“Then-premier Dalton McGuinty, he recalls, had been struck by a study suggesting nearly a third of the province’s Grade 1 pupils were defined as “vulnerable” on an index of educational development indicators, meaning they struggled with literacy, numbers or behaviour. “

Funny thing, there is studies going back to the 1970s, that runs across all the social-income groups, that 1/3 of a typical grade 1 class will be lagging behind, another 1/3 will have issues in learning and the remaining 1/3 will have no issues and progress steadily. The main conclusion of the studies is that a typical grade 1 class, where two-thirds of students will be at risked for learning failure, and not meeting the typical standards. The finger is pointed at the instruction practices and educational policies of the schools and the school districts.

Under the Ontario index, my child would not considered vulnerable under the present criteria of the Ontario education practices. And yet should be, like a great many other children, who experiences minor delays in child development and milestones. And yet what is implied is - “Pascal’s oft-cited report, “With Our Best Future in Mind,” recommended a seamless network of child-care, early learning and parental support programs centred in the province’s public schools—a “holistic, comprehensive, integrated approach, ” as he put it, that would unite everything from prenatal care to nutritional education in a “one-stop shopping” model for parents.”

Oh really? Is there the seamless care of speech pathologists, physical therapies, and other occupation therapists present at the schools. No, I didn’t think so, as there would be little in new information in areas of prenatal care and nutritional education that could not be found in other places, like doctor’s offices and hospitals.

My point is, seamless service is only possible with 1/3 of the children attending the Ontario all day K plus day care. The other two-thirds are force to adapt to a system, that is designed for only 1/3rd of the children, who will not be needing any of the wrapped around services, and will not be taxing the education system in resources and additional staff.

Outcome will be, by the end of grade 3 at the very least 33 % are not meeting expectations and by the end of grade 3, another 10 % is added where the benefits of all day K has worn off.

Its a combination of educational policies/practices and what the parents can provide for their children in the home environment. Then there is another 20 percent of 3 to 5 year old receiving some type of health and medical services on a regular basis weekly, that are available only in the day time, during the same hours as school. 

As for the educational practices and policies, is it realistic that a school can provide and meet the needs of all the 4 and 5 year old students coming through their doors?  I dare say no, and like it is done in the higher grades,  it will be downloaded upon the parents to provide for their children that the teachers feels is the best interests of the children, and best fits the needs and best interests of the school staff. So children with or had minor speech delays will be shuffled off to the corner, the kid with a funny gait will be too, that turns out to be a minor deformity of the hip that should have been corrected as soon as possible but wasn’t. My point is the children with mild to moderate problems are left to their own devices in a school environment that pushes the students into the norm, that is defined by the educators and policy wonks to delivered an education program on the cheap and farmed out the education services that the school is no longer providing to the parents.

Its as crazy as providing one or two toilets for two kindergarten classes. However it is a prime example of education on the cheap, and no doubt telling the kids, that they should be so lucky to wait 10 minutes to go to the washroom, unlike other kids in other parts of the world. Only to tell them in the older grades, that having one bathroom in one household is a sign of poverty, or some other warped explanation that is fundamentally based on relativism.

If FDK are not capped, having enