  Council  of 
Niagara  Falls,  lunior  Social 
Planning  Council,  Niagara  Falls 

Teens  Educating  Against  & 
Confronting  Homophobia 
(TFJ^CH).  Toronto 

TG  Magazine,  Toronto 

Youth  2(XX),  Winlbor 

Youth  in  Care  Connectioiu 
Across  Ontario,  Toronto 

Youth  Involvement  Ontario, 
TbfWfifo 

Youth  .Summit  Ommittee  of 
World  Cxtuncil  for  Gifted  & 
Talented  Children  Inc.,  Torortto 

Youth  to  Youth  Network.  Anti- 
Racism  Youth  Working  Group, 
EMiYork 


Part  2:  Non-«chool  v*nu*s 
for  atudent*  and  youth 
outraach  -  Spring  1994 

Mall  viaHs: 

liLvuiishirc.Mall,  Windsor 
F^ton  Centre,  Toronto 
Kidrau  Mall,  Otrim'iJ 
Station  .Mall,  .S<ju/r  Sle.  Mane 

Datantlon  cantraa, 
community  centras,  and 
other  »oclal  aarvica 
aganciaa  vlaitad: 

.Alexandra  I'ark.  (  oninuiiiilv 
Centre,  Toronto 

Ambassador  School,  Toronto 

Beat  the  Street,  Toronto 

Bethel  Home  for  Young  Women, 
Scarborough 

Brookside  Youth  Centre,  Cobourg 

Cecil  Facer  Youth  Centre, 
Sudbury 

Community  Girls  School  of 
Sarnia,  Sarnia 

Oivenant  House.  Toronto 

Durhamdale  House,  Pickering 

F^agle  Rock  Youth  Centre,  Samui 

Kmployment  and  Education 
Resource  Centre,  Cornwall 

F.tobicoke  Ciirh  Residence, 
htobicoke 

Irrnic  House.  Pefferlaw 

Mayden  Youth  Scrvica,  Ajax 

Hope  Harbour  Open  Custody 
Facility.  Kitchener 

lohn  Howard  Society.  Othawa 

Kingston  Employment  and 


For  iha  Lo««  of  Laamtnc 


Youth  Service,  Kingston 

Marjory  Amos  House,  Brampton 

Maryvale,  Windsor 

Massey  Secondary  School 
Program,  Toronto 

Metro  West  Young  Offender 
Unit,  Etobicoke 

Native  Child  &  Family  Services, 
Toronto 

Operation  Springboard,  Toronto 

Pape  Adolescent  Resource 
Centre,  Toronto 

Portage  Open  Custody  Facilty, 
Elora 

Roebuck  Home,  Peterborough 

Rosalie  Hall,  Scarborough 

Scarborough  YMCA, 
Scarborough 

Sudbury  Children's  Aid  Society, 
Sudbury 

Talitha  House,  Ottawa 

Theatre  Graduation  School 
Program,  London 

Thunder  Bay  Young  Offender 
Unit,  Thunder  Bay 

Touchstone  Youth  Centre, 
Toronto 

Vanier  Centre,  Brampton 

Woodgreen  Community  Centre, 
East  York 

Youville  Centre  for  pregnant 
teens,  Ottawa 


Part  3:  Volunteers 

Eric  Adams 
Saryu  Aggarvifal 
Veneta  Anand 
Camille  Bailey 
Trasi  Beardy 
Jennifer  Beauchamp 
Linda  Bertrin 
Anuja  Bharti 
Sarah  Bobka 
Jason  Bryan 
Heather  Bullock 
Shelly  Cameron 
Sam  Castrglione 
Tuyet  Ha  Chuong 
Krystal  Cooke 
Vanessa  D'Souza 
Tim  Dafoe 
Kelly  Dowdall 
Drew  Eaton 
Vicky  Eutridef 
Miriam  Figueroa 
Greg  Frankson 
Kim  Fry 
Linor  Gerchak 
Stephanie  Gibson 
Mandi  Gosling 
Lisa  Graham 
Sarah  Grant 
Mark  Grill 
Jenn  Harren 


Susie  Herbert 
Sheena  Hockham 
Esther  Hoppe 
Ryan  Hordy 
Meghan  Houghton 
Sonya  Howard 
Brendan  Hughes 
Jolene  Hunt 
Chandra  Hunter 
Terry  Lynne  Jewell 
Naana  Jumas 
Katrina  Kam 
Proesy  Kawesa 
Nicole  Kennedy 
Glenn  Kukee 
Autumn  Langis 
Matthew  Laverty 
Jason  C.  Lin 
George  Listen 
Susan  Littleton 
Armando  Lucarelli 
David  MacDonald 
Ken  Mark 
Amanda  Maud 
Lina  Mayer 
Laura  McKibbin 
Ryan  McNally 
Lori  Mercier 
Kristopher  J.  Moron 
Imran  Mughal 
Zahra  Nathoo 


Claire  Parkinson 
Josh  Paterson 
Saara-Ilona  Pinola 
Ben  Poiteoin 
Kelley  Porter 
Colin  Putney 
Julie  Racine 
Stephanie  Raymond 
Ryan  Rizzo 
Shannon  Roberts 
Mike  Rodaway 
Vanessa  Brandt  Rousseau 
Daniel  Eipaage  Rundle 
King  Siu 
Erin  Smylie 
Navneet  Sodhi 
Becky  Stranberg 
Becky  Stranburn 
Monica  Tessier 
Norma  Jean  Trout 
Fercana  Visnani 
Alice  Weber 
Zerlina  Whitecrow 
Paula  Wilson 
Gisele  Yanez 
Laila  Zafar 

Special  thanks  to: 

Denise  Campbell 
Bindu  Diahwal 
Zenia  Wadhwani 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


App«ndix  C:  Consultation  with  Groups  and  Individuals 


AbclU.Rmi« 

Ailunt,  G..  UnileJ  Kingdom 

Adunv  (Vtrr.  VnileJ  Kingdom 

Aitkrti,  l>yUn 

AIcxu,Uk 

AL.Uckj 

Allen,  P.A.,  United  Kingdom 

Allison.  Patncu 

Anucf.  Paul 

Architxld.  Ro9«anne 

Annstrong,  lane 

Baincv  Dr.,  United  Kingdom 

Barben.  Deb 

Baronc,  Anihony 

BjLueK.  Lydu.  New  York 

Baxter,  Graham 

Beartiy,  Ma<leleinc 

Beauger.  loseph 

Beauregard.  Retny 

Bcdeau,  lulei 

B^n,  Fenund 

Benhamida.  Zaiha 

Bene,  Christina.  Alberta 

BtemiUer,  Andy 

Bintikingombe  Mme 

Bondar.  Rnberta 

Booth.  Davtd 

Bourn*.  Brian 

Boyai^nda.  Randy 

Brathvratic.  Harold 

BrtMcttc.  Borriy 

BtomMdoI.  Patncu. 

Vntttd  Kingdom 


Brum,  Marta 

Brtustowilu,  Tom 

Burden.  Arlene 

Burns,  K. 

Bu\Vi,  lulius.  Alberta 

Butter,  David,  United  Kingdom 

tUmenin,  H^lene, 
British  Columbia 

Gampbell,  Brenda 

lUmpbell,  Denise 

Carrier,  Denis 

Case,  Robbie 

Cazabon,  Benolt 

CEFFO  Esecutive 

Chabot,  Diane 

Challis,  William 

Ch^ier,  Raymond 

Chummar,  .Noble 

Coalition  For  Education  Reform 

Collins,  loan,  British  Columbia 

Common,  Ron 

Comptois,  lean 

Connon.  Pit 

Convertini,  Angela 

Convertmi,  Anna 

Cook.  Bob 

Cooke,  Cntal 

Cooke,  Dave 

CattA,  Filomena 

Col^-O'Hara,  locelyn 

CoUui-Clevcland,  Tara 

CourchoiK,  Renaud 

Courville.  Aaron 


Cousineau,  lY^va 

Cressy,  Gordon 

Curran,  Mary 

D'Allaire,  H^lenc.  Quebei 

Dandurand,  Pierre,  Quebec 

Davis.  Tom,  United  Kingdom 

Demctra,  George 

Dennis,  LIuyd 

Uprose,  Anioinc 

Dhaliwal,  Bindu 

Diakite,  Kaba 

Dickenson,  BnKk 

DiGiovanni,  Caroline 

Dilamarter,  lames 

Dixon,  Bob 

Dorais,  Leo 

Doris,  lim 

Dourctte,  Phil 

Downey,  lim 

Doxtator,  Harry 

Dryden.  Veronica 

Dunning.  Paula 

Duran.  Marcela 

Eakin.  Lynn 

FjrI.  Lorna 

F^astham.  Kay 

Erie  I  Board  of  (^-operative 
Educational  Services.  New  York 

Evaru,  Roy,  United  Kingdom 

Evans,  Gareth,  United  Kingdon 

Ewens.  Peter 

Faucher.  Rolande 


Finlayton,  Ann 

Firestone.  William.  New  leney 

Fiihcr.  loan 

Fitzgerald,  lane 

Flinl,  Kcnl 

F»>ot.  David 

Forgucs.  Oscar 

Frccdman,  Bev 

Fullan,  Michael 

Gabriel,  Glen 

Gandikuta,  Priya 

Gaulhicr,  P  Wiibrod 

Gittens,  Margaret 

Gitterman.  Aryeh 

Gogna.  Sarabjit 

Gonzales,  Theresa 

Goodchild,  Melanie 

Grant.  I.inda 

Grattan,  Robert,  Alberta 

Grayson,  Linda 

Green,  Duncan 

Green,  loan 

Ibtkcll.  Helen 

Haines,  Grifiilhs, 
United  Kingdom 

Hall,  Nancy,  British  (jtlumbia 

Hargreaves.  Andy 

Hawkins,  Karen, 
British  Columbia 

Hendricks,  Mary 

Hill.  Anne  Mane 

Hill.  Ada 

Hindle.  I.yn 


For  ttw  Low*  of  Laarrrinc 


Holmes,  Ann 

Houghton,  Roy 

Inter- Faculty  Technical  Council 

Jacob,  Lynn 

Jalsevac,  John 

James,  Roy,  United  Kingdom 

Jamieson,  Rebecca 

Januario,  Ilda 

Jeffrey,  Alan 

Jessen,  Leigh 

Jones,  Owen,  United  Kingdom 

Kaplan,  Beth 

Keating,  Dan 

Kelly,  Peter 

Kelsey,  Brian 

Kenny,  Brenda 

Kentucky  Office  of  Education 
Accountability 

Kentucky  Department  of 
Education 

Kilcher,  Ann,  Nova  Scotia 

King,  Allan 

Kirner,  Joan,  Australia 

Knox,  Marilyn 

Lacelle,  Gilles 

Lacelle,  Heather 

Lacey,  Veronica 

Lafond,  Marie-Josee 

Landry- Sabourin,  Monique 

Lane,  Carola 

Lapointe,  Marie 

Lauwers,  Peter 


Laxer,  Jim 

Leithwood,  Ken 

Lemire,  Jacques 

Lessard,  Remi 

Levi,  Marion 

Levin,  Malcolm 

Lewis,  Stephen 

Lewko,  John 

Li,  Francis 

Lichti,  June 

Lickers,  Keith 

Lim,  Sam,  British  Columbia 

Lind,  Phil 

Lloyd,  M.E.R.,  United  Kingdom 

Loretan,  Robert 

Lowry,  Keith 

Luis,  Derek 

MacDougall,  Dave,  Alberta 

Mackay,  Bauni,  Alberta 

Maclaren,  Janet 

Maclure,  Stuart,  United  Kingdom 

Major,  Judith,  Washington 

Maloney,  Colin 

Malubungi,  Mueni 

Maracle,  Doug 

Marguerite  Bourgeoys  Parents' 
