The clock is now ticking for many of Canada’s rural communities. Declining enrollments are gradually emptying small community schools and provincial departments of education are attempting to address the “excess space capacity” with facilities planning models that promote regional consolidation, tend to ignore local community interests, and signal the death knell for small schools.
School accommodation reviews are the harbinger of school closures, essentially ripping the heart out of rural communities. Shuttering rural schools does far more than emotional damage. A June 2008 Canadian Senate Agriculture and Forestry Committee report, Beyond Freefall, identified school abandonment as a major contributor to the cycle of rural poverty. http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/392/agri/rep/rep09jun08-e.pdf
From Nova Scotia to Ontario to British Columbia, School Reviews become the defacto rural education strategy. In Nova Scotia, the School Review process, revamped in 2008, continues under rather legalistic rules that formalize a process pitting school boards against the communities they purport to serve. Parents and families caught up in the process soon discover a regulated, quasi-judicial “chopping block” on the road to a more consolidated, regionalized, and remote school system. Being granted a reprieve is all most small, rural schools can hope for under the current School Review system. http://www.capebretonpost.com/News/Local/2012-05-16/article-2981277/Schools-vital-to-rural-areas-group/1
The Schools at the Centre policy brief, produced by the Nova Scotia Small Schools Initiative and presented on May 15, 2012 to Education Minister Ramona Jennex , attempts to change the prevailing dynamic. http://www.facebook.com/NovaScotiaSmallSchoolsInitiative It calls for a moratorium on School Closures for one year to provide the time to develop a coherent, coordinated Rural Strategy aimed at revitalizing threatened rural communities. The Delegation challenged the Minister and her Department to take the lead, working with Rural and Economic Development and other agencies, in developing a “Schools at the Centre” revitalization plan, giving rural Nova Scotia communities some reason for hope in the future. http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/97233-committee-urges-province-to-keep-rural-schools-open
A coordinated, strategic approach to rural education and sustainability is imperative to the future of rural communities. It is not really a new concept, because many Provinces and Territories have at least formally adopted such policies. A few examples of Rural Strategies should suffice:
Manitoba: “Collaboration among school divisions, the provincial Government and community agencies is essential to the articulation and implementation of effective strategies and actions which will ensure a high quality of educational opportunity for all students in rural and remote areas of our province.” (Rural Education in Manitoba: Defining Challenges, Creating Solutions, 5)
Alberta: “As part of Alberta’s plan, a Minister’s Advisory Committee on Small and Rural School Programming was to be established along with “incentives…to encourage rural school jurisdictions and educational institutions to work with community agencies to make their schools and facilities a hub of services for children, communities and lifelong learning”. (A Place to Grow: Alberta’s Rural Development Strategy, Executive Summary)
Ontario:“Our plan for rural Ontario recognizes that when young people have access to good education in local schools, our communities can grow stronger.” ( Ontario’s Rural Plan Update 2006)
Prince Edward Island: “Given that many people prefer a rural lifestyle, rural communities that offer comparable levels of connectivity and educational services will soon be able to compete with urban centres for residents with high-quality talent and expertise, especially those communities with a vibrant local culture and identity. If rural communities can attract, and retain, even a small percentage of people seeking to raise their families in a rural environment – whether they earn their living in the community or an urban centre – these citizens could provide rural Prince Edward Island with the economic foundation it needs to maintain its way of life and achieve a higher quality of life”.( Rural Action Plan A Rural Economic Development Strategy for Prince Edward Island, 2010)
While provincial governments have various departments responsible for education, regional development, health, and community services, they still tend to operate in comfortable “silos”. In the case of Nova Scotia, the new Kids & Learning First Education Plan is a prime example. It contains a smattering of good ideas, but these in no way constitute the kind of analytical thinking and integrated planning necessary to tackle the issues of rural education, rural depopulation and rural economics, not to mention the most basic right of any child — a quality educational experience within her or his own community.
The members of Nova Scotia’s Small Schools Delegation challenged the Minister and her Department to take the lead in “reframing” the whole issue. Rather than relying upon the School Review process to simply shed small rural schools, why not embrace a new concept of schooling? A new Smaller Human Scale model that recognizes the centrality of schools in rural communities and one that demonstrates the viability of small schools run in an affordable, efficient fashion tapping into the potential of networked school communities.
Where do we start to address the core problem? The NS Small Schools Initiative has recommended that:
1. The Minister of Education announce the Department of Education’s intention to take the lead in developing a Rural Revitalization Strategy, working in partnership with Economic and Rural Development for an integrated government-wide approach.
2. The Minister of Education take the lead in advancing the Kids & Learning First plan by embracing our Schools at the Centre philosophy aimed at revitalizing rural education through a province-wide, community-building and development strategy.
3. The Minister of Education announce a moratorium on all School Review processes, effective June 1, 2012, affecting all schools recommended for closure in the current provincial cycle of school accommodation reviews.
4. The Department of Education build on the Nova Scotia Virtual School project by initiating a Rural Schools Online Education Network, based upon the Newfoundland model, creating digitally-networked schools and taking fuller advantage of distance education in the 21st century guise of virtual schooling.
5. The Department of Education take a lead role in facilitating the partnerships necessary to help small rural communities develop their school structures into multi-use community assets, through a public engagement process, involving all interested groups, including school boards, regional development agencies, school councils, teachers, local boards of trade, local government and citizens.
What’s stopping Canada’s provincial governments from tackling the challenge of revitalizing rural education? Why do provinces like Nova Scotia, Ontario, and New Brunswick rely almost exclusively upon a School Review process to guide their policies? Can we find the leadership to take up this challenge?
Leadership is important with this initiative. I mean in the sense of government harnessing proven community assets like this one. So is a moratorium on school closures. For to long we have seen the “work together branch” in one hand of government while the other “cut and close” branch continues to operate without alternative consideration.
This is a sensible initiative brought forward in the truest way by the larger community, to the provincial government. It is inclusive and bridges other stakeholders in the role of rural revitalization.
At the end of the day, there may just not be enough students to make a school viable. My solution has always been a dialogue between the board and the parents followed by a vote, one vote per family. Vote to keep the school open – school stays open but don’t expect the ecomnomies of scale big schools achieve. Ittinerant teachers can add variety to the program.
Lets just assume for the sake of argument and 150 years of Canadian history, that the rural areas of Canada just keep getting smaller and smaller through this depopulation process. Then what ARE the solutions. None of them look attractive to rural folks.
More and more bussing to central schools
Boarding schools
Tiny little schools with 10-15 kids in them at 4-5 grade levels.
Home schooling
Perhaps technology can help but no government right left or centre wants to pay to support that system above.
Well for starters the tiny little school of 10- 15 is in no way the norm. Anything under 125 students seems to tap the knee cap reflexes of most review apologists intent on consolidation. So the small school needs to be defined accurately for the urban dweller as well as the rural. Not just in terms of numbers but relevance.
P-9’s go from 500 and up in the big box world and most high school terminals have an optimum range of a thousand students.
However, by taking a stronger and more inclusive departmental approach to the issue – like economic development, tourism, infrastructure and renewal (those are the “we just build em guys, we don’t explain why”) etc., then perhaps a more cohesive approach will create a more proactive effort by provincial governments.
But I also see this through the cultural lens of contemporary life. High school for instance, needs to be one of the most positive experiences for students being raised outside of the city. Those years are crucial in developing a strong identity with their place. It is hard to return to a small town or rural are if there is no connection left which included a sensible identity fostered through the education experience.
Hence the free fall.
Click to access rep09jun08-e.pdf
One of the questions it all raises and I am not trying to provoke here just clarify, is why do the people have an interest in maintaining a rural way of life for those who like it just because they are nostalgic for bucolic images or values.
In other words, why not just let the countryside depopulate without any particular supports. Why do they need a strategy to move jobs into rural areas? Why not just let the people move to the cities except the bare necessity to farm or extract resources?
Just because “some people like it” does not seem like a good enough reason.
For many decades “Upper Canadians” have asked “why do we have to move jobs to the Maritimes? We should be moving Maritimers to the jobs a la Fort McMoney.
I think a lot of people wrestle with that perspective – I know I have every time I drive into a city. And speaking of nostalgia, what may be passing through the mind of Hopper’s middle manager as his life as a city dweller takes a momentary break?
http://www.apieceofmonologue.com/2010/03/edward-hoppers-sketchbook.html
The perception of the contemporary city could be reduced to a belief that cities are just over crowded “info-farms”, that is if we let the ubiquitous lens of urbanism cloud our knowledge of values as they relate to the popularity of place. So are cities economically useful but nothing more?
No. We all know cities are much more than that. Culturally, educationally and economically etc.
The same premise can be structured for rural areas.
But you did use the word “values” which opens up the perspective of educational experience for those who choose to use the term as it relates geographically -not just a nostalgia for values in general.
So why should education be more valued in one place than another?
And is it not ironic that Fort McMoney is considered remote?
Not so much remote although 80% of Canadians live with two hours of the American border, but a relocation area particlarly for Atlantic Canadians who need work.
I have a general belief that people should not be subsidized by others to live somewhere. There must be a natural economy to underpin their life in a region.
http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/01/31/to-have-and-have-not/
Perhaps Newfoundland would agree with you. However, I do recall a while back Doug, you suggesting a moratorium on rural school closures. It is a significant initiative in this reframing strategy.
I do agree with a moratorium while the way forward is worked out, maybe even 5 years but we need a strategy that both works and is understood to be fair if that is possible. We will see how NL likes it now that they need to float Ontario. LOL
Moratorium followed my moratorium ad nauseum keeps pushing off the problem to even more ‘crats in the future. What is (conveniently) never mentioned are proposals for innovative methods of delivering education–charters, virtual schooling, other governance models, etc.–usually because the concept is so out of the narrow little boxes from which most governments operate. They cannot concieve of anything else but the school board model.
http://southshorenow.ca/archives/2012/052312/news/022_No_moratorium_on_school_reviews_minister.html.php
Rural areas are concerned with the present right now. While the clock ticks dealing with the ‘crats in the future may be moot for many communities – Rural and Urban in NS for that matter. It applies for both.
So, “school boards will continue with their process” (silly me, I thought it was our process). Taking the lead – kids and learning first is good but needs provincial wide inclusion with an integrated approach – hence schools at the centre.
Nobody seriously entertains privatization as part of the solution. It is ruled out at the get-go.
So far the results of virtual schooling are highly unimpressive as are charter results. Virtual schooling has a higher non completion rate than regular school. Offer these possibilities to the parents. They will turn you down flat.
“Offer these possibilities to the parents. They will turn you down flat.”
vs. closing their local school?…
Offer these possibilities to the parents. They will turn you down flat.”
vs. closing their local school?…
No they will say unacceptable choice but they will choose a centralized school far away over virtual schools or charters. Virtual schools have a low completion rate because they attract couch potatoes. Some high tech types who are pushing virtual schools are panicing at the results. There is a lot of money at stake.
Kids just want to be in the big building with all the other kids because that is where the action is.
http://educationnext.org/the-public-weighs-in-on-school-reform/
Choosing a far away school is a red herring. There is no choice in the matter – only ultimatum. Just another way to attempt most parents and citizens to not weigh in on school policies.
Doug,
“Kids just want to be in the big building with all the other kids because that is where the action is.”
Silo talk. Even those buildings are starting to look mighty empty.
Doretta
http://educationnext.org/the-public-weighs-in-on-school-reform/
Let me see now, a poll by a right wing organization still finds that a minority opposes teachers, teachers support their unions more than ever and the affluent don’t like unions?
STOP THE PRESSES!!!!!!!!!!
And Steven, we see that you do not like all of the conventional solutions so your overall big picture new solution would be…….. what exactly?
Partnership. Plain and simple.
If DOE worked with Economic and Rural development initiatives together, they would see how important schools at the centre of a community really are.
Advertising the beauty of a community or putting money toward remote schools, while those schools are being reviewed for closure sends a mixed and insincere message at best.
That’s why a moratorium is imperative.
This means then bringing in the stakeholders.
Well Doug, firmly entrenched in the globalist/ economic / political centralization of all, including seeing people as mere capital resources to be be moved around where ever there is a need. Most literature that I have read, on both sides of the political spectrum, speaks of a future where the only human activity in rural areas, will be in the labour camps, model much like the 21st century models of Alberta’s labour camps for the oil fields. Busy hives of activities, concern with food, accommodation and transportation of the oil field workers, of three weeks in and one week off or some other configuration. No need for schools, churches, or even a community when a labour camp along with the technology and the internet can be its new replacement, and where the families can live in more urban centres in other parts of the country, while Daddy and Mommy are off to the work camps. It is where the the State comes in to provide the services for children, including education services at a centralized location and where parents pay according to income, Obviously, as the many articles have stated, the private concerns would not be able to handle the flow and attend the needs of everyone, and where the public sector will step in on the pretence of safety and security for the children.
The articles read like another version of Utopia, where each human has its place in the economic system, working towards the identical goals much like the former USSR, minus the capitalist doctrine, but never a less the same goals, just a different version.
That said, Doug’s comments are the excuses given, to support the ideological stances of a centralized system and structure in the present social/economic/political systems that relies on centralization models to provide services and goods in the capitalistic model.
One of Doug’s comment says it all – “I have a general belief that people should not be subsidized by others to live somewhere. There must be a natural economy to underpin their life in a region.”
Who dictates the terms of the natural economy? For that matter the economic policies that underpins the local economies? The education system, from what I have read in the historical files, was built to provide the future workers and provide a reliable domestic work force. What the public education system never had to provide under the legal framework, is a standard set of what constitutes a basic education, and more importantly what the public education system has been charged within the legal parameters, to deliver education services, that are free for anyone to attend. It has allow the public education models to support the economic systems of the provinces, nationally and internationally by the delivering of education services based on the economic needs of the country, and not on the needs of the students.
Resulting in differing quality of education outcomes based on the income-social status as well as being based on the local economies of the communities. Thus, an inner urban city school composed mostly of low income students, a rural school of 200 students or less, and a community with two elementary schools are all at risk for students receiving a lesser quality in education, because the resources and delivery of education services are based on the economic system, predicting the needs of the far off future. The majority of students received an education according to their social-economic status standing, rather than the best education according to the needs of the students. The current and past education systems are geared to deliver education services based on the social/economic status of students. To the educationalists, it is simply not worth the effort and merit to deliver an education of top quality, that results in over qualified workers that are well versed on the fundamentals of the 3 Rs, as well as having a solid foundation in the sciences, the arts, the humanities and the maths.
As the years have rolled by, technological advances and the economic shifts /changes that corresponds to the technological advances, society and its economic systems have change its value system to meet and manage the change. The public education system has not change, because the public education system only has to deliver education services, but do not have to deliver a top notch quality education services for all. The promises of the educationalists that the big box schools of over 500 students or more will deliver a better education for the children whose schools have been closed or slated to be closed, is one of the greatest illusions being perpetuated unto the public. How many of the high income schools been closed in the last 50 years? Not any I can think of, and I am still flabber-ghasted a Ontario high school, that my oldest child attended, is still open and is not on the chopping block, even though it is no longer the number one high school in the region academically or on the sports roster. Meanwhile, the high schools that have replaced my oldest child’s former high school in rankings, are always threatened to be placed on the review list for closures, even though students are hanging from the rafters. Could it be the the high schools who are always threatened to be placed on the review list for closures, are composed mainly of students , whose parents are not of high professional status, compared to my child’s former high school, that is composed of 400 or so students, down from the 1200 count in the late 1980s, whose parents mainly come from the professional careers of accountants, lawyers, etc,, and the better off immigrant families,
As Doretta’s link has suggested, that the higher the social/economic rankings, the greater the odds are that parents and their children have the political clout and power to effect change as well as to protect their children from receiving a lower quality of education and thus are able to maximized their children’s chances of securing a better future than the other parents of lower social/economic status. But it is never acknowledged among the decision and policy makers within the education system, because it would put their statements and promises made of the offerings of the big box schools to what they really are, illusions of grandeur, to convince parents that it would benefit their children and their futures.
It is why Doug’s statement, ” Kids just want to be in the big building with all the other kids because that is where the action is.” is a pseudo-truth, a small white fib, or a little white lie. Any kid would want to go to a different school, if the school board has cheated the school out of resources and maintaining the upkeep of the building. If the school is falling apart, no library to speak of, using old computers that belong in a museum display for the 1990s – well than there is no contest. And the long bus rides commence to a centralized location, and sometimes it does occur in highly dense urban areas, with promises of sugar plums dancing in the heads of the newly transported students, until reality crashes down upon the students. All the students have exchanged is a fancier geographical location, with a few more bells and whistles, only to received the identical quality of education as in the former school, with even more restrictions that prevents students from fully participating in the new school, and parents who will now have even less political clout and power to affect change for their children’s best interests and their futures.
Innovative changes and methods of delivering education services are never mentioned as Doretta has stated for good reason, the educationalists cannot conceived of anything else but the school model of the 19th century kind. The powers to be who hold the economic and political purse strings, are bound and determined as they were in the early 1900s, to keep schools as playing the starring role to supply workers for the changing job markets of the futures. Heaven for bid, a dyslexic of a working class background, would received a top notched reading program provided by the school board, when the parents of higher social/income means, are always quite willing to pay for the services privately, when the school or school board refuses to provide for the top notched reading program. I heard that reason in many different forms over the years, and I do truly believed that my child and other children are not worth the effort and expense by the educationalists of centralization, to supply top notch programs for children who do not have high social/economic standing. It is about delivering education services the cheapest way possible to supply the future working skills of the future. Today in our schools, the emphasis is on trade skills, except for the schools of higher social/economic status. Those schools the emphasis is the academics of students, and ensuring that the doors of post-secondary are always kept open to them. Whatever the students are lacking in both groups, can always be picked up on their own dime after 12 years of schooling.
The stats clearly shows the final outcomes of students, and if one picks up a newspaper, the connections to the economic troubles, the cutting of government services, the unemployment rate, and the loss of jobs is clearly connected to the old 19th century education model, that stubbornly refuses to change the model of ensuring a steady supply to meet the labour demands of the future, to one that will meet the labour demands of the present. And not some futuristic model that predicts the future needs of a labour market, and than go about shaping the education policies around the future needs of the labour market, at the expense of the students’ education and their future.
As for Doug’s comment on NL – ” We will see how NL likes it now that they need to float Ontario. LOL” Newfoundland is no longer closing down schools, and have not been for the last ten years in the rural areas. But they sure like to close down schools in the main urban center and capital of NL.It clearly shows, where the majority of the top ranking schools under AIMS rankings, are to be found in the rural areas of the province, and to which the local school that my child attends is one of the top ranking schools. The rural schools of small proportions must be doing something right, considering resources and selection of curriculum is in short supply in rural NL. Thankfully thanks to the advances of technology, high school students can now go beyond the basic science,math and english courses, and partake in the different courses of interest and learning. It also helps to have an education policy, that insists on using teachers to teach within their field, and as a result, their is a very high ratio of math, science, english teachers and french teachers teaching within their field, with few if any generalist teachers teaching at the high school level.
Doug, lessons could be learn for Ontario, if they look at the Atlantic provinces, The Atlantic provinces have their share of economic troubles for many years and Ontario is just beginning the rocky pathway. Closing down schools is not the answer, especially when the transportation bills becomes higher than the actual education of students. Nor is the smart remarks of shipping Atlantic Canadians to the Alberta oil fields, because people in the big city of Toronto no longer want to subsidised the life styles of Atlantic Canada. Really, many of an outport have been saved by the ones who are willing to go to Alberta, staying in the work camps, while the families remain at home. In the smaller outports, women of all shapes and sizes have taken over the volunteer fire departments and other town services. The men and women return from Alberta, pouring new money in the small communities keeping the small businesses turning a profit, and like magic, the outport no longer looks like a dying community. Why go to all the work and effort, if rural living according to the experts and urban planners will be no more in the future? There is no contest living in a $400,000 trailer home in Fort McMurray compared to the homes of an outport.that are not trailers. Besides that, rural NL is a sweet spot to raise children and it is why people in rural areas across Canada are working hard to keep their rural communities across Canada. No community wants the societal troubles of Fort McMurray , where one is hard press to find the rural benefits and advantages in a town that is located in rural Alberta, and yet has all the problems of big city living, including the identical problems dealing with the education of youth in urban centres.
Yes, lessons can be learned for the Ontario folks by looking at Atlantic Canada and see what innovative ways are shaping and forming education policy throughout Atlantic Canada, and their ways of meeting the changes to society and how change is managed. In many ways Atlantic Canada, is still struggling to managed the change, in the same way as Ontario is. But plowing ahead intent on the centralized model of education, where rural schools are closed for the simple reason of declining enrolment , does the greatest disservice to the rural communities – it is a government walking away from the citizens of a small rural community. What makes anyone think, that employers would want to invest in a rural community, when the government has already removed most of the government services from the community? In my rural NL outport, residents are able and willing to fight to keep the government services of schools, the small hospital that also provides all health services, including the clinics, and other government services, because it happens to be the key to maintain and attract new employers willing to invest in our town, as well as attracting new residents willing to move to our community, in much the same way as Stephen’s community of Lunenburg in Nova Scotia. In the end Stephen is correct to assert in his posts, that rural communities are not only worth saving, but as well as rural communities are really part of a vital and booming economy for all citizens,
By dismissing rural communities, and their economies, that city folk are quick to do, it only reinforces the message that rural communities no longer play a role in the overall economies of the provincial and federal governments. This message repeats and eventually divides people in their respective camps, and more importantly the urban and rural divide widens even further. Allowing the governments to do what they want, intent on the centralized model to provide services, that soon will make its way to the big urban centres of plenty. Watch the urban folk scream when their children are transferred from the local neighbourhood school, to a school halfway across town, because the developers want the school land, for a new condo development. Or the futuristic article that I read yesterday on eco-pod homes, that according to the authors will be the future in home building, due to the limited supply of land and high real estate land prices. Rural Canada, does not have that problem, of rising real estate prices where economic activity is not high in the resource sector. Look at what happen to Fort McMurray, the eco-pods would be a affordable God sent but rather foolish and a waste of money for other rural areas who are not under heavy economic activities. As for the urban centres, eco-homes will become the new ghettos for affordable housing, and be a luxury for many, to move out of cement towers of immense height, have a wee bit of land to plant tomatoes.
The centralized model is eating away at the fabric and engine of the economies of Canada. The course for the last 100 years has been directed at the rural areas in Canada, but now in 2012, the centralized model is turning its attentions to the urban centres of plenty. In the end, the ironic part is that the people in the urban areas will change their attitude concerning rural Canada, and maybe the most ironic thing that will happen in the near future, is the wholesale change of values of all of their urban and rural citizens, saying no in unison to the plans of the advocates who only know one way – centralization and doing things the 19th century way, in the 21st century.
I can’t wait to hear the screaming when governments decide to shut down an urban school or a hospital, and giving out the reason, that services can be provided at a higher efficiency, resulting in cost savings, that can be redirected to enhance the services at the new location. Public libraries don’t get any respect from the urban dwellers, but a closure of a school or a health services provider does, when it will require the person to access the services that requires a 20 minute to an hour trip depending on traffic and mode of transportation. Only to find out, the services are no better than what was received before, and questioning what enhancements.
Well Doug, firmly entrenched in the globalist/ economic / political centralization of all, including seeing people as mere capital resources to be be moved around where ever there is a need. Most literature that I have read, on both sides of the political spectrum, speaks of a future where the only human activity in rural areas, will be in the labour camps, model much like the 21st century models of Alberta’s labour camps for the oil fields. Busy hives of activities, concern with food, accommodation and transportation of the oil field workers, of three weeks in and one week off or some other configuration. No need for schools, churches, or even a community when a labour camp along with the technology and the internet can be its new replacement, and where the families can live in more urban centres in other parts of the country, while Daddy and Mommy are off to the work camps. It is where the the State comes in to provide the services for children, including education services at a centralized location and where parents pay according to income, Obviously, as the many articles have stated, the private concerns would not be able to handle the flow and attend the needs of everyone, and where the public sector will step in on the pretence of safety and security for the children.
The articles read like another version of Utopia, where each human has its place in the economic system, working towards the identical goals much like the former USSR, minus the capitalist doctrine, but never a less the same goals, just a different version.
That said, Doug’s comments are the excuses given, to support the ideological stances of a centralized system and structure in the present social/economic/political systems that relies on centralization models to provide services and goods in the capitalistic model.
One of Doug’s comment says it all – “I have a general belief that people should not be subsidized by others to live somewhere. There must be a natural economy to underpin their life in a region.”
Who dictates the terms of the natural economy? For that matter the economic policies that underpins the local economies? The education system, from what I have read in the historical files, was built to provide the future workers and provide a reliable domestic work force. What the public education system never had to provide under the legal framework, is a standard set of what constitutes a basic education, and more importantly what the public education system has been charged within the legal parameters, to deliver education services, that are free for anyone to attend. It has allow the public education models to support the economic systems of the provinces, nationally and internationally by the delivering of education services based on the economic needs of the country, and not on the needs of the students.
Resulting in differing quality of education outcomes based on the income-social status as well as being based on the local economies of the communities. Thus, an inner urban city school composed mostly of low income students, a rural school of 200 students or less, and a community with two elementary schools are all at risk for students receiving a lesser quality in education, because the resources and delivery of education services are based on the economic system, predicting the needs of the far off future. The majority of students received an education according to their social-economic status standing, rather than the best education according to the needs of the students. The current and past education systems are geared to deliver education services based on the social/economic status of students. To the educationalists, it is simply not worth the effort and merit to deliver an education of top quality, that results in over qualified workers that are well versed on the fundamentals of the 3 Rs, as well as having a solid foundation in the sciences, the arts, the humanities and the maths.
As the years have rolled by, technological advances and the economic shifts /changes that corresponds to the technological advances, society and its economic systems have change its value system to meet and manage the change. The public education system has not change, because the public education system only has to deliver education services, but do not have to deliver a top notch quality education services for all. The promises of the educationalists that the big box schools of over 500 students or more will deliver a better education for the children whose schools have been closed or slated to be closed, is one of the greatest illusions being perpetuated unto the public. How many of the high income schools been closed in the last 50 years? Not any I can think of, and I am still flabber-ghasted a Ontario high school, that my oldest child attended, is still open and is not on the chopping block, even though it is no longer the number one high school in the region academically or on the sports roster. Meanwhile, the high schools that have replaced my oldest child’s former high school in rankings, are always threatened to be placed on the review list for closures, even though students are hanging from the rafters. Could it be the the high schools who are always threatened to be placed on the review list for closures, are composed mainly of students , whose parents are not of high professional status, compared to my child’s former high school, that is composed of 400 or so students, down from the 1200 count in the late 1980s, whose parents mainly come from the professional careers of accountants, lawyers, etc,, and the better off immigrant families,
As Doretta’s link has suggested, that the higher the social/economic rankings, the greater the odds are that parents and their children have the political clout and power to effect change as well as to protect their children from receiving a lower quality of education and thus are able to maximized their children’s chances of securing a better future than the other parents of lower social/economic status. But it is never acknowledged among the decision and policy makers within the education system, because it would put their statements and promises made of the offerings of the big box schools to what they really are, illusions of grandeur, to convince parents that it would benefit their children and their futures.
It is why Doug’s statement, ” Kids just want to be in the big building with all the other kids because that is where the action is.” is a pseudo-truth, a small white fib, or a little white lie. Any kid would want to go to a different school, if the school board has cheated the school out of resources and maintaining the upkeep of the building. If the school is falling apart, no library to speak of, using old computers that belong in a museum display for the 1990s – well than there is no contest. And the long bus rides commence to a centralized location, and sometimes it does occur in highly dense urban areas, with promises of sugar plums dancing in the heads of the newly transported students, until reality crashes down upon the students. All the students have exchanged is a fancier geographical location, with a few more bells and whistles, only to received the identical quality of education as in the former school, with even more restrictions that prevents students from fully participating in the new school, and parents who will now have even less political clout and power to affect change for their children’s best interests and their futures.
Innovative changes and methods of delivering education services are never mentioned as Doretta has stated for good reason, the educationalists cannot conceived of anything else but the school model of the 19th century kind. The powers to be who hold the economic and political purse strings, are bound and determined as they were in the early 1900s, to keep schools as playing the starring role to supply workers for the changing job markets of the futures. Heaven for bid, a dyslexic of a working class background, would received a top notched reading program provided by the school board, when the parents of higher social/income means, are always quite willing to pay for the services privately, when the school or school board refuses to provide for the top notched reading program. I heard that reason in many different forms over the years, and I do truly believed that my child and other children are not worth the effort and expense by the educationalists of centralization, to supply top notch programs for children who do not have high social/economic standing. It is about delivering education services the cheapest way possible to supply the future working skills of the future. Today in our schools, the emphasis is on trade skills, except for the schools of higher social/economic status. Those schools the emphasis is the academics of students, and ensuring that the doors of post-secondary are always kept open to them. Whatever the students are lacking in both groups, can always be picked up on their own dime after 12 years of schooling.
The stats clearly shows the final outcomes of students, and if one picks up a newspaper, the connections to the economic troubles, the cutting of government services, the unemployment rate, and the loss of jobs is clearly connected to the old 19th century education model, that stubbornly refuses to change the model of ensuring a steady supply to meet the labour demands of the future, to one that will meet the labour demands of the present. And not some futuristic model that predicts the future needs of a labour market, and than go about shaping the education policies around the future needs of the labour market, at the expense of the students’ education and their future.
As for Doug’s comment on NL – ” We will see how NL likes it now that they need to float Ontario. LOL” Newfoundland is no longer closing down schools, and have not been for the last ten years in the rural areas. But they sure like to close down schools in the main urban center and capital of NL.It clearly shows, where the majority of the top ranking schools under AIMS rankings, are to be found in the rural areas of the province, and to which the local school that my child attends is one of the top ranking schools. The rural schools of small proportions must be doing something right, considering resources and selection of curriculum is in short supply in rural NL. Thankfully thanks to the advances of technology, high school students can now go beyond the basic science,math and english courses, and partake in the different courses of interest and learning. It also helps to have an education policy, that insists on using teachers to teach within their field, and as a result, their is a very high ratio of math, science, english teachers and french teachers teaching within their field, with few if any generalist teachers teaching at the high school level.
Doug, lessons could be learn for Ontario, if they look at the Atlantic provinces, The Atlantic provinces have their share of economic troubles for many years and Ontario is just beginning the rocky pathway. Closing down schools is not the answer, especially when the transportation bills becomes higher than the actual education of students. Nor is the smart remarks of shipping Atlantic Canadians to the Alberta oil fields, because people in the big city of Toronto no longer want to subsidised the life styles of Atlantic Canada. Really, many of an outport have been saved by the ones who are willing to go to Alberta, staying in the work camps, while the families remain at home. In the smaller outports, women of all shapes and sizes have taken over the volunteer fire departments and other town services. The men and women return from Alberta, pouring new money in the small communities keeping the small businesses turning a profit, and like magic, the outport no longer looks like a dying community. Why go to all the work and effort, if rural living according to the experts and urban planners will be no more in the future? There is no contest living in a $400,000 trailer home in Fort McMurray compared to the homes of an outport.that are not trailers. Besides that, rural NL is a sweet spot to raise children and it is why people in rural areas across Canada are working hard to keep their rural communities across Canada. No community wants the societal troubles of Fort McMurray , where one is hard press to find the rural benefits and advantages in a town that is located in rural Alberta, and yet has all the problems of big city living, including the identical problems dealing with the education of youth in urban centres.
Yes, lessons can be learned for the Ontario folks by looking at Atlantic Canada and see what innovative ways are shaping and forming education policy throughout Atlantic Canada, and their ways of meeting the changes to society and how change is managed. In many ways Atlantic Canada, is still struggling to managed the change, in the same way as Ontario is. But plowing ahead intent on the centralized model of education, where rural schools are closed for the simple reason of declining enrolment , does the greatest disservice to the rural communities – it is a government walking away from the citizens of a small rural community. What makes anyone think, that employers would want to invest in a rural community, when the government has already removed most of the government services from the community? In my rural NL outport, residents are able and willing to fight to keep the government services of schools, the small hospital that also provides all health services, including the clinics, and other government services, because it happens to be the key to maintain and attract new employers willing to invest in our town, as well as attracting new residents willing to move to our community, in much the same way as Stephen’s community of Lunenburg in Nova Scotia. In the end Stephen is correct to assert in his posts, that rural communities are not only worth saving, but as well as rural communities are really part of a vital and booming economy for all citizens,
By dismissing rural communities, and their economies, that city folk are quick to do, it only reinforces the message that rural communities no longer play a role in the overall economies of the provincial and federal governments. This message repeats and eventually divides people in their respective camps, and more importantly the urban and rural divide widens even further. Allowing the governments to do what they want, intent on the centralized model to provide services, that soon will make its way to the big urban centres of plenty. Watch the urban folk scream when their children are transferred from the local neighbourhood school, to a school halfway across town, because the developers want the school land, for a new condo development. Or the futuristic article that I read yesterday on eco-pod homes, that according to the authors will be the future in home building, due to the limited supply of land and high real estate land prices. Rural Canada, does not have that problem, of rising real estate prices where economic activity is not high in the resource sector. Look at what happen to Fort McMurray, the eco-pods would be a affordable God sent but rather foolish and a waste of money for other rural areas who are not under heavy economic activities. As for the urban centres, eco-homes will become the new ghettos for affordable housing, and be a luxury for many, to move out of cement towers of immense height, have a wee bit of land to plant tomatoes.
The centralized model is eating away at the fabric and engine of the economies of Canada. The course for the last 100 years has been directed at the rural areas in Canada, but now in 2012, the centralized model is turning its attentions to the urban centres of plenty. In the end, the ironic part is that the people in the urban areas will change their attitude concerning rural Canada, and maybe the most ironic thing that will happen in the near future, is the wholesale change of values of all of their urban and rural citizens, saying no in unison to the plans of the advocates who only know one way – centralization and doing things the 19th century way, in the 21st century.
I can’t wait to hear the screaming when governments decide to shut down an urban school or a hospital, and giving out the reason, that services can be provided at a higher efficiency, resulting in cost savings, that can be redirected to enhance the services at the new location. Public libraries don’t get any respect from the urban dwellers, but a closure of a school or a health services provider does, when it will require the person to access the services that requires a 20 minute to an hour trip depending on traffic and mode of transportation. Only to find out, the services are no better than what was received before, and questioning what enhancements.
