In Toronto and the GTA, and no doubt clear across Canada, school board trustees have, like all public sector personnel, acquired an attitude of entitlement regarding the use of taxpayers money.  What is especially discouraging is the fact trustees are elected in the public interest. In other words, they are supposed to be in a position of public “trust.” Yet, if actions speak louder than words, the only interest they have once elected are their own salaries and perks.

Read Don Peat’s Toronto Sun column today about the Toronto Catholic School Board’s inappropriate spending habits. Remember, this is the crowd who took home, on average, $107,000. As Peat states:

“They spent themselves right through warnings and into supervision. Documents obtained by the Toronto Sun show taxpayers shelled out for embattled Toronto Catholic trustees to stay at a Beverley Hills hotel, buy iPods, pick up $1000 in gift cards, donate to a Mississauga symphony concert, get a master’s degree and shovel cash to schools in their wards.”

What amazes me is that even after Ontario Education Minister Kathleen Wynn assigned a supervisor to run the board, the trustees kept right on spending. So, we either have to start holding their feet to the fire and vote for new trustees at the first opportunity.

Or, it is time to abolish school board trustees altogether.

H/T Cathy Cove.

Christina Blizzard has an excellent column today about whether or not there might be a conflict of interest between the teachers’ unions and campaign donations in the 2007 Ontario election. If, as she suggests, you follow the money, it doesn’t look good. For example, a number of Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario (ETFO) offices contributed to Education Minister Kathleen Wynn’s campaign, as did the Ontario Teachers Federation (OTF).

And, remember, these are the same groups that screamed their way through the Mike Harris years with “Days of Protest” and a two week teacher strike in 1997. So, what does it say to the public when none of that is happening now and hasn’t since the McGuinty government was first elected in 2003? Is it good management and good leadership as the Ontario Liberals would have us believe or is it simply giving the teachers’ unions everything they want? 

Meaning, that there will likely be a lot sabre rattling regarding the current ETFO negotiations, followed by Wynn “settling” and claiming victory. However, let’s not forget what that “victory” is going to cost Ontario taxpayers. Remember, ETFO wants nearly one billion dollars more so that elementary per-pupil grants equals that of secondary students.

But, it doesn’t end there. Scroll down this Ministry of Education (MOE) page. Fourth quarter investment money allocations were $250,000 to OTF and $900,000 to ETFO.

Now, can anyone make a direct link between election donations, contract settlements, grant allocations and peace in our schools? In other words, is there an unofficial “quid pro quo” arrangement? I very much doubt it. However, it should be something PC opposition leader John Tory looks into.

In the meantime, if perception is reality, there is clearly enough of a conflict of interest in this situation that it should somehow be avoided in the future — no matter which political party is involved!

[...]

H/T Doretta Wilson, Exec. Director of the Society for Quality Education & Joanne (Blue Like You). 

Excuse me? What do we have here? Extremist politically correct language as well as policies? Enforced and compulsory toleration? Where “some” minorities in this country have more rights than other minorities or the majority? Does our Charter of Rights and Freedoms only cover the rights of certain groups and not the rest of us? Do I dare even write about it? Do I dare even talk about it?

Yes, we need hate laws — but we need to define what extreme hate is. Usually we know when someone or some group has crossed the line. For example, if someone spray paints swastikason a Jewish synagogue or grave stone or the words “fag” or “queer” on someone’s house — that is clearly hate.

But, simply to write about an alternative opinion is not hate. Nor is not wanting to talk about or listen to a certain subject. And, quite frankly, most of us are just getting tired and fed up of being told what to say, what not to say, what to think and what not to think. And, speaking of compulsory thinking, it’s long past time for both minorities and the majority to say STOP. Stop trying to make our society some Walden utopia.    

Now, let’s look at what the Vancouver Sun editorial is actually telling the parents of that lovely city. First of all the paper refers to classes where homosexuality is discussed as ”gay friendly,” a term that is likely used by the Vancouver Board of Education.  What on earth is that politically correct term actually supposed to mean?

People who are gay are human beings for goodness sakes. Why are our institutions making them into some kind of oddity? They are our sons and daughters and nieces and nephews (and for me that is literally true). As such, they should not be separated in our society or in our high school curriculum the way they are. In fact, in my opinion, compulsory toleration will just do the reverse.  

So, while B.C. parents can pull their children out of sensitive health classes that might offend religious or cultural beliefs, they cannot do the same in any class that is discussing homosexuality and same sex gender issues. And, why on earth not? How will  ”enforcing” such a policy make those parents and their children more tolerant? All it will do is anger and disappoint the parents because it will take away their right to choose — guaranteeing further animosity.

Therefore, even though I personally would want my children exposed to all worldly topics, it would be far better Vancouver board policy to allow parents who disagree with homosexuality, for whatever reason, to remove their children from classes that deal with the topic. We simply don’t need “compulsory toleration” policies anywhere in this country!

H/T to regular reader Eryl.