Committee 

Mark,  Ken 

Martin,  Richard 

Marujo,  Manuela 

Mather,  Dick,  Alberta 

Mathien,  Julie 


Mauti,  Sante 

Mawhinney,  Hanne 

McArthur,  Doug 

McCaU,  Douglas, 
British  Columbia 

McDonald,  Elaine 

McGuire,  Norma 

McKenzie,  Hugh 

McKeown,  Ned 

McKittrick,  Sara 

McMurphy,  Elsie, 
British  Columbia 

Messenger,  Bill 

Meyer,  John 

Michaud,  Pierre 

Milton,  Brian 

Milton,  Penny 

Minchin,  Edward 

Miskokomon,  Joe 

Morcos,  Baher 

Morgan,  Gareth 

Mortimore,  Peter, 
United  Kingdom 

Munro,  Marg 

Mvogo,  Germain 

Mwenga,  Macky 

Myers,  Doug,  Nova  Scotia 

N'Zingi,  Sebastien 

Nahwegahbow,  Leona 

Negron,  Richard,  New  York 

Nelson,  Fiona 

Noble,  Wendy 

Nunes,  Fernando 


O'Leary,  Mary  Ann 

Offord,  Dan 

Ontario  Women's  Directorate 

Ontario  Advisory  Council  on 
Women's  Issues 

Ontario  Parent  Council 

Ontario  Welcome  House 

Ontario  Association  of  Deans  of 
Education 

Ontario  Council  of  University 
Affairs 

Ontario  Anti-Racism  Secretariat 

Orlikow,  Lionel,  Manitoba 

Orpwood,  Graham 

Panschi,  Bobby 

Paquette,  Jerry 

Park,  Paul 

Pascal,  Charles 

Passmore,  Ellen 

Patterson,  Joshua 

Pawis-Tabobondung,  Vera 

Pawria,  Kavita 

Pearl,  Stan 

Pegahmagabow,  Merle 

Pelletier,  Jacqueline 

Penfold,  George 

Peters,  Gord 

Phillips,  Carol 

Pluviose,  Marie-Josee 

Poisson,  Yves 

Premier's  Council,  Economic 
Lifelong  Learning  Taskforce 

Premier's  Council  on  Health, 
Children  and  Youth  Advisory 


Vol.  IV     Appendices 


Conuniltec 

Pncturd.  Robcn 

Probcn,  PitncM 

IUb«.  GufUve 

RMiwuuki.  Cicorgr 

iUhim.  Mohamcd  K.K. 

Rccv  Ci«imi)rch,  United  Kingdom 

Reilty.  Tom 

Rieu«:hin,  Sue 

Rioux.  Marcu 

Robiiuon,  Nomun. 
British  Columbui 

Roch.  Lucille 

RoemcT.  Frank.  British  Columbia 

Rote,  lim 

Rouleau,  Paul 

Ruuell.  ( .arol  (>ill 

Rutlc(%e,  Don 

Sdnei.  Ncshat 

Santerre,  Annie 


Scane.  loycc 

Schweinbenz,  Hont 

Scott.  Ciraham 

Seaton,  lackie 

Selignun,  loni 

Sewell,  lohn 

Shapiro,  Bernard 

ShapMin,  Stan 

Shryburt,  Bernard 

Shukyn,  Murray 

Singh,  Allan 

Slobodian,  Valentina 

Smart,  r>«)ugla^, 
hritish  (Mlumbui 

Smith,  Gerry 

Solomon  Sylvia 

Speirs,  Rosemary 

Sponagle,  Sandy 

Steele.  Louise 

Sleinhauer,  Paul 


Stone&s,  Rae 

Stuart,  Susan 

Stunt,  lohn 

Stursberg,  Richard 

Swam,  Ron 

Tegert,  (ackie,  British  (x>lumbia 

Tempiin.  Mary 

rhompson,  Tim 

Tidd,  Myrna 

Tidey,  Tom 

Tottenham.  Ann 

Toussainl.  Pierre-Eddy 

Towndrow,  Lee 

I'ownscnd,  Richard 

Tranchcmontagne,  Clement 

Tr*panier,  Claire 

Trolticr,  locelync 

Trustees  Leadership  Assembly 

Twist,  loanne 

Vickcrs,  Colin 


Vigneault,  Dolores,  (Jufhei 
N'igoud,  Toby 
Wadwani,  Zenia 
Wark-Martyn,  Shelley 
Wells,  Margaret 
Wells.  Stan 
White.  Krank 
Wiggins,  Cindy 
Williams,  Steve 
Wilson,  Bob 
Wilson,  Margaret 
Worzel.  Richard 
Wright,  ludith 
Wright,  Ouida 
Ynez,  Giselle 
Young,  Don 
Youngchief,  Mariam 
Young-Mitchell,  Kcri 
Zussman,  David 
Zywinc,  loanne 


App«ndix  D:  Public  Hearings  -  Dates  and  Sites  (September  1993-May  1994) 


ScfNcmbCT  27-2»  Thunder  fiar 


Sc|»teMibci  2^ 
September  30 
October  4-S 


St  pjirick't  Secondary  School 

Sioux  l>ookout 

Queen  FJi/ahelh  High  School 

Kcnora/Krewalin 

St.  Louis  Klemenlary  School 

Sudbtiry 

Sudbury  Secondary  School 


October  6  7  Sault  Ste.  Marie 

korah  (  ollcgiate  &  Vocational  School 

October  6  7  North  Bay 

'^t  loseph  -  Scollard  Hall  Secondary  School 

October  1 2  Toronto 

Kiival  (  ommission  on  Learning  Oflficei 

October  1  <  lomnio 

<  ardinal  (-arlcr  Academy  for  ihc  Arts 


For  the  Love  of  LaarrtMC 


October  18-19 


October  20-21 


October  20 


October  21 


November  1 


November  2 


November  3 


November  3 


November  4 


November  4 


November  9-10 


November  9-10 


November  15-16 


November  17 


November  17 


November  18 


November  18 


London 

Wheable  Centre  for  Adult  Education 

Windsor 

W.D.  Lowe  Secondary  School 

Sarnia 

Clearwater  Arena 

Chatham 

Tecumseh  Public  School 

Hamilton 

Bishop  Ryan  Secondary  School 

Hamilton 

Briarwood  Adult  Learning  Centre 

Guelph 

Our  Lady  of  Lourdes  Secondary  School 

St.  Catharines 

Lincoln  County  Board  of  Education  Offices 

Kitchener 

Waterloo  County  Board  of  Education 

WeUand 

Welland  County  Roman  Catholic  Separate  School 
Board  Offices 

Scarborough 

Winston  Churchill  Collegiate  Institute 

Oshawa 

Eastdale  Collegiate  Institute 

Ottawa 

Albert  St.  Administration  Centre 

Kingston 

Holy  Cross  Secondary  School 

Cornwall 

St.  Laurent/St.  Lawrence  High  School 

Peterborough 

Thomas  A.  Stewart  Secondary  School 

Hawkesbury 

£cole  secondaire  regionale  Hawkesbury 


November  22  Newmarket 

Dr.  Denison  Secondary  School 

November  22  Markham 

Markville  Secondary  School 

November  23-24  North  York 

Northview  Heights  Secondary  School 

November  29  East  York 

East  York  Collegiate  Institute 

November  30  City  of  York 

York  Memorial  Collegiate  Institute 

December  1  Mississauga 

Dufferin-Peel  Roman  Catholic  Separate  School 
Board  Offices 

December  6  Toronto 

Beverley  School 

December  7  Toronto 

Etienne-Brule 

December  8  Toronto 

Regent  Park  Duke  of  York 

December  10  Ottawa 

University  of  Ottawa,  Faculty  of  Health  Science 

December  13  Toronto 

Brockton  High  School 

December  14  Toronto 

Gabrielle  Roy  Elementary  School 

December  15  Toronto 

Lawrence  Park  Collegiate  Institute 

March  2  Timmins 

Northern  College  (South  Porcupine) 

May  5  Moose  Factory  Island 

Ministik  Public  School 

May  6  Moosonee 

Northern  Lights  Secondary  School 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


Appendix  E:  Schools  Visited  (1993-1994) 


Aleumicr  Muir/GUdstone  Avmu«  Public  S<:hix)t.  Toronto 

The  AmhuMdor  School  Program,  Toronto 
(A  Division  pro)eci  of  Frontier  College) 

Avondale  Sccon<lary  School,  North  York 

Bishop  Belleau  Public  School,  Mooionet 

Buhop  Sirachdn  School,  Toronto 

Canterbury  High  School,  Ottawa 

difford  BoMvy  School,  Ottawa 

Ecole  tecondiire  publique  De  La  Salle,  Ottawa 

Ccole  Horizon  leuncue.  Cornwall 

Ccolc  Notre- Dame,  Cornwall 

Frank  Ryan  Senior  Elementary  School,  Septan 

The  Greemxood  Centre  School,  Toronto 

Holy  Family  Education  Centre 
(Technical  School),  Guelph 

Horizon  Alteriutivc  Senior  School,  Toronto 

Lakefield  College  School,  UkefieU 

Lord  DufTenn  lunior  &  Senior  Public  School,  Toronto 

Mary  Ward  Catholic  Secondary  School,  Scarborou^ 

Mooic  Factory  Ministik  Public  School,  Moose  Factory 


MooMincc  HuWk  vHih)!,  Siooioncc 

Northern  Ughts  Secondary  School,  Mooionee 

Pelican  Falls  First  Nation  High  School,  Sioux  Lookout 

Powassan  Junior  Public  School,  hyHinuin 

Regent  Park/Dukc  ot  York  lunior  Public  School,  Toronui 

River  Oaks  Public  School,  Oakville 

Rose  Avenue  lunior  Public  School,  Toronto 

Senator  O'Connor  College  School,  North  York 

Sir  Wilfrid  Laurier  Secondary  School,  Orleam 

Smiths  Falls  District  Cx)llegiaie  Institute.  Smiths  h'alk, 

Sprucecourt  lunior  Public  School,  Toronto 

St.  Joseph  Scollard  Hall  Secondary  School,  North  Bay 

St.  loseph's  School,  Calabogie 

Topcliff  Public  School,  North  Yoii. 

Walp<ile  Island  School  and  Study  Centre,  Wallaceburg 

W.  E.  Govtrling  Elementary  School,  Ottawa 

Widdifield  Secondary  School,  North  Bay 

Winchester  Public  School  junior  and  Senior,  Toronto 


For  ttw  Lov«o(  L*am«nc 


Appendix  F:  Background  Papers  -  Author  and  Title 


Titles  are  given  in  the  language  in  which  the  paper  was  written  and  will 
be  available. 

Allison,  Patricia  A. 

"Teacher  Education  in  Ontario" 

Biemiller,  Andrew 

"Indicators  of  Reading  Progress" 

Biemiller,  Andrew  and  Booth,  David 

"Towards  Higher  Levels  of  Literacy  in  Ontario" 

Cazabon,  Benoit 

"Ecole  et  culture:  Creer  une  culture  scolaire  qui  responsabilise  les  el^ves  et 
les  enseignants  tout  autant  qu'elle  cree  les  liens  entre  I'ecole,  la  famUle  et 
la  communaute" 

Corson,  David 

"Towards  a  Comprehensive  Language  Policy  for  Ontario: 
The  Language  of  the  School  as  a  Second  Language" 

"The  'Sami  Language  Act'  in  Norway:  Implications  for  Users  of 
Aboriginal  Languages  in  the  Ontario  School  System" 

Coulter,  Rebecca 

"An  Introduction  to  Aspects  of  the  History  of  Public  Schooling  in 

Ontario,  1840-1990" 

Cummins,  lim 

"The  Role  of  Language  Maintenance  and  Literacy  Development  in 

Promoting  Academic  Achievement  in  a  Multicultural  Society" 

Daenzer,  Patricia  and  Dei,  George 

"Issues  of  School  Completion/Dropout:  A  Focus  on  Black  Youth  in 
Ontario  Schools  and  Other  Relevant  Studies" 

Dennie,  Donald  and  LaFlamme,  Simon 

"Rapport  de  recherche  presente  a  la  commission  royale  d'enquete  sur 

rfiducation  en  Ontario" 

Desjarlais,  Lionel 

"La  vision  de  Tecole  catholique  de  langue  fran(;aise  en  Ontario" 

Earl,  Lorna  M. 

"Accountability  and  Assessment:  Ensuring  Quality  in 

Ontario  Schools" 

Hagarty,  Stephen 

"Vision,  Purpose,  Values  and  Principles" 

Heller,  Monica 

"Les  aspects  socioculturels  du  role  du  langage  dans  les 

processus  d'apprentissage" 


King,  Alan  J.C. 

"Restructuring  Ontario  Secondary  Education" 

Labrie,  Normand 

"Les  politiques  linguistiques  a  I'ecole:  Contraintes  et  libertes  decoulant 
des  dispositions  provinciales  et  nationales  et  des  engagements 
internationaux" 

Masny,  Diana 

"Quelques  questions  de  langage  dans  les  ecoles  de  langue  fran<^aise  de 

rOntario" 

Mawhinney,  Hanne  B. 

"The  Policy  and  Practice  of  School-Based  Interagency  Collaboration" 

Michaud,  Pierre 

"Le  centre  scolaire-communautaire:  reflexion  et  synthese  des  ecrits" 

Muir,  Elizabeth  Savard 

"Summary  and  Analysis  of  Recent  Literature  on  Parental  Roles  in 
Educational  Governance" 

Nagy,  Philip 

"National  and  International  Comparisons  of  Student  Achievement: 
Implications  for  Ontario" 

Orpwood,  Graham 

"Scientific  Literacy  for  All" 

"Consideration  of  Alternative  Models  of  System  Assessment" 

Paquette,  Jerry 

"Major  Trends  in  Recent  Educational  Policy-Making  in  Canada: 
Refocusing  and  Renewing  in  Challenging  Times" 

Scane,  Joyce 

"What  the  Literature  Tells  Us  about  School-Based  Management  in 
Selected  Jurisdictions:  Implications  for  Ontario" 

Stuart,  Susan 

"Mathematics  Teaching  and  Learning  in  Ontario" 

Williams,  Linda  D. 

"Pre-Service  Teacher  Education  in  Selected  Provinces  of  Canada" 


In  addition  to  these  commissioned  papers,  faculty  Members  and  graduate 
students  of  the  Faculty  of  Education,  York  University,  contributed  papers. 