Well Doug, firmly entrenched in the globalist/ economic / political centralization of all, including seeing people as mere capital resources to be be moved around where ever there is a need. Most literature that I have read, on both sides of the political spectrum, speaks of a future where the only human activity in rural areas, will be in the labour camps, model much like the 21st century models of Alberta’s labour camps for the oil fields. Busy hives of activities, concern with food, accommodation and transportation of the oil field workers, of three weeks in and one week off or some other configuration. No need for schools, churches, or even a community when a labour camp along with the technology and the internet can be its new replacement, and where the families can live in more urban centres in other parts of the country, while Daddy and Mommy are off to the work camps. It is where the the State comes in to provide the services for children, including education services at a centralized location and where parents pay according to income, Obviously, as the many articles have stated, the private concerns would not be able to handle the flow and attend the needs of everyone, and where the public sector will step in on the pretence of safety and security for the children.
The articles read like another version of Utopia, where each human has its place in the economic system, working towards the identical goals much like the former USSR, minus the capitalist doctrine, but never a less the same goals, just a different version.
That said, Doug’s comments are the excuses given, to support the ideological stances of a centralized system and structure in the present social/economic/political systems that relies on centralization models to provide services and goods in the capitalistic model.
One of Doug’s comment says it all – “I have a general belief that people should not be subsidized by others to live somewhere. There must be a natural economy to underpin their life in a region.”
Who dictates the terms of the natural economy? For that matter the economic policies that underpins the local economies? The education system, from what I have read in the historical files, was built to provide the future workers and provide a reliable domestic work force. What the public education system never had to provide under the legal framework, is a standard set of what constitutes a basic education, and more importantly what the public education system has been charged within the legal parameters, to deliver education services, that are free for anyone to attend. It has allow the public education models to support the economic systems of the provinces, nationally and internationally by the delivering of education services based on the economic needs of the country, and not on the needs of the students.
Resulting in differing quality of education outcomes based on the income-social status as well as being based on the local economies of the communities. Thus, an inner urban city school composed mostly of low income students, a rural school of 200 students or less, and a community with two elementary schools are all at risk for students receiving a lesser quality in education, because the resources and delivery of education services are based on the economic system, predicting the needs of the far off future. The majority of students received an education according to their social-economic status standing, rather than the best education according to the needs of the students. The current and past education systems are geared to deliver education services based on the social/economic status of students. To the educationalists, it is simply not worth the effort and merit to deliver an education of top quality, that results in over qualified workers that are well versed on the fundamentals of the 3 Rs, as well as having a solid foundation in the sciences, the arts, the humanities and the maths.
As the years have rolled by, technological advances and the economic shifts /changes that corresponds to the technological advances, society and its economic systems have change its value system to meet and manage the change. The public education system has not change, because the public education system only has to deliver education services, but do not have to deliver a top notch quality education services for all. The promises of the educationalists that the big box schools of over 500 students or more will deliver a better education for the children whose schools have been closed or slated to be closed, is one of the greatest illusions being perpetuated unto the public. How many of the high income schools been closed in the last 50 years? Not any I can think of, and I am still flabber-ghasted a Ontario high school, that my oldest child attended, is still open and is not on the chopping block, even though it is no longer the number one high school in the region academically or on the sports roster. Meanwhile, the high schools that have replaced my oldest child’s former high school in rankings, are always threatened to be placed on the review list for closures, even though students are hanging from the rafters. Could it be the the high schools who are always threatened to be placed on the review list for closures, are composed mainly of students , whose parents are not of high professional status, compared to my child’s former high school, that is composed of 400 or so students, down from the 1200 count in the late 1980s, whose parents mainly come from the professional careers of accountants, lawyers, etc,, and the better off immigrant families,
As Doretta’s link has suggested, that the higher the social/economic rankings, the greater the odds are that parents and their children have the political clout and power to effect change as well as to protect their children from receiving a lower quality of education and thus are able to maximized their children’s chances of securing a better future than the other parents of lower social/economic status. But it is never acknowledged among the decision and policy makers within the education system, because it would put their statements and promises made of the offerings of the big box schools to what they really are, illusions of grandeur, to convince parents that it would benefit their children and their futures.
It is why Doug’s statement, ” Kids just want to be in the big building with all the other kids because that is where the action is.” is a pseudo-truth, a small white fib, or a little white lie. Any kid would want to go to a different school, if the school board has cheated the school out of resources and maintaining the upkeep of the building. If the school is falling apart, no library to speak of, using old computers that belong in a museum display for the 1990s – well than there is no contest. And the long bus rides commence to a centralized location, and sometimes it does occur in highly dense urban areas, with promises of sugar plums dancing in the heads of the newly transported students, until reality crashes down upon the students. All the students have exchanged is a fancier geographical location, with a few more bells and whistles, only to received the identical quality of education as in the former school, with even more restrictions that prevents students from fully participating in the new school, and parents who will now have even less political clout and power to affect change for their children’s best interests and their futures.
Innovative changes and methods of delivering education services are never mentioned as Doretta has stated for good reason, the educationalists cannot conceived of anything else but the school model of the 19th century kind. The powers to be who hold the economic and political purse strings, are bound and determined as they were in the early 1900s, to keep schools as playing the starring role to supply workers for the changing job markets of the futures. Heaven for bid, a dyslexic of a working class background, would received a top notched reading program provided by the school board, when the parents of higher social/income means, are always quite willing to pay for the services privately, when the school or school board refuses to provide for the top notched reading program. I heard that reason in many different forms over the years, and I do truly believed that my child and other children are not worth the effort and expense by the educationalists of centralization, to supply top notch programs for children who do not have high social/economic standing. It is about delivering education services the cheapest way possible to supply the future working skills of the future. Today in our schools, the emphasis is on trade skills, except for the schools of higher social/economic status. Those schools the emphasis is the academics of students, and ensuring that the doors of post-secondary are always kept open to them. Whatever the students are lacking in both groups, can always be picked up on their own dime after 12 years of schooling.
The stats clearly shows the final outcomes of students, and if one picks up a newspaper, the connections to the economic troubles, the cutting of government services, the unemployment rate, and the loss of jobs is clearly connected to the old 19th century education model, that stubbornly refuses to change the model of ensuring a steady supply to meet the labour demands of the future, to one that will meet the labour demands of the present. And not some futuristic model that predicts the future needs of a labour market, and than go about shaping the education policies around the future needs of the labour market, at the expense of the students’ education and their future.
As for Doug’s comment on NL – ” We will see how NL likes it now that they need to float Ontario. LOL” Newfoundland is no longer closing down schools, and have not been for the last ten years in the rural areas. But they sure like to close down schools in the main urban center and capital of NL.It clearly shows, where the majority of the top ranking schools under AIMS rankings, are to be found in the rural areas of the province, and to which the local school that my child attends is one of the top ranking schools. The rural schools of small proportions must be doing something right, considering resources and selection of curriculum is in short supply in rural NL. Thankfully thanks to the advances of technology, high school students can now go beyond the basic science,math and english courses, and partake in the different courses of interest and learning. It also helps to have an education policy, that insists on using teachers to teach within their field, and as a result, their is a very high ratio of math, science, english teachers and french teachers teaching within their field, with few if any generalist teachers teaching at the high school level.
Doug, lessons could be learn for Ontario, if they look at the Atlantic provinces, The Atlantic provinces have their share of economic troubles for many years and Ontario is just beginning the rocky pathway. Closing down schools is not the answer, especially when the transportation bills becomes higher than the actual education of students. Nor is the smart remarks of shipping Atlantic Canadians to the Alberta oil fields, because people in the big city of Toronto no longer want to subsidised the life styles of Atlantic Canada. Really, many of an outport have been saved by the ones who are willing to go to Alberta, staying in the work camps, while the families remain at home. In the smaller outports, women of all shapes and sizes have taken over the volunteer fire departments and other town services. The men and women return from Alberta, pouring new money in the small communities keeping the small businesses turning a profit, and like magic, the outport no longer looks like a dying community. Why go to all the work and effort, if rural living according to the experts and urban planners will be no more in the future? There is no contest living in a $400,000 trailer home in Fort McMurray compared to the homes of an outport.that are not trailers. Besides that, rural NL is a sweet spot to raise children and it is why people in rural areas across Canada are working hard to keep their rural communities across Canada. No community wants the societal troubles of Fort McMurray , where one is hard press to find the rural benefits and advantages in a town that is located in rural Alberta, and yet has all the problems of big city living, including the identical problems dealing with the education of youth in urban centres.
Yes, lessons can be learned for the Ontario folks by looking at Atlantic Canada and see what innovative ways are shaping and forming education policy throughout Atlantic Canada, and their ways of meeting the changes to society and how change is managed. In many ways Atlantic Canada, is still struggling to managed the change, in the same way as Ontario is. But plowing ahead intent on the centralized model of education, where rural schools are closed for the simple reason of declining enrolment , does the greatest disservice to the rural communities – it is a government walking away from the citizens of a small rural community. What makes anyone think, that employers would want to invest in a rural community, when the government has already removed most of the government services from the community? In my rural NL outport, residents are able and willing to fight to keep the government services of schools, the small hospital that also provides all health services, including the clinics, and other government services, because it happens to be the key to maintain and attract new employers willing to invest in our town, as well as attracting new residents willing to move to our community, in much the same way as Stephen’s community of Lunenburg in Nova Scotia. In the end Stephen is correct to assert in his posts, that rural communities are not only worth saving, but as well as rural communities are really part of a vital and booming economy for all citizens,
By dismissing rural communities, and their economies, that city folk are quick to do, it only reinforces the message that rural communities no longer play a role in the overall economies of the provincial and federal governments. This message repeats and eventually divides people in their respective camps, and more importantly the urban and rural divide widens even further. Allowing the governments to do what they want, intent on the centralized model to provide services, that soon will make its way to the big urban centres of plenty. Watch the urban folk scream when their children are transferred from the local neighbourhood school, to a school halfway across town, because the developers want the school land, for a new condo development. Or the futuristic article that I read yesterday on eco-pod homes, that according to the authors will be the future in home building, due to the limited supply of land and high real estate land prices. Rural Canada, does not have that problem, of rising real estate prices where economic activity is not high in the resource sector. Look at what happen to Fort McMurray, the eco-pods would be a affordable God sent but rather foolish and a waste of money for other rural areas who are not under heavy economic activities. As for the urban centres, eco-homes will become the new ghettos for affordable housing, and be a luxury for many, to move out of cement towers of immense height, have a wee bit of land to plant tomatoes.
The centralized model is eating away at the fabric and engine of the economies of Canada. The course for the last 100 years has been directed at the rural areas in Canada, but now in 2012, the centralized model is turning its attentions to the urban centres of plenty. In the end, the ironic part is that the people in the urban areas will change their attitude concerning rural Canada, and maybe the most ironic thing that will happen in the near future, is the wholesale change of values of all of their urban and rural citizens, saying no in unison to the plans of the advocates who only know one way – centralization and doing things the 19th century way, in the 21st century.
I can’t wait to hear the screaming when governments decide to shut down an urban school or a hospital, and giving out the reason, that services can be provided at a higher efficiency, resulting in cost savings, that can be redirected to enhance the services at the new location. Public libraries don’t get any respect from the urban dwellers, but a closure of a school or a health services provider does, when it will require the person to access the services that requires a 20 minute to an hour trip depending on traffic and mode of transportation. Only to find out, the services are no better than what was received before, and questioning what enhancements.
Sorry Nancy I don’t have time to read your thesis on rural schools. I guess the trouble for rural schools is democratic and whoever you elect continues the relentless closings of smaller rural schools that has been taking place in Ontario since the 1950s.