Why is it that “elected” school board trustees have so much difficulty closing schools that have low enrollments? Is this lack of decision making only an Ontario problem? Or, is it a problem clear across this country? That, in spite of supposedly clearly thought out provincial guidelines on how to conduct a pupil “accommodation review,” few trustees are able to buck what their community and parents seem to want. 

It is a dichotomy for sure. On the one hand, parents don’t want to pay high property and income tax rates. But, on the other, they lobby and lobby hard for all schools to remain open even when the handwriting is on the wall. So, the squeaky wheels do get the grease.

Which means, the more noise the community makes, the more unlikely trustees can rise above the noise and do the right thing. Although in fairness, I should point out that some trustees ARE able to make those types of tough decisions but, when they do so at public meetings, are often booed and jeered by parent groups.

Is that what school board trustees are supposed to do? Aren’t they the ones that are supposed to represent the public and make sure costs and related matters are kept in check? Or, are they there just to do as the various parent and community activists want them to do? Rhetorical questions for sure as I certainly don’t have any answers to those questions. But, let’s look at a couple of examples of this phenomenon.

Read the rest of this entry »

I have written about the problems with school board trustees overspending and misusing public funds. See here and here. So, I completely agree with columnist Cathy Cove who writes for the Goderich Signal Star who published her piece last week. Cathy has kindly given me permission to reprint it here, title and all, so that my regular readers and I can discuss it.

[...]

STICKY-FINGER TRUSTEES SHOULD BE CHARGED AND SHOWN THE DOOR

Over the past months newspapers in the province have been replete with the revelations of another  school board’s alleged misuse of public funds.

This time it’s the Toronto Catholic School Board under the microscope of provincial investigator Norbert Hartman, who was called in by Minister of Education Kathleen Wynne to begin sorting out a mess of Machiavellian proportions.

It is widely expected that Wynne will appoint a supervised takeover of the Toronto Catholic board.

Minister Wynne, so far holds the record for sending in the provincial troops to straighten out financially troubled school boards.  Her iron-fist in s a velvet-glove approach seems to be a more welcome intervention than was the Harris sledgehammer.

Make no mistake though, the penalty for any public official in a statutory role, whether, member of federal/provincial parliament, town councillor, mayor, school council representative or school board trustee, when it involves the public purse, if proven, must be swift and severe.

Read the rest of this entry »

Given that far too many of Ontario’s school boards’ elected trustees cannot be trusted to manage the public interest regarding board budgets and what goes on in Ontario’s schools, that model should be completely abolished in favour of the New Brunswick model of “School Districts.”

Yesterday, for example, Ontario’s Education Minister Kathleen Wynn, had to take over the Toronto Catholic Board’s financial affairs by appointing school finance expert Norbert Hartmann, because she no longer had confidence in the ability of its trustees to do what needed to be done. (I wrote on this last month here.) 

No doubt many other Ontario boards have also been found to be negligent in their public responsibilities. And, just try to imagine how much all these trustees are costing — money that could be going to school resources — such as membership fees in their associations, their stipends, attendance at conferences and retreats and mileage.

Back in 1995, when I was working for an Ontario PC MPP, the Mike Harris government had to take away Board of Education taxing powers because of a similar “trustee” entitlement culture. At that time it was called the “Who Does What” process but, being on the inside, I can say that much of the downloading was done so as to take away the ability of boards to continually raise education property taxes.

Read the rest of this entry »

During the past month we have been hearing about Toronto Catholic Board trustees and how they have over spent on their expenses by thousands and thousands of dollars. Now, Moira MacDonald of the Toronto Sun reports that things got so bad in Nova Scotia this week that a school board had to be taken over by the provincial government. Here is what MacDonald writes about that situation:

“In Nova Scotia this week the 12 trustees at the Strait Regional School Board — overseeing schools in Cape Breton Island and the northeastern part of the mainland — were turfed by Nova Scotia’s Conservative government for failing to get along and meet new ethical standards.”

Are we Canadians paying so much attention to federal politics that we are missing allegations of overspending and ineffectiveness at the thousands of boards of education across this country? What is even more of a concern is that it is a well documented fact that in some communities, few people actually vote in municipal elections.  For example, turnout can range from a low of 10% to a high of 76%.

Another phenomenon I noticed during the last municipal elections in Ontario, which may be at the root of this problem, was that trustees seemed to get re-elected, not on the basis of their record, but on name recognition alone.  In fact, I spoke to someone who ran for the first time and she admitted it is almost impossible for a new candidate to get elected. This doesn’t make sense, does it? We keep voting the same people in election after election without knowing whether they were effective or not.  

Clearly, something is going to have to be done about this situation and awareness is a good start.  

[...]

Why do we have elected trustees on school boards at the municipal level? We have them to oversee the education and well being of children and youth living in a specific municipality — representing both public and separate (Catholic) rate payers. And, key in that role of overseer is making sure money is spent wisely and appropriately.

While we frequently like to say that elected officials should spend public money as if it were their own — we don’t mean that literally. Yet, when we hear the “average” amount allocated to some Toronto trustees last year was $107,218, what are we, the public, supposed to think?

