Nobody is saying “write them off” the situation is that some children are very difficult to educate due to their special situation.I have always supported spending far more on children such as this. What I do not support is charters, vouchers or subsidies for private school. If you want to go private that is up to you but do not expect state support for private decisions.

If you get public money, the option must be controlled by the public through elected trustees and MPPs.

Let us also not forget the source of the polling information.
Parents know well that when the OSSTF pays for a pollster to take a poll they can steer the questions to get the desired answers and THEN they can drop in on blogs like this one a claim some sort of victory by saying “the polls say….”.

Polls can be made to read and spun in many different ways, which is why most intelligent parents don’t pay attention to them. They will however let their experience with the system be the judge.

Mr. Little,

Are there no conceivable situations in which the state acknowledges the right of an individual to make “private” decisions which result in claims against the state?

And this: “the situation is that some children are very difficult to educate due to their special situation”...

Is it that simple?

Is it just that the workers are given inferior material to work with?

What if, in fact, a lot of the problems experienced by children in “education” stem from the fact that they are not taught the right things in the right way in the right sequence?  What if valid and dependable research and experience are being ignored?

And please, please answer this question:  Are you opposed to public alternatives on only ldeological grounds, or because the public system is demonstrably and significantly superior?  And if so, where is the concrete evidence? You still haven’t responded to Mr. Cowley or shown any interest in reading anything that doesn’t confirm your point of view.

And home schooling;  should parents have the right?  Or should their children be removed from home by the state and forced to attend a public school?

What are the rights of these folk under the education act?  What are the obligations of parents in this case?  And who defines, under the Act, what is satisfactory “education”?  Is it you Mr. Little?  Is it the local school principle?  Children’s Aid?  The minister of education? The school board trustees?  Superintendents of education?

Just be thankful that the retired OSSTF rep. and former trustee will have no influence on the future of the Ontario education landscape. The vision lies elsewhere and outside the union ties and bind and gag.

Blunt Language, Not Niceties, for Genuine Education Reform

The word ?impediments? when discussing education reform conveys something easy ? minor ? to be overcome if we are to achieve any kind of improvements.

The conversation so far is very polite and even genteel.  Mr. Cowley outlines 7 ?impediments?, which, one might conclude, are negotiating points in some gentleman?s contest. 

Let there be no mistake, however, the contest is downright serious.  If there was to be any real, genuine, concerted move to providing the choice and competition Mr Cowley suggests, the opposition would be fearsome.

We?re talking obstruction, blocking, sabotage.  Mr. Little, long time teacher union spokesperson, gives us a hint of the threat to come if charters or vouchers or any other form of increasing choices for parents and students becomes a possibility.  He says, ?All parties know the forces against such a move are more than 10X the size of the forces in favour.? Look at the US battles for the magnitude of these David and Goliath confrontations.

Charles, a perceptive commentator on this thread, says the SYSTEM itself is the biggest impediment.  He is so right.  Above all, the apparatus, the system, has to be perpetuated for all the ?stakeholders? ? those with vested interests ? to keep on playing their games.

Leave out parents ? they were never nor should be considered ?stakeholders?.  But, the stakeholders who depend on and revel in the present system are these: teacher unions, school board trustees, administrators, professors, Ministry bureaucrats, politicians, researchers, consultants, etc. 

Funny that Mr. Little would mention New Jersey and their per capita student spending of $15,000 as desirable.  Didn?t SQE just a few months ago highlight the existence of a movie, The Cartel, about New Jersey?s highest US expenditures on schools and most dismal achievements?  See these 4 YouTube presentations:
The Cartel ? the Trailer http://www.thecartelmovie.com/cgi-local/content.cgi
The Cartel ? local spending, ? corruption in public schools, ? new jersey charter schools http://www.thecartelmovie.com/cgi-local/content.cgi?g=20

It is no wonder that the research in the twin fields of corruption in education and obstruction of education reform is mushrooming.  This playfield is coming under intense scrutiny, including from the United Nations.

I’m not sure that I agree with your sweeping statements Tunya. If you have any proof at all of the corruption in education as they pertain to Ontario lead the way.

Otherwise, I take issue with the whole “Leave out the parents -” paragraph because I see parents as active stakeholders in their children’s education no matter what choice. Asserting their place within the public system may be wasted effort but there needs to be a solid pushback by parents for those who choose the public system.