Go ahead and try virtual schools and charters. You get no more kids in a charter than you get in a traditional school. Virtual schools have a poor track record to date but i suppose that can change. So far they attract slackers and couch potatoes. Doesn’t sound like a lot of fun to me. Oh boy I get to stay home with my siblings and do school on line. Yikes. Have fun at the virtual dance.
“they attract slackers and couch potatoes”?
As always its best to avoid sweeping generalizations and nasty comments. There are all sorts of reasons why folks may avail themselves of “virtual schools” and unless and until we can speak to that there’s no need to insult those who do.
Ditto for charters.
“I can’t wait to hear the screaming when governments decide to shut down an urban school or a hospital, and giving out the reason, that services can be provided at a higher efficiency, resulting in cost savings, that can be redirected to enhance the services at the new location. Public libraries don’t get any respect from the urban dwellers, but a closure of a school or a health services provider does, when it will require the person to access the services that requires a 20 minute to an hour trip depending on traffic and mode of transportation. Only to find out, the services are no better than what was received before, and questioning what enhancements.”
Nancy
Well Doug, I read Nancy’s piece and it took me about a leisurely 7 minutes. Several stellar points taken from her observations – some even prophetic re urban school closures.
http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/100101-board-reverses-decision-on-bedford-south-grades
Seems like a sensible time for a moratorium to me.
Democratic eh? More like a rigged process within the education model of centralization, that does no favours for the education of students, their futures and the communities of a province and across Canada.
To which, Stephen’s link allures to, when the education authorities wanted to reconfigured the school. The minutes of the May, 2012 school association attested to – “HRSB have carried the motion to make Bedford South School a P-6 as of September 2013. The S.A.C. is unanimous in this not happening, and will write a letter to the The Board asking them to reconsider the motion. A 2/3 majority is required for this. May 23 is the date of the next meeting.”
http://www.bedfordsouth.ednet.ns.ca/HSA/hsa.htm
“Not happening” according to the school association members, but the newspaper article is revealing of the politics that have invaded the education system, leaving their tainted mix of cocktails to be nursed at the school level.
““The overwhelming response from the community has been that we want to keep our culture, we want to keep our P-9 configuration as it is.”
Finlayson said parents objected to the change for a variety of reasons.
They argued that Bedford South in its current configuration is safe, embraces cultural diversity and has a solid academic track record.
“It felt like it was going backwards” to make the change, Finlayson said.”
The article did not list the reasons, but I bet the parents of the association did used many reasons based on the final outcomes of students, where the politics is absent. If one cares to surf on the school site, a safe and welcoming school, as well as this gem, that speaks volumes on parents, students and the community – ” A unique feature of our school is that students remain here for ten years, thus providing a built-in support structure. During this time our staff, students, parents, and community get to know one another well.”
http://www.bedfordsouth.ednet.ns.ca/about_us.htm
All about the positive outcomes having students remain in one spot for 10 years – a built-in support structure thrives that supports the students, the school community and the outside community. Rather ironic, when school boards of centralization, spend reams of money, trying to replicate it, when the student population hails from all parts of the board district or a combination of two to four communities. Centralization, has never been about the school community, nor has it been about the final outcomes of students. It has been about the funding and delivering of education, at the lowest possible cheapest price. Centralization and its philosophy allows the politics to become entrenched in the minds of the local communities and schools, where decisions are made on the processes based on the centralization philosophies, and NOT on the final outcomes of students, and its community.
In the newspaper article, at the end the school board relies on the politics to defend their position, avoiding the positive outcomes of the K-9 configuration, in order to reverse the board’s decision. All of it done within the philosophy of the centralization model, that emphasizes the inputs, and ignores the outputs.
“A boundary review had determined that making Bedford South an elementary was necessary due to exploding enrolment. But Finlayson said enrolment is about to drop as the cohort leaving Grade 9 is larger than the number of Primary students arriving in the fall.
The school, built to hold 625 students, has been handling more than 700 but the numbers will drop to 640 next year, he said.
Some parents had pressed for Bedford South to become an elementary in the hope that classes would be smaller, but Finlayson said that would never have happened because of the province cutting back on education funding.
He said work to adjust the school’s boundaries likely isn’t over yet because of new construction in the area.”
http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/100101-board-reverses-decision-on-bedford-south-grades
Some parents have pressed to have the school become an elementary, in the hope that the the classes will be smaller? Really, the minutes of the parent association have not alluded that some parents wanted the school in an elementary configuration? Rather irrational, to drop grade 9, and expect smaller classes, in my opinion, but parents within a centralized education model, often become the scapegoats in defending the failures and sometimes successes of the school board.
But the parent association minutes has alluded to the school board attentions, as well as the future visions that are dancing in the heads of the school board, where it is all about the inputs, and has little to do with the best interests of their students.
In the October minutes – ” Boundary review
Approved for CPA Family of schools, with the exception of Hammonds Plains Consolidated
Robert spoke at last Board meeting to request boundary review
Our school boundary includes Moirs Mills, Ravines, bordering Larry Uteck up to the exit, left side of Hammonds Plains Road to the 102, both sides of Hammonds Plains Road past the 102 up to Kearney Lake Road.
Boundary changes to take place as of Sept. 2012
Report on boundary changes from committee must be submitted to Board by end of January
Committee includes principal or designate from each school and an SAC rep from each school, plus facilitator
Includes public consultations
Cindy asked about any dates for new schools in area. Robert said these can be found on board website under Imagine our Schools – Board had made a motion last year to approach the province for new elementary school and province said they would not be starting any new capital projects. This year the board is asking for a new junior high school
Action: Robert to call director of operations to see when this will begin
Debbie to call her supervisor
SAC and school to do their best to keep parents informed and request their participation in the public consultations.”
http://www.bedfordsouth.ednet.ns.ca/sac.htm
Could it be, the board’s wish of a new junior high school, were dashed, and the next vision to enter their heads, was to do a reconfiguration of a few schools, and the Bedford school was one of their targets? The board probably underestimated the school community, and their resolve to keep the K to 9 school as is.
Centralization models, rest their laurels on the input side, rather than a balance between the inputs and outputs. Whether it is health or in education services, centralization models counts on the users of the systems to remain on the input side of things, rather than their focus on the output side of things. Parents are no longer willing to give their attentions on the input side, and I am glad to see more and more parent associations are looking at the outputs, the very same outputs that the school boards do not want parents to focus on.
The same outcomes that speaks loudly on the processes and inputs and the negative outcomes of students. Doug’s , disdain for virtual or charter schools is common place among the stakeholders, because it impacts the inputs of a school system, in delivering education. It is not at all about the track record of either, even though it is the constant steady beat of the messages radiating from the centralized education model. It is the cover, to protect the real agenda of the stakeholders within the education system. The agenda to protect the inputs that delivers the education, and the processes to deliver the education and more importantly to protect their treasured power of privilege, that under the law, the public education system has been charge with – the delivery of education services. Too bad, that the law does not state, prescribing the desire outcomes of students. All about the inputs, and nothing about the outputs. Yeah, virtual schooling, charter schools are a threat to the centralized education model, just like the students like my kid, who represent a threat of another kind, but alike in changing the inputs, to facilitate positive outcomes for students that opens many future doors of opportunities, than the slamming, and the sealing of the doors that take place every day in the centralized education model.
The current education model, is not at all interested in the outputs nor in seeking the best positive outcomes for students. If they were, my kid along with many, would have a solid foundation in the 3 Rs, and high schools would not be experiencing the problems dealing with students of many different levels. Instead, it is easier to slammed and seal shut the future doors of students, because it poses no threats to the inputs and the delivery of education. The outcomes and the processes now become the political fodder for the educationalists to dance on, to convince students and parents they only have the best interests of the students and the communities in thei hearts.
To which rural education and the revitalization of rural education is at its greatest risk, when parents and its communities focuses only on the inputs, and ignoring the outputs and outcomes of students. Take note, when the introduction of school councils became a reality, over the years the school councils and federations are nothing more than mere rubbing stamping of the inputs, and focusing on the processes of the inputs, rather than a balanced approach of inputs versus outputs versus final outcomes of students. The outputs tells the stories, and the outcomes attest and affirms the inputs are of the best interests of students.
Rather comical, and ironic, when the inputs of the school closure process rests on the assumption that all schools whether in the urban or rural settings all have identical needs, and than it is used to justified the inputs and its processes to control the school closure process or the more common name of school accommodation reviews. Key word, is ‘accommodation’ and a word that has many different meanings, and none of them represent the best interests of the schools, the students or the communities. The reason being the use of the word accommodation is always associated with the word diversity, that creates the image that the school board and of the whole public education structure of the centralized kind, are the ones that are accommodating to adjust and adapt their resources to the education needs of their children.
But are they? No, the reality is that parents and their communities are the ones being asked to accommodate and adapt to the school board needs, their goals, often against the best interests of their children and their communities. In the same way, the current health systems are asking patients to travel on their own dime, to access basic health services, that 10 years ago could be had at the local hospital. Soon, the emergency departments of hospitals will become places where a person will need to book an appointment in advance, and just like the current public education system, where parents are asked to book appointments in writing, in seeking a meeting with school board staff and the trustees.
It is time for parents or patients to sing out in unison, no more and demand that centralized models and its processes to go under a review, that compares the inputs to the outputs and than the final outcomes. What would be found, and become a universal truth,that centralization and its underlying philosophy is an illusion of sugar plums and fairies for the parents, students and its communities, and the means for the stakeholders within the centralized to have all the users and the communities to work for the best interests of the stakeholders. The users have to take the educationalists’ word that they have the best interests of the students at heart based on future promises of dancing sugar plums and fairies, even though it is not in the best interests of the students, and their futures. , ,
“they attract slackers and couch potatoes”?
As always its best to avoid sweeping generalizations and nasty comments. There are all sorts of reasons why folks may avail themselves of “virtual schools” and unless and until we can speak to that there’s no need to insult those who do.
Ditto for charters.
The studies are coming in John and it is not good news for virtual schools. they have low “completion rates” which means kids to not complete courses or graduate in the same numbers as regular schools. Charters? Go ahead and try but you will only have “tiny charters” to replace “tiny public schools”.
Governments cannot manufacture students to fill empty rural schools. They will continue to get smaller and smaller as farms get bigger and bigger. Small towns are dying in the process.
What is tried in other similar places?
boarding schools
fewer days longer hours after long bus rides.
virtual schools – go ahead, lots of problems.
charters – hardly solve the problem
A lot of rhetoric Nancy. Spell out your solution in detail. Same with any of you. Show is a working model anywhere of schooling that you like where rural areas are depopulating at a rapid rate.
It’s not a matter of “manufacturing” students. Halting the unnecessary migration of students to ‘big box fields of vapidity’ would go a long way to creating a solution.
.Actually Doug the human scale model exists as outlined – the burden of proof is with the government or in the case of this dialogue, you.
No slings for the boarding schools and shorter school week – considering the ideals hail from the school boards themselves. Negative outcomes? Too numerous to count, but it is all in providing the cheapest possible education at the cheapest costs.
California has far too many stories of the shortened school week, in many different versions. Thunder Bay, Ontario concerning the boarding school for First Nations people, because the board has steadfastly refuse to build a school on the reservation, and bring education to the reserves. In both cases, there is far too many negative outcomes for students, but it seems to be par for the course of an education system model, that still models itself on the biases, beliefs of the 19th century. I heard the words describing rural people far too many time, calling them hay seeds, to the many other insulting descriptions of the word hay seed that defends the practices of the public education system on delivery of education and why the education system continues to short-change the rural students of an education.
One can always look at the Nova Scotia education system, that has a partnership with the First Nations, to bring education and the schools to their doorstep, and as well the NL education system, that has customarily provide education at their doorstep, for Inuit, the Innu and other rural communities, even though the numbers do not justified it,Lots of good things happening there, compared to Ontario. Decreasing the cost input is the call of the educationalists where ever rural students and now urban students are figure as cost inputs, .Not that , the present day practices of closing down rural schools saves money, and in reality it kills two birds in one stone, resulting in short changing the students’ education, and putting students at high risk for failure after 12 years of schooling. I wonder what the costs are, when the education system refuses to have policies that are flexible and elastic to account for the local school needs, the students needs and the community? Lots, and it certainly shows in the annoying stats, how many students are cheated out of top-notched quality education..
Virtual learning, and the education systems of NA, could take a page off the Canadian virtual schooling or e-learning to which many of them are funded and operation by the public education system, and if not, have the blessings of the education ministry, such as the Virtual High School located in rural Ontario – a private operation that grows every year, and help along greatly by the full-time students registered at the public high schools. Funny thing, the stats shows that e-learning the pass rate is higher than the pass rate of a traditional class, and better yet, the average grade for virtual learning is also higher for the individual students. In NL it shows in the stats, and it was only then that I would allow my child to take the long distance education courses in her senior year.
So Doug, there is much to avail of, rather than hurling insults where ever people are talking about the 21st century methods that should be introduced to the education system, who sees only the solutions of the 19th century. If rural Canada, is de-populating, than why are the prices of real estate going up and up. My home has gone up by $30,000, and it is still a bargain compared to the homes in Toronto having a water front. A million and a half dollars, compared to my home of $90,000. And to boot, my home has been tested many times since the 1970s, whenever the hurricanes come a visiting. Down in my neck of the woods, a Toronto school administrator would have thought they have gone to heaven, if they had the administration tools of the 21st century that our school processes, and damn near every household in my community. How many schools communicate using Twitter, directly to the students smart phones? The local high school does, and individual teachers can use the school’s twitter account, to make announcements to an individual student or the whole class, to let the students know, bring another set of books with you for the next class.
De-populating? Such an old fashion term, that is well suited for the 19th century, but not for the 21st century. If anything, the public education system in 2012, should upgrade themselves, on the advances being made in the education research, and start to learn that closing down schools because of excess capacity, is not only pound foolish, but makes no ‘cents’ want so ever in the 21st century where technology reigns supreme.in an environment of rising real estate prices and rising commodity prices.
The Nova Scotia Small Schools Initiative has just won the support of Atlantic Canada’s largest newspaper, The Chronicle Herald. In today’s Editorial, the Halifax Herald supports the call for a Moratorium on School Closures and our Schools at the Centre plan for Rural Revitalization and networked rural schools.
http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorials/100833-new-model-schooling-the-heart-of-a-revival
The movement for Rural Education reform is definitely gaining steam across Nova Scotia. The ball is now in Premier Darrell Dexter’s court and it will be fascinating to see how he responds to a constructive, independent policy initiative that did nor emanate from the bureaucracy.
I came across this article regarding NL –
“While Jackman notes student enrolment has declined by 22 per cent since 2001-02, the number of teaching positions has been decreased by less than 14 per cent over the same period.
“That’s attributable to the change in the allocation model, and today, relative to the student population, we have more teachers in our education system than ever in our history,” Jackman said, adding he has challenged opposition members in the House of Assembly to identify a better allocation model in Canada.
“They won’t find it,” he said.”
http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Local/2012-05-26/article-2988812/Teacher-allocations-down-for-next-school-year/1
Quite the statement, but a question popped into my head, how does the allocation models and formulas affect consolidation of schools, the closures of schools, and if the allocation resource models, are the number one factor to put a school on the chopping block?
It turns out, that Jackman our education ministry in NL, is correct and can justified his boasting. The NL model is unique, and it should be held as a model to be copied by other provinces such as Nova Scotia.
Below is a report – Teacher Allocation Commission 2007
Entitled “Education and Our Future:
A Road Map to Innovation and Excellence”
Click to access TACReport.pdf
It is a big report, but worth reading it. It will tell the reasons why rural schools, including the very small ones have not shut down. The history, and all kinds of things that I did not know about the other provinces and their education system. Most of the 35 recommendations are in place, and now I know why our local rural high school of 200 or so students, have teachers with the required science and math backgrounds.
In the newspaper article of the first link, the president of the school council federation -““Even though enrolment is declining in our schools, a lot of the problems and the issues in our schools are certainly on the increase,” said Ruby Hoskins, president of the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of School Councils.
“We have more students entering the system with behavioural needs, needing remedial assistance, mental health issues. … We may have less students in our system, but we’re having more issues and problems that our students are facing in the system. It’s certainly not a time to take those teacher out.”
I agree with her, because the new model of teacher allocation, is very stingy for specialist support staff. Resulting in only children with the most severe needs are look after, and the mild to moderate learning needs of children, are put on the back burner. Essentially what has happen, the allocation model in NL, where school board staff, and the ministry have reduce the number of staff, in order to increase the number of teachers at each school, to accommodate class size and to increase the number of support staff if possible at the small school.
The report, is illuminating, that is has answer my first question, that the allocation of resources and formulas has a major impact on consolidation and closure of schools for all of the provinces except for NL and PEI, PEI is on a different model, but is similar to NL, are promoting the consolidation and closure of schools, at a rapid pace under the models that are provincial wide allocation models.
Which makes me think, after reading the NL commission report, that to halt the progression of consolidation and closure of schools, the allocation formulas covering all aspects of staff and how they are allocated, including the other education policies that directly impact students’ education, need to be change. Otherwise, in Nova Scotia, a moratorium, to allow the small schools initiative will run into a few roadblocks, preventing innovation and small school community models. If anything, the small schools of NL, are as different from one another, as they are different from the urban school models. The reason being the allocation formulas is based on the schools needs of the student population, and one school of a 100 students may indeed have 4 SE teachers, and another school down the road of 200, may have more than their fair share of teachers with backgrounds in science and math. Our high school, is a model of high tech, and any urban administrator from outside of the province would be envious of our principal. And the students are allow to bring their devices, rather than waiting for the powers to be to change the rules concerning technology province wide. The policies are flexible enough, for small schools in NL to delivered education according to the needs of their students.
Ontario should be looking at NL’s model, and now, or the public be on the hook paying the heavy price in the future, that will be due, after consolidation and closures are slow down. It makes no economic sense in the consolidation and closures of school using allocation policies that are based province wide. ,
It’s not a matter of “manufacturing” students. Halting the unnecessary migration of students to ‘big box fields of vapidity’ would go a long way to creating a solution.
.Actually Doug the human scale model exists as outlined – the burden of proof is with the government or in the case of this dialogue, you.
If you wait for the government you are in for disappointment. As school populations decline, fewer and fewer voters are rural voters. They are usually wildly overrepresented but nevertheless they are losing clout rapidly. Moritorium is good news (don’t tell Doretta) so they can get their act together.
So exactly and I mean exactly, what is the policy proposal that would solve the problem? Moritoriums are great but to this extent Doretta is right – then what?
But Doug, the fan of big schools, are the same fans that don’t want to talk about the future of where declining enrolment is a reality. It comes to the point in the current consolidation and closures of schools, when it no longer makes economic sense. Just like at the other end, where the education policies are applied across the board, without taking into the account the realities of urban and rural schooling and its communities. And I believe it is happening in Ontario, and everyone is wearing their blinders, and the rural students are the ones that paying the price.
Take a look at the report of NL, in my last post and the recommendations that are already a reality in NL. Two distinct policies – one for the rural schools and one for the urban schools. allowing enough flexible and elasticity for individual schools to meet the unique needs of their students.
Doug sees the solution as a political one, but it is isn’t. The education policies should never be decided on the political line, because it is not in the best of the students.Ontario will soon reach the point, where it makes no economic sense to continued to consolidate schools, but if they continue to, a peek at the future, just look at California or England. England stopped consolidation and now students have their pick of schools, and for some students the mornings begin at 7:00 in the morning stepping on the bus, and not back home until after 4:00 in the afternoon. Long day, for either the English students or the California students on using bus transportation.
Most the of the policies that are in place, are being applied provincial wide. Take a look at Toronto, and the demand from the education minister telling the Toronto school board to do something about the excess capacity and selling off some of their real estate. And than the other problem of robbing Peter to pay Paul to continue on providing full day kindergarten. Than take a look, at a rural school board, who is delivering education on a shoe-string budget. In the end, both districts and their students are paying a price for applying province wide policies, that does not have the flexibility to adjust to the unique community needs of their district. Again, robbing Peter to pay Paul, and comes at the expense of others within the school district. And if not, asking for extra funding to cover the costs of province wide policies, becomes an exercise of political astuteness, rather than basing the funding on the needs. So the big school boards like Toronto, are more likely to get the extra funding and the small or large rural school boards, have to make do, because funding is based on the number of students.
The consolidation and closing of schools is unsustainable in the far off future, when education policies are applied province wide without the flexibility and elasticity to account for the individual differences of the board and the individual schools within the board. And especially with the differences between rural and urban environments, and their diversity.
Steven is correct, the burden of proof falls on the government, to acknowledge the differences, and stop treating rural/urban, small/large schools, as if each is identical to each other, with minor differences. Reminds me that the education policies that have developed over the years when declining enrolment appeared on the scene, is like seeing students and schools as mere appendages to be move around the chess board as pawns, to protect the power bases of the stakeholders within the education system.,.
taking politics out of situation is the same as taking democracy out of it. This is how we make decisions in Canada. I still don’t hear solutions just complaints. Exactly what should boards and premier do. Exactly, not rhetoric.
Actually, it seems to me this effort ‘is’ putting politics into it – from citizens concerned with rural revitalization and a more democratic route. Generally citizens are not steeped in the craft of rhetoric familiarized through the politics of exclusion. They’re usually on the receiving end.
Partnerships are the template for this initiative.
Rather ironic, considering the public education model is a bureaucratic centralization operation, that has deaf ears to the students as well as the communities.
Just 4 recent articles on the deaf tone public education of the Ontario kind. Especially deaf tone concerning the little unwritten policy, concerning bureaucratic centralization operations that all education decisions always must have at the expense of the children’s education. Go figure, why the dyslexic children never do get to learned their phonemic sounds of language,because they might actually have to trained teachers.
Course fees still a reality for Ontario high school students
http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/news/gta/article/1201382–course-fees-still-a-reality-for-ontario-high-school-students
Growing number of Ontario college students need help in grade school math, study finds
http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/education/article/1181299–growing-number-of-ontario-college-students-need-help-in-grade-school-math-study-finds
Toronto trustees plead with the province for budget ‘flexibility’
http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/education/article/1182555–toronto-trustees-plead-with-the-province-for-budget-flexibility
I saved the best for the last……
Ontario school closings rile parents
http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/education/article/1177276–ontario-school-closings-rile-parents
Pray tell Doug, what democracy principles are working in the Ontario Education system?
In fact Doug, the NL public has a much better chance in stopping closures of schools, because the school boards plan in advance, and the public is well notified, in advance of 5 years – it is called multi-year planning, If you care to check, more new schools are being built in NL, reconfigured, and of course being renovated. Only a handful of schools have been closed in the last 10 years. and there is a reason for that, if you care to read the links in my second last post. Planning in advance, what a concept, Perhaps, the education systems of other provinces should adapt the 5 year planning, instead of leaving the schools and communities guessing each year who is going to be on the chopping block, and than leave the schools and parents scrambling in a very short time frame to persuade the powers to be not to close their schools.
,http://www.esdnl.ca/aboutesd/theboard/multiyearplanning/
The statement of Doug’s , “taking politics out of situation is the same as taking democracy out of it. ” is a statement that only comes from the mouths in control of a bureaucratic centralization model, that pretends to act on democratic principles, and than turns around and cuts the legs of the democratic principles , to limit access and control from the public. Only the yes people and how many patty-cakes sir is the kind of democratic principles that is in operation.
Doug, why are you not discussing what NL is doing? Afraid of something? Perhaps too many principles of democracy appearing? Or is it really sound business management practices at play, where the public is consulted, and they heed the public?
Oh I am against school fees, provincial underfunding, school closings, and all of the rest but Nancy, this is the left wing critique of Ontario (and other) budgets and priorities.
Exactly how many students should constitute enough to stay open? 1, 10, 20, 50? How will we know when a school must close. Not warmed over rhetoric or rural revitalization plans lets have some specifics. Every time i ask for specifics everybody runs for the hils or talks in vague generalities.
Not really Doug. Several times your questions have been answered but you fail to recognize the response. Again you use numbers like 1,10 and so on.
Most high schools or elementary schools in NS with 125 students or under, are targeted (although not always). For example – this seems to be the range that Dr. Gunn defined to the folks in Lunenburg, when he led the town worthies/centralists to the scent of big box consolidation. They now need a key and password to navigate various floors of a school building similar to the pentagon.
Ironically in the Atlantic provinces there have been schools with increasing enrollment that are still closed. Time for you to answer a few questions and provide the burden of proof.
What do you think of partnerships which move schools to the centre of a community while incorporating a strategy which enhances the public engagement process? (see recommendation #5)
The left and the right are for all purposes are working for the same goals, a centralization operation, with all the trappings of a large bureaucracy, regulation regime that works for the best interests of the power relationships of the stakeholders within the education system. The power relationships between the stakeholders within the education, contract and expand between each other depending on what is at play in the political ideologies, and the pawns are the students, parents, taxpayers to be moved around to support the stakeholders’ power and ideology stances.
As for the students, parents and taxpayers, they become the victims of the power networks within the education system, and the political ideologies that are at play. More importantly governed under the regulation regime supported by the school acts based on legislated law, that controls the actions and behaviour of the public and its communities working with the protocols and processes that were created without public input, by the stakeholders within the education system, who have the legal authority to deliver education services to the public.
Thus, the School Review models, no matter what part of Canada, are designed to ignore the needs of its schools and the communities. A rigged process, to protect the public education system and their legal authority to delivered education, that is derived from the legal legislation of the late 19th century, of the state’s right to deliver education. The 20th century, became a series of fine tuning to consolidate and centralized the powers of the stakeholders within the education system, to entrenched their legal authority in delivering education.
It matters not a whit, left or right political ideologies at play concerning the public education model. It matters not a whit, the quality of education a student receives. The pawns become the causalities of a public education system model, that for all purposes is an nherently unfair system, built-in systemic flaw designs, and more importantly, where the house always wins, like a casino.
And there is many pawns within the education system, that plays useful roles. Doug is one of them, he does really care about school fees, underfunding, and a few other issues, but like most of the pawns within the education system, will refuse to see the realities of the outcomes of students, parents or even the taxpayers. Doug, does not see anything wrong with a two hour bus ride, longer school days, the closing down of rural schools, and in the end the final outcomes of these students. Doug does not care, because he has worked in a system all of his adult life, that delivers education services, to which the education system has been legally charged with, and where the education system arises from. Quality does not matter nor the outcomes of students, just the focus on delivering the education services, under the legal authority the education system has been charge with.
The People For Education, has delivered two reports of late, describing the outcomes, and speaking on the harsh realities. Rather unusual, is P4E changing their tune, and is no longer willing to confine themselves dancing to the tunes of the stakeholders and their power relationships, spreading their messages.
“The annual report is unique in Canada. This year it includes recommendations to help Ontario catch up to other provinces with more comprehensive policy and funding to reach “beyond school walls.”
“.Ontario behind other provinces on support for school–community connections”
” Economic and geographic differences create inequities
The province also has a long way to go to ensure that all students have equitable access to the programs and resources that will help them succeed. ”
” People for Education has recommended that the province conduct two full public reviews – one of special education and the other of the process and policy around closing schools. The group also recommends changes to
provincial standards for newcomer language acquisition, and that the province create stronger policy and provide funding to support stronger school community connections. They found that current funding to support low-income students is ineffective and have recommended the creation of a new Equity in Education Grant.
Overall, the group says it is time to create a cabinet-level secretariat to oversee an integrated and funded policy framework for children and youth. “There have been decades of talk about dismantling the service “silos” in the province – it’s time to take action,” says Annie Kidder, Executive Director of People for Education. “If we supported real community schools it would save some schools from closing, ensure that the one in five kids who
need mental health support get that support in a timely fashion, and, in the end, it would save money.”
Click to access People-for-Education-Annual-Report-2012-media-release.pdf
The report –
Click to access Annual-Report-2012-web.pdf
Would not be surprise in a year from now, P4E advocating for rural and urban education policies, and even advocating for small schools like the Nova Scotia initiative.
Know what is amusing, Doug states we run for the hills, and yet it is him lime a great many in the centralization bureaucracy called an education system, are wearing their blind folds securely in place, to avoid seeing the outcomes of a system, that have never wavered away from their legal duty of delivering education services, and very much like the old days, of delivering supplies and food to the remote parts of Canada. The quality of supplies and food did not matter, just that the government delivered the supplies and food according to their legal obligations, The quality of education does not matter, nor does it matter that a package of pasta cost $13.00 in our Northern communities.
In one of the many articles concerning where politicians and bureaucrats defend themselves, concerning policies for Northern communities, the identical language can be found in education, where the stakeholders expound very much like our PM, did below.
“There are concerns,” Harper said.
“Our position is to always listen. We will listen to the public on this and if it’s necessary to make changes, we will make them.”
The stated goal of the program is to help transport quality foods at cheaper prices, to a region with rampant health problems such as high rates of diabetes. It was also meant to replace an old mail subsidy system described by Ottawa as inefficient.
But the new system has become the subject of much skepticism, fuelled by media reports showing shocking sticker prices on everyday goods in northern grocery stores.
“It’s an important priority for us that people in Arctic regions have access to quality foods at an affordable price,” Harper said.”
Only the delivery of services matter within a government, and not the quality of the services, the outcomes, nor if the services are a good fit for the people, Just the delivery of services,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Think about it – amazing how similar our government institutes, its agencies are when it comes to their sole legal duty of delivery of services, and the arguments that are use to justified their policies? Now think about the delivery of education services and the consolidation and closures of schools, and the arguments that are used to consolidate and close schools.
Another stream of consciousness and diatribe, screed what ever against the blob zzzzzzzzzzzzz Another attempt to dodge the question, exactly what do you do when rural areas, and therefore schools, just keep getting smaller and smaller every year.
I guess we will have another round about why everybody is bad instead of any specific proposals on what to actually do about it.
Maybe I can ask Paul because clearly nancy and Steven have no actual answers.
What do you actually do?
Oh Doug, lots of literature within the education files, stating how ridiculous is to assume that declines in rural population will continue. It is clearly wrong to think along the line, without taking in the whole picture, and the variables. One thing that has clearly shown, is the rural population shifts moving to urban locations has clearly shown it has either halted, or it is down to a snail pace.
School population always appears to become smaller, because the whole damn formulas are based on number of square feet – capacity. Oops, 10 students leave, and excess capacity is the cry, and often the reason to short change the school. Perfectly good schools, built of stone, solid construction are being razed, because the classrooms were built to hold 40 students comfortably. Too expensive to renovate, based on the declining enrolment, and therefore the school is closed, and the students moved to a new school that certainly don’t have the building standards of the former school.
Every school must have full capacity, including the former closets and supply closets of the schools. Gotta stick students in there, as well as making the square footage smaller in the classroom, where 25 students are crowded in like a can of sardines, and no room to breath, let alone personal space. And so easy to cheat, and most students are tempted to do so.
It is fairly easy to show the mathematical numbers against the historical data of the inputs (variables) to predict with some accuracy, the current model and formulas are no longer sustainable or cost effective. Unfortunately, it has not been done with the public education system, because it is not in their best interests.
However there is the Dougs’ of the world confine within the parameters holding unto the old truths and the old ways of thinking. Perfectly fine in 1970, but not in the year 2012, when urban residents and the centralized government have become so disconnected from their urban counterparts. They only think of solutions of the one way route, telling the rural folks what they can do or cannot do, even though the majority of policies hailing from the urban headquarters do not work or as effective. Spent two hours this afternoon, talking to some bureaucrat of the urban kind, transported down to the rural region, defending the new waste disposal created by the urban policy wonks, that did not think there was anything wrong with not properly notified and keeping the ordinary citizens inform. Nor did they think, $120 for a garbage bin, will not be stolen if one is fool enough to purchase one, and second who would?
And the Dougs’ of the world whine that we are running away from solution. Well, from my little trip through the web, I concluded it is the Dougs, especially the government types of the urban kind, are running away from the many solutions hailing from the rural parts. I think I can hear the applause button, and it is not quite as loud as it should be from the Dougs’ of the world, so for the next round of applause – Rural Atlantic Canada, should stand up for pushing the envelope to where no urban policy wonk wants to go, including the Dougs of the world. Yikes, a small school, with excess capacity that turned the two empty classrooms in a nature science lab and the another one in an art lab where kids actually get dirty, and the janitor hates cleaning this room, are the things that no urban education policy wonk, wants to go. Apparently, it has something to do with equity, but their kind of equity is the same number of square feet per student, and no more or no less. One textbook per student, and the list goes on. And presto, they call it equity, even though the rural books are falling apart and the school board is removing the shelves of the library made of sturdy oak, because the shelves are no longer the correct dimensions.
Below is one of the many solutions, brought to you by a Newfoundlander with the correct academic credentials that would put most of the urban policy wonks and their one way approaches to shame.
One-way Bridge to Rural and Urban Canada – Part 5
And the Atlantic Rural Centre, that should blow away Doug
” Welcome to the Atlantic RURAL Centre. The mission of the RURAL Centre is to enhance our understanding of the physical and socioeconomic environmental influences on health and the capacity of rural Atlantic Canadians to respond to these challenges. Formed in 2004 and funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Atlantic RURAL Centre promotes research development, collaboration, and knowledge translation between researchers, government agencies, concerned citizens and rural Atlantic Canadians.”
.http://www.theruralcentre.com/
Guess who is not listening? Most of the provincial and federal government who don’t want to share, or give rural communities capacity to grow among the challenges that are facing rural communities. It is obvious the model of garbage collection of the urban kind does not work in rural areas, nor does the education model developed for cities and urban living, are not working very well for rural communities.
What do you think of partnerships which move schools to the centre of a community while incorporating a strategy which enhances the public engagement process? (see recommendation #5)
So what do you say Doug?
Should be interesting.
http://southshorenow.ca/archives/2012/053012/news/015_Board_calls_special_meeting_regarding_school_reviews.html.php
That is fascinating, Steven.
Nova Scotia’s One Woman South Shore Regional School Board has just called a special meeting for June 6, 2012,regarding its ongoing school reviews.
“I am receiving regular updates from the superintendent regarding school review and the school impact assessment reports being managed by Deloitte,” said a statement from board member Judith Sullivan-Corney.
“To that end, I am calling for a special board meeting for Wednesday, June 6 at 7 p.m., where we will provide the public with an update on work completed by the consultants. It is my hope that any information from the consultants will ease the angst among communities currently in the review process. In addition, early findings may indicate that some options may not be viable and/or new options may have been identified.”