The  collection  was  entitled: 

"Equity,  Social  Difference  and  Ontario  Schools:  Collection  of  14  Papers  for 

the  Ontario  Royal  Commission  on  Learning"  (compiled  and  edited  by  Curt 

Dudley-Marling) 


Vol.  IV     Appendices 


Appendix  G:  Commissioners'  Biographies 


Moniquc  B«{(in 
C  uchdir 

A  tormcr  teacher,  Monique  Begin  completed  her  M.A.  in 
sociology  at  I'Univer&it^  de  Montreal  and  did  doctoral  studies 
at  rUniversit^  de  Paris  (Sorbonne),  before  working  as  a 
consultant  in  applied  SiKial  sciences  in  Montreal.  From  1967 
to  1970.  she  served  as  the  executive  secretary  to  the  Royal 
Commission  on  the  Status  of  Women  in  Canada  and  co- 
signed  the  report  to  Parliament.  After  two  years  as  assistant 
director  of  research  at  the  Canadian  Radio-Television  and 
Telecommunications  Commission,  she  ran  for  Parliament  as  a 
Liberal. 

Re-elected  four  times  ( 1972-*4),  Monique  Begin  is  best 
known  as  the  first  woman  MP  elected  from  Quebec  to  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  as  minister  of  National  Health  and 
Welfare  ( 1977-84).  In  that  portfolio,  she  sponsored  a  range  of 
legislation,  including  the  Canada  Health  Act. 

Since  September  1984,  when  she  left  politics,  Monique 
B^in  has  been  a  visiting  professor  at  the  University  of  Notre 
Dame,  Indiana,  and  McGill  University  in  Montreal,  before 
becoming  the  first  holder  of  the  joint  Chair  in  Women's 
Studies  at  the  University  of  Ottawa  and  Carleton  University.  In 
1990  she  was  appointed  dean  of  the  new  Faculty  of  Health 
Sciences  at  the  University  of  Ottawa. 


Gerald  I .  (apian 

Co-ihair 

Cierald  Caplan  has  had  a  varied  career  as  an  academic  and 

educator,  political  and  social  activist,  public  po!ic\'  analyst, 

and  public  affairs  commentator. 

He  has  an  M.A.  in  Canadian  history  from  the  University  of 
Toronto  and  a  Phi)  in  African  history  from  the  School  of 
Oriental  and  African  Studies  at  the  University  of  London.  He 
has  taught  in  the  history  departments  at  the  University  of 
loronto,  the  University  C^ollogc  of  Rhodesia,  and  the 
Department  of  History  and  Philosophy  t)f  Kducation  at  the 
Ontario  Institute  for  Studies  in  Kducation.  He  is  the  author  of 
several  books,  many  articles  and  book  reviews  in  academic 
journals,  as  well  as  magazine  and  newspaper  columns. 

After  leaving  OISK  in  1977,  Gerald  Caplan  became  the 
Director  of  the  CUSO  program  in  Nigeria,  after  which  he  ran 
the  Health  Advocacy  Unit  of  the  City  of  Toronto.  He  then 
became  federal  secretary  (national  director)  of  the  New 
Democratic  Party  and  national  campaign  manager  for  the 
1484  election.  Shortly  after  leaving  that  position,  he  was 
appointed  (by  the  Mulroney  government)  as  co-chair  of  a 
federal  task  force  on  Canadian  broadcasting  policy.  Between 
the  completion  of  the  report  on  broadcasting  policy  in  1986 
and  becoming  co-chair  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Learning 
in  199.^,  he  was  primarily  engaged  as  a  newspaper  columnist 
and  television  commentator,  as  well  as  a  consultant  on 
government  relations. 


Fof  Itw  tov«  of  L«aminc 


Manisha  Bharti 
Commissioner 

Manisha  Bharti  has  a  list  of  accompHshments  that  would  be 
impressive  in  a  woman  twice  her  1 9  years.  A  graduate  of  St. 
Lawrence  High  School  in  Cornwall,  she  is  currently  studying 
at  Harvard  University. 

Academically,  she  was  a  gold  award  winner,  with  an 
average  of  90  percent  or  more  in  her  secondary  school 
courses.  In  the  Waterloo  University  Mathematics  Contests, 
Manisha  finished  in  the  top  eight  percent  of  Ontario. 
Throughout  high  school,  she  was  a  member  of  her  school's 
SchoolReach  and  Canada  Quiz  academic  teams.  She  spent  one 
summer  involved  in  biological  research  at  the  University  of 
Guelph  and,  upon  graduation,  she  was  awarded  the  governor 
general's  medal  of  distinction. 

Manisha  was  extremely  active  in  a  variety  of  high  school 
activities,  including  the  school  environmental  club,  the  school 
spirit  club,  and  the  student  leaders  organizing  committee.  She 
was  the  Student  Council  president,  chair  of  the  SD&G  Inter- 
School  Student  Council,  and  Eastern  South  Region  vice- 
president  of  the  OSSSA  -  the  Ontario  Secondary  School 
Students  Association.  Manisha  was  also  a  representative  on 
the  Stormont,  Dundas  and  Glengarry  County  Board  of 
Education  Race  Relations  and  Ethnocultural  Equity 
Committee,  as  well  as  involved  the  board's  Environmental  and 
Vision  2000  steering  committees. 

