Update Wednesday, November 18th, 7:45pm — I listened to the University of Toronto/OISE Jackson lecture webcast for about a half an hour until I discovered it was not really a panel “discussion” of ideas and research findings about early learning. Rather, with Education Minister Kathleen Wynn acting as the moderator, it was no more than an opportunity for everyone on the “panel” to agree with the Ontario McGuinty government’s rationale for a fully funded full-day kindergarten program.
Personally, I have no argument with the rationale for such a “voluntary” program. It has long been known that not all children have an equal start in life. So, providing all children with an opportunity for a headstart can only be a good thing for them, their families and society at large.
No, my main disagreements with this program are its timing and cost. Think about it. Ontario now has a deficit just under $25 billion and this program will likely cost between $1-$2 billion every single year.
And, there has been no mention at all of parents contributing to that cost. In the province of Quebec, for example, each and every family contributes a small $7.00 a day fee per child to have their children take part in the provincial government’s subsidized childcare program.
While some regular visitors may be surprised that I agree with this idea in principle because I am a conservative supporter politically, I am not going to be a hypocrite.
You see, my husband and I both had careers (or attended university at various points) when our children were growing up. Moreover, my son had severe behavioural problems (which were eventually diagnosed as autism) and needed to be in a structured environment. So, I can definitely appreciate how important this kind of program would be for families with single or two working partners.
In any event, readers can be assured that I will write more on this topic as information becomes available.
[...]
Previously Posted: We have heard much all across Canada about the Ontario McGuinty government’s proposed full-day junior and senior kindergarten program — due to be implemented in the fall of 2010.
Presented by the Ontario government as being based on solid early learning research as defined in the Charles Pascal report, we shall be able to see for ourselves if it is or not, via a University of Toronto (OISE) sponsored live event; namely, this year’s annual R.W.B. Jackson Lecture which will be broadcast live online, starting at 7 pm on Wednesday evening November 18th — EST.
Advertised as a ”conversation,” it will include a panel of five people — Dr. Pascal, Ontario Education Minister Kathleen Wynn, former deputy minister of education Ben Levin (also a defender of Ontario’s no-fail policy), OISE professor Janette Pelletier and OISE graduate student Kimberly Bezaire.
While visitors can read my archive on what I have written on this topic before (at this link), I will do my best to remain open-minded when I listen to the webcast, which I will then report on here.
I would also encourage anyone else who is interested in this topic — particularly parents who have small children — to listen as well and then comment here so we can have an open dialogue on all the issues.
Filed under: All-day Kindergarten, Early Childhood Learning, Pascal Report | Tagged: OISE Webcast
I know this is off topic, but what happened to the last post? That was a very good discussion, I thought.
No thanks. This is just more waste of my tax dollars. When the discussion gets around to how the Liberal government has soaked Ontarians and where ELSE this money could go, then maybe I’ll do the government’s job for them. We’ll be spending quality time with our kids instead.
Well Drewey — this is going to happen one way or the other and you and I are going to pay for it whether we like it or not. So, I figure by listening to the webcast, I will at least no what to expect and what to fight against in the next Ontario election.
Put another way, we ought not to simply ignore this program since it is going to cost a couple of billion dollars a year — indefinitely. But once the gov’t starts something like this, it will be almost impossible to politically get rid of it.
Anyway, this site is to inform. And, since I’ve done my share of academia, I know just what kind of edu-babble to expect. But, I’ll do my best to “translate” what I hear. What I expect to hear is how the McGuinty gov’t plans to sell this to Ontarians — while only being based on the Pascal report in part, a very small part is my guess.
Balbulican — My apologies but I decided to take it down as it was attracting too many trolls, but we can continue the discussion here if you would like.
For one thing, I probably should have made my position clearer in the post itself — that I didn’t condone what MP Gover did. I am just fed up with all the bitching. As are most Canadians.
In fact, I am fed up with the whining and complaining on all sides of the political divide and the media enablers and spent most of the weekend putting up this new theme — far more creative in my opinion.
Sandy,
Fair comment, but I have to wonder if Hudak’s giving in as easily? Is there any word from the PCs because if they are giving in on this I’ll be taking my vote elsewhere or staying home next election. Who is standing up for parents? I’m not looking to the NDP, so I guess it’s home we stay.
Regarding your last posting though, I’m glad to see it gone. If it isn’t a scandal then it’s NOT a scandal anywhere. Why shag it to death?
Drewey — I wouldn’t be too tough on Hudak. The PC’s are not in government and only have so many votes in the legislature. In fact, since this is policy and not compulsory, I doubt a vote is even necessary.
Having worked for a Harris era MPP (one of Hudak’s Niagara colleagues), my bet is the Ontario PC’s still don’t know how the majority of parents are going to feel about this issue. In fact, I put up two posts on the topic and got only a limited response. Next spring and summer, just prior to it starting, then, we’ll know. That said, few parents who are both working will likely complain.
But, please don’t stay home on this issue. Hudak can’t change anything unless he gets a majority government and every vote in October 2011 will count.
Re the Glover post, I put in my postscript it was written “with tongue in cheek” but some people didn’t take it that way obviously. Anyway, Balbulican and I were having a good debate.
Sandy – thanks for the clarification, much appreciated.
Just for the record Dewey the Ontario PC’s education critic did call the Liberal government out on under-estimating and then not covering the potential cost of this program, WHICH, still has yet to be determined. While some things are covered by the gov’t, there is much that is not. Perhaps the HST is how McGuinty intends to pay for this?
Hi Sandy,
Sorry to hear your description of Wynne’s panel being essentially a “love-in” fest. I don’t like these sessions even if I agree with the content. I do like polite conflict so that all sides can be heard.
Off topic:
Do you have any comments about a family’s homework ban contract?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/family-and-relationships/family-negotiates-homework-ban/article1367357/
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/family-and-relationships/more-homework-rebels-speak-out/article1368986/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/18/canada-homework-milley
Skinny Dipper — I think a certain amount of homework is okay but not if it interferes with everyday life. I have heard stories where primary aged children have a couple of hours a night. That is ridiculous! I’ll read your sources as soon as I can.
Oh by the way, SK — In my first draft of my update, I actually used the term “love in” so really laughed when I read your comment. That is exactly what it was. I didn’t realize that Education Minister Kathleen Wynn had a Master’s from OISE so it was a hometown crowd. Mind you, I’m an alumnus as well.
What I tried to imagine was a PC Education Minister being invited to moderate the panel. Not! Just not one of the in-crowd and therein lies the problem as to why the Ontario gov’t gives in to everything the teachers’ unions demand. Everything and more. There definitely needs to be more arms length there.
Apparently for the first phase of the roll-out of this program only those schools with existing space might see the program at all. Boards are to take this into consideration when deciding which of their schools might offer the program.
socio-economics, language, and get this, EQAO results may play a part in a school landing an early learning program.
In a news release one of our local school board directors cautioned parents on getting their hopes up because to date, the funding hasn’t been finalized, with the gov’t only picking up the operating costs. Capital costs to house programs will not be paid for by gov’t.
Also, the Ministry is still “working on” just what the full-day curriculum will contain and which of the two (ECE, or elementary) folks will deliver what part of the program.
In the news release the director “cautions parents on what the number of classes offered actually means. He said for example, that five classes doesn’t automatically mean full-day kindergarten will be offered in five different locations.” He told me that one of our local schools could eat up four of those classes.
“If a larger school has several kindergarten classes now, most of the full-day classes will then be located in that one school.”
If you’re in an urban board that works much better than in small town rural boards where the one school offering the program is over an hour away.
As the saying goes Catherine — it’s all in the fine print. In the end, maybe it will be much ado about nothing. Only time will tell.
no doubt, but typically as this government has proven time and time again the finished product looks nothing like what was originally the plan. My guess is that this will end up that way too. Looks great on paper and in those larger urban boards, but with not much thought given to small/rural Ontario. Actually, I have to wonder whether this initiative is a god send for the urban boards in an attempt to not close schools but fill up existing empty space?
Sandy – you may wish to have a look at the education reporter’s latest on the subject and another challenge looming for this program that I’m sure the gov’t hadn’t thought of.
Thanks Catherine. I’ll take a look. I thought he was still on hiatus.
Catherine — I have left a comment which you might find interesting. I’ll try to find time to write about that topic tomorrow.
Hi Sandy, I am taking an AQ course at OISE right now. I love the sound of the subway train rumbling under my class. It’s annoying!
In terms of student homework, I generally accept 10 minutes per grade per day–usually Monday to Thursday evenings. In the primary grades, I would strongly encourage reading for homework. Children and parents can read together. Siblings can read to each other. From grade-four, I accept that students can do independent homework. Students should not be doing group assignments at home other than gathering materials for class activities. I also don’t believe in assigning homework sheets where the students have not had ample time to work on them in class.
Skinny Dipper — You mean you are in class right this moment and working on a blackberry or similar device? Naughty naughty. LOL
By the way, I left a comment at Education Reporter re specific training for the full-day kindergarten. Have you heard of any in-service for primary teachers on this topic? Just wondering. Unless a teacher has a diploma in ECE from a college or a degree in youth and child studies, they really are not going to be well prepared for dealing with students who usually are considered “pre-schoolers.”
Just wondering if anything is in the works that you have heard about.
Sandy – you may want to offer your 2 cents on the Niagara board’s accomm. review at ed.reporter today. You’re actually there and may be able to add information that may be missed from those looking in from afar?
Catherine — I know “exactly” what is going on in NOTL and it is becoming VERY ugly. While I would be the first to hope that some way would be found to keep NDSS open, what the municipal council is doing is disgusting. And, of course, you know why don’t you? We have a municipal election in exactly one year and they are all in a panic they won’t get re-elected. That is all this is about — saving their political skins, not the high school.
Not only that, the parents have now been forced to take sides. Parents of elementary aged children want nothing to do with the notion of their young children being forced to go outside their village to attend a run down high school. Those parents who were part of the accommodation review are outraged and so they should be. They want the new school built, just as is happening in St. Davids.
Politics and shenanigans indeed! I was an NDSS supporter until October 31st, the deadline. And, the council and Friends of NDSS said they were going to do whatever they had to do to get the board to change their mind. Look, the demographics are just not there and it has NOTHING to do with Eden high school. People have completely forgotten that NDSS was offered Eden twenty odd years ago and they said no. Now, it is located in St. Catharines, has nearly 800 students and a waiting list. Of those 800, only a bit over one hundred are from NOTL. Even if they forbid them the option of attending an alternative school, none of those students would attend NDSS. Just wouldn’t happen and yet it’s like talking to a brick wall to the Eden haters.
Bah, humbug!