Well, clearly, the school board trustees that took that amount of money out of a school board budget thought they were “entitled” to it. That board is the Toronto Catholic District School Board (TCDSB). And, as the Toronto Sun editorial says today the Education Minister will have to take over this board and appoint a provincial supervisor in order ”to restore fiscal sanity.” 

What is especially unfortunate with this type of “collective failure” is that it silences the competent trustee voices in the confusion. How very frustrating it must be to be a hard working and effective trustee on that board, such as John Del Grande, who the Sun says filed 21 motions proposing various reforms.

Read the rest of this entry »

Congratulations to the staff and students at Britannia Elementary School on Vancouver’s east side!  From a previous school ranking by the Fraser Institute of 2.8 a number of years ago, this year they made in on the honour roll with a 7.5 out of ten. Well done!

What an inspiring example of what can happen when everyone involved in a school makes a commitment to improve.  And, when they do, everyone benefits — clear across Canada because we are now telling their story. And that story is that school rankings, whether they be from the Fraser or C.D. Howe Institutes, can be used as the impetus for change. 

They are not, as I wrote yesterday, a “flawed picture” as suggested by the Ontario Public School Board Association (OPSBA). As Doretta Wilson, Executive Director of the Society for Quality Education pointed out today in an e-mail, there are jurisdictions in this country that are using the school rankings to make a difference and she included the link to the Vancouver Sun article as proof.  

And, make a difference they have. According to Janet Steffenhagen of the Vancouver Sun, Britannia is an inner city school. Half the children are ESL, more than half are aboriginal and the parents’ education is generally below average.  So, how did the staff take the school from a 2.8 ranking to a 7.5? One teacher was inspired to use a controversial “direct-instruction” literacy program called “Reading Mastery.” And, when students started making huge gains, the whole staff decided to use it school-wide spending up to 2 hours every single day on the program.

Memo to OPSBA and the Ontario teachers’ unions. Britannia Elementary School in Vancouver has used the school rankings to improve.  Don’t tell the government, the general public and parents, that it can’t be done. It not only can be done, it has been done.

[...] 

Note: Let’s get the news out. Send the link to everyone you know. C/P at With Good Reason.

* Update: It sounds like the B.C. Trustees Association is providing the same kind of spin as OPSBA. For example, the B.C. association published a news release this past Tuesday, May 6th, that stated:

“Last week, the Fraser Institute published its annual Report Card on British Columbia’s Elementary Schools.  BCSTA believes that the conclusions drawn by the Fraser Institute are incomplete and misleading because it ranks schools based on a narrow snapshot of information that fails to reflect the breadth and depth of activities occurring in schools.  Fine arts, sciences, athletics, student citizenship and the success of many other school programs are not reflected in the report.”

“Furthermore, the rankings are potentially harmful to the morale of those who work and learn in BC’s public schools. The report does not take individual school, student population, or other community factors into consideration. The narrow snapshot of data used by the report fails to recognize the significant accomplishments and progress taking place every day in BC’s public schools.”

Clearly, provincial trustee associations need to get off their high horses and represent the taxpayers who voted for them, including the parents, not the teachers’ unions. They also need to read about schools that are benefitting from the school rankings report card because the rankings do not need to be a “narrow snapshot.”

Moroever, tell that to the staff and students at Britannia. And, as far as the students not getting as much Social Studies and other subjects? Unless you can read and write, those courses are not going to do the children any good whatsoever. With well established literacy skills, they will be able to catch up by high school. But, without fully automatic literacy skills, they would likely never catch up.

[...] 

It came to my attention recently that the Ontario Public School Board Association (OPSBA) was taking on the Fraser Institute’s (FI) school rankings survey results. Now, keep in mind, OPSBA represents ALL public boards in Ontario — which means that, according to their February 19th, 2008 news release, ALL the public boards in Ontario see the school rankings “as a flawed picture.” Which means that the teachers’ unions and the rank and file also likely see the school rankings in that way.

Why, one could ask, is the FI  annual school rankings report flawed?  Well, according to the OPSBA news release it is because the FI doesn’t take all the factors affecting student achievement and school life into consideration.  Rather, they “create a superficial picture of the place of schools in the lives of children and families.”

What exactly does that statement mean? How does annual literacy and numeracy testing create a superficial picture of student achievement — and thus a superficial picture of our schools in the lives of children and their families? If students are actually completing the tests themselves, are parents not finding out just how well their children can read and write and do basic math? What is superficial about that? Why would children and their families not benefit? Or, is it code to mean that parents have no understanding of what makes a good school apart from the rankings? If that is the case, the assumptions would be wrong on both counts.

That said, OPSBA is correct when they say there are a whole number of factors that influence how effective a school is and what low results might suggest. For example, one school may have one or more special education classes which, when added to the overall statistics of the school, can lower the rankings. Yet, that school may be every bit as good a school as one who has a higher ranking but no special education classes. But, that should not suggest that parents are incapable of understanding these issues.

Read the rest of this entry »