Comment:
What’s bizarre about this turn-of-events? Two things jump out immediately. The One Woman Board (Judith Sullivan Corney) is described in the Media Release as a singular “board member” and the firm hired to produce the Internal Assessment Reports is none other than the firm that conducted the governance review resulting in the firing of the elected trustees.
I’m not making this up!
How curious, as I have observed – when the minutes and updates of meetings are no longer being put up on the web site, the school board has lots to hide.
The last year that is available was the 2010 to 2011. The one woman board,has made the biggest mistake, by not keeping the minutes and highlights updated. Go figure, even rural people like to keep up to date and informed on the going-ons even at the school board. More so who have the reins to funding and decision making. I shall assume, the one woman board, thinks rural folk don’t have the same issues as urban folk.
Or perhaps, there is mutiny in the air of the school board staff, that may not like her urban ways?
Mutiny in the air…?
http://www.southshorenow.ca/archives/2012/050212/news/School_board_director_part_ways.html.html
this came as a big surprise considering the rush to review.
Steven, I was referring to the school board site, and some important things are not being kept up to date, whereas when they was a full slate of board trustees ,the activities of the trustees were up-to-date.
I am sure the board staff are not happy campers, dealing with the one woman board. except for the superintendent. Keeping their citizens well-informed, should be a top priority in any organization that is paid out of the taxpayer’s purse.
your’re right – under 2012 minutes only the 2011 comes up.
Of course everybody wants to “move the school to the centre of the community” promote multi purpose and community schools, Combine the library health clincs, child care, whatever all into one. We have been all through this in Ontario but still it is not anywhere nearly enough. The only mill in Smooth rock falls closes, the town dies, the houses are now worthless, including the teachers’ houses of course. The entire town is not viable. Some old people hang on to underwater houses. The kids and their families all move to Timmins. Some get jobs, some EI some welfare.
This is what i am talking about.
Doug repeats the messages and urban-speak of repeating the negatives over and over again, until everyone thinks, acts and behaves believing the falsehoods instead of the realities and truths.
His description of the dying rural town defies the real realities of 2012, and is best suited in the era of the 1940s in Ontario, and for that matter any part of rural Canada, of the 1940s. Provincial. Governments are always located in the capital city of a province, and as a truth, policies are shaped and designed for the heavy populated areas of the province. Everything is seen through the lens of urban living, urban blight, urban crime, urban energy needs, urban schooling, urban health, and even down to the benefits of the urban tree, where the rural tree gets a bad rap.
I laugh so hard when reading about the urban tree versus the rural tree, but the sad fact, this piece of very bad science is coming from a urban college course. I call it bad science, because a tree is a tree that produces the identical benefits no matter where it is located.
” While all trees absorb carbon dioxide – one of the gases linked to global warming – urban trees provide greater benefits than rural trees. By providing shade that reduces the need for air conditioning in summer, and by serving as a windbreak that reduces heating needs in winter, properly located and managed trees reduce the demand for carbon-emitting fossil energy in the first place. Overall, researchers estimate that an urban tree can save five to 10 times more carbon than a rural tree. Help make the most of these important environmental assets with exciting opportunities in the utility, municipal, and commercial tree care sectors. Entry-level positions usually require strong climbing skills. After that, how high you climb is based on your skills and strengths, and the specific needs of the employer.”
http://www.humber.ca/program/arborist-apprenticeship
Now you know why I laugh so hard, and I had to, because I would end up crying that even the urban versus rural divide have now come down to trees. What will be next? Declaring urban children leave a smaller carbon footprint compared to rural children?
It is obvious the war between rural and urban is still raging, just as it was when I was young in the 1960s. Urban folk, still do have many of the misconceptions raging in their heads, plus a few more that defies rational thinking, that puts science on the back burner, and exchange it for urban-speak where the truth and realities are ignore.
It clearly shows in the files of rural education versus urban education, and Ontario could very well be the place considered ground-zero, for urban-speak, the spreads like a virus across the country.
To where urban trees versus rural trees, rural school boards versus urban school boards, and everything that has a price tag according to the stock market.
Doug claims he wants community schools, but he does not, nor does the current Ontario government, and its policies,that actively pits rural against urban, promoting the same myths operating in the 1940s in the year 2012. Lots of pretty words from the Ontario education establishment, but their actions and behaviour clearly shows their contempt for rural living, in holding values that speaks more of destroying rural living.
Just in one area – how the Ontario government defines what is a rural community.
Plenty of news stories and blogs writing about it, because rural schools that are targeted for closing, often gets a new label of morphing into the urban category, and no longer qualifies for a grant under rural schools.
” There is little doubt that some of the 100 or so largely urban community’s are considered ‘rural towns’ but it also includes such places as Barrie, Kitchener, Mississauga and of course Toronto, which clearly are not. This once again highlights the number of smaller ‘communities’ verses the number of larger Towns and cities, make of it what you will, I just like to see the actual figures so that when I say ‘rural’ or ‘urban’ I know (somewhat) what I am talking about.”
http://ruralcanadian.blogspot.ca/2012/01/rural-verses-urban-populations-in.html
To make matter worse, Census Canada defines rural areas, to which my community, and a great many other rural communities are no longer define as rural.
“Census rural areas and population centres
Census rural areas have with fewer than 1,000 inhabitants and a population density below 400 people per
square kilometre. The terminology for all other areas has changed starting with the 2011 census.
Statistics Canada has defined census urban areas using the same methodology based on population size
and density since the 1971 Census. An census urban area was defined as having a population of at least
1,000 and a density of 400 or more people per square kilometre.
Starting with the 2011 Census, the term ‘population centre’ replaces the term ‘census urban area.’
Population centres are classified into one of three population size groups:
• small population centres, with a population of between 1,000 and 29,999
• medium population centres, with a population of between 30,000 and 99,999
• large urban population centres, consisting of a population of 100,000 and over.
A population centre is defined as an area with a population of at least 1,000 and a density of 400 or more
people per square kilometre. All areas outside population centres continue to be defined as census rural
areas. Taken together, population centres and census rural areas cover all of Canada. ”
http://www.ruralontarioinstitute.ca/file.aspx?id=231b5f1a-a7ca-4ddf-b69e-4034a35de640
The above are the realities of morphing rural areas into urban areas, that rural communities that are now defined as urban areas, on the same playing board as their urban counterparts of cement towers and green spaces, where funding and all policies are based within the parameters of ‘cement towers and green spaces’ and the urban environment. What is considered rural areas by the policy wonks? A good question, when much of the rural areas now turned urban, are rural in every way, and remains so for the citizens living in the small communities.
More importantly, it allows the acceptance of long bus rides, school closures, consolidation of schools to mimic the ‘cement towers and green spaces’ environments. Not only in education, but in health services, policing, water and sewer, one-sized-fits-all policies province wide, and the most important fact, to download the costs unto the rural residents by slowly withdrawing government services to larger and larger urban centres.
No wonder the Dougs’ of the big city landscapes, can repeat the same messages of the 1940s, over and over, and the new one that a urban tree is worth 10 times the value of a rural tree.
Below is such example and there is many of rural residents speaking out –
“This has question has been asked for years, but I’ll ask it again, because every year it becomes more relevant; why can’t there be two different funding models for urban and rural? There should be a funding plateau for urban schools, and a sort of plug for rural schools to stop the funds from draining out from the bottom. The per-student formula doesn’t work for rural Ontarians, and we pay taxes to the province, just like urban residents.
How many more years can this school board deal with such severe shortfalls? How many more programs do rural students have to do without?
Eventually, we’re going to run out of schools to close and amalgamate. It will cost more to bus kids from the tip of the peninsula and southern Grey County to some central school. (But they don’t tend to look at transportation costs do they?)
Eventually, something’s got to give.”
http://www.southwesternontario.ca/opinion/education-funding-following-students-who-leave-the-area/
But the federal and provincial governments are not listening, and nor are they taking heed to the many studies, reports on the academic side.
http://www.ofa.on.ca/issues/additional-information/Lauzon-should-we-keep-rural-schools-open
Anyone want to talk about the negatives of big city living? Why should education policy be all about urban students? And why are the policy wonks forcing urban education policies unto the rural students? For that matter, why do the education gurus of Levin and the gang of OISE, insist their urban ways of high tastes in education, is the way to go? Considering that Levin would get lost in the country woods from 100 yards from the road, and call for help.
You don’t have much of a choice. You don’t have enough votes and after each census and riding redistribution you count for less and less. It doesn’t really matter what you want, you are not going to get it because you just don’t have enough votes and you are getting smaller. Time for a realistic plan. Not pie in the sky.
Doug does not get it – Rural areas demographics have stabilized, and increases have taken place but just in certain rural areas, according the census. The big cities are the ones that are losing population. The second part of the equation, an urban area is urban when there is a population of 1000 or more, which is how the policy wonks of the provincial kind can continue to ignored the rural areas, more or less following urban policies of the down town Toronto or Halifax kind.
Rather crazy,, in this day and age, with high fuel prices, thinking bus transportation to a larger rural centre, to a bigger school that requires a lot more heat, and utilities and expect to realized savings. There is no savings, especially in rural areas. In Ontario, rural bus transportation contracts have been awarded to the big guys from Toronto, and once again they tell the public they will save money. Yeah, and the savings are pocketed by the big bus companies, and meanwhile the small bus independents are driven out of business.There is now studies and research, that shows clearly the way rural education is delivered, it is very expensive in costs, and always at the expense of the students and the rural communities.
So Doug, rural areas are not shrinking, but I bet few if any of oil-drill workers and other trades making big money are moving to cities. Hell, even in my community we have a few working in the Gulf of Mexico, and the families stay here. Labour patterns have change, where one is living may be far away from the place of work. Rural Ontario has there fair share of people working away, and families remaining in the rural communities. It is a lot easier to raise kids in the rural communities, than try to raise them in some urban concrete jungle. So big deal, the rural schools don’t have all the bells and whistles, but than again the same rural schools don’t have all the problems that urban schools have.
Doug, is the typical urbanite, dismissing anything from rural Canada with contempt, until the day the urbanites are begging them for help. Remember the day that Toronto called in the army, to shovel them out? The majority of the armed forces hails from rural Canada, and I bet he was bubbling over when they came down his street. I can’t wait when the urbanites who only worship the cement towers, wake up realizing their cement towers, their homes, paved streets were all made from materials from rural Canada.
Leave with a video clip on a BC school having a mice problem of epic proportions. Guess what? The parents and the students are left hanging, and common sense from the board is absent. There is a video, and no one has to wonder why there is a mice problem. Major repair work, but I doubt that the Surrey board will not provide the money to do the repair work..
But parents complain the district hasn’t shared its game plan.
“What are they doing to protect the kids in the interim? What are they changing in terms of how the school day operates so the problem isn’t getting worse and worse as the school year goes on?” mother Jennifer Wisdahl asked.”
http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20120529/bc_surrey_school_rodent_infestation_120529/20120529?hub=BritishColumbiaHome
Maybe the game plan is to close down the school?
From this educator’s perspective I’m inclined to support Paul’s ideas, Nancy’s very thorough reviews and the common sense of John and Doretta. The future for small schools is in their preservation, not closure. Too often, as is the case in Ontario at the moment the boards and teacher unions keep educators, some who have spent years at a particular small town school isolated and away from the parents and also caution us against saying much publicly. Discussion between educators on school closure in Ontario at least needs to come out of the closet so to speak. I think it of benefit that individual educators have their opinions expressed publicly and along side parents and community instead of getting “briefed” by the local union rep. or school board bureaucrat who is often in charge of the Accommodation Review process.