Manisha  has  also  been  active  in  the  broader  community, 
volunteering  with  the  Cornwall  Alzheimer  Association  and 
the  Cornwall  Environment  Resource  Centre.  She  is  a  past 
president  of  OCTAGON,  the  Optimist  Youth  Service  Club, 
and  she  has  volunteered  at  the  Hotel  Dieu  Hospital.  In 
addition  to  all  this  activity,  Manisha  has  attended  a  number  of 
youth-related  conferences  and  travelled  extensively. 


Avis  E.  Glaze 
Commissioner 

Avis  Glaze  taught  in  secondary  school  and  teachers'  college  in 
Jamaica  before  applying  to  the  Ontario  Institute  for  Studies  in 
Education  to  pursue  post-graduate  studies.  There  she 
completed  master's  programs  in  the  areas  of  educational 
administration,  guidance,  and  counselling,  and  additional 
courses  in  special  education,  curriculum,  measurement  and 
evaluation,  and  educational  psychology.  She  completed  her 
doctorate  in  1979. 

Dr.  Glaze  has  taught  at  all  levels  of  education  -  elementary, 
secondary,  community  college,  teachers'  college,  and 
university  -  and  has  been  a  superintendent  of  schools  in  both 
the  separate  and  public  school  systems.  As  well,  she  is  a 
member  of  the  Board  of  Governors  of  Humber  College  of 
Applied  Arts  and  Technology,  and  a  member  of  the  Senate  of 
York  University.  Dr.  Glaze  has  won  awards  for  her  outstanding 
contribution  to  education. 

In  1983,  Dr.  Glaze  was  seconded  to  the  Curriculum  Branch 
of  the  Ministry  of  Education  as  an  education  officer.  She  also 
served  as  a  research  co-ordinator  with  the  Ontario  Women's 
Directorate  and  has  worked  with  both  the  Ontario  and 
Canadian  Advisory  Councils  on  the  Status  of  Women.  She  is 
called  upon  frequently  to  present  at  major  conferences  and  to 
conduct  professional  development  sessions  with  teachers  and 
workshops  with  parents  and  students.  Her  most  recent 
community  involvement  is  with  the  Harry  Gairey  Scholarship 
Fund. 

Dr.  Glaze  is  currently  a  superintendent  of  education  with 
the  North  York  Board  and  a  course  director  in  the  Faculty  of 
Education  of  York  University. 


Vol.  IV    Appendices 


Dennis  J.  Murphy 
C!ommissioncr 

Dennis  Murphy  is  j  priest  of  the  Diocese  of  Sault  Stc.  Marie 
and  Wis  ordained  in  1960.  He  studied  in  North  Bay,  Toronto, 
Rome,  Brussels,  and  Ottawa,  receiving  his  PhD  in  education 
from  the  University  of  Ottawa  in  1971.  Monsignor  Murphy 
has  served  in  his  diocese  as  a  parish  priest.  Chancellor,  and 
Director  of  Religious  Education.  He  was  also  a  lecturer  in 
religious  studies  at  Laurentian  University. 

At  the  national  level,  from  1%7  to  1970  he  was  the  director 
of  the  National  Office  for  Religious  Education,  Canadian 
Conference  of  Catholic  Bishops,  and  from  1977  to  1984  he 
was  general  secretary  of  the  Conference  of  Bishops. 

In  1986  he  founded  the  Institute  for  Catholic  Education  in 
Toronto,  and  for  the  first  several  years  was  its  executive 
director. 

In  1977  Dennis  Murphy  was  elected  to  the  Nipissing 
District  Roman  Catholic  Separate  School  Board,  and  served 
for  a  brief  period.  He  v«s  also  chaplain  of  the  Ontario 
Separate  School  Trustees  Association  from  1967  to  1985,  and 
the  chaplain  of  the  Canadian  Catholic  School  Trustees' 
Association  from  1971  to  1977. 

Throughout  his  career,  he  has  also  served  on  many  boards, 
including  the  North  Bay  Crisis  Centre,  the  Metropolitan 
Toronto  Catholic  Children's  Aid  Society,  St.  Joseph's  Hospital 
in  North  Bay,  and  the  University  of  St.  Jerome's  College  in 
Kitchener. 


For  the  Love  of  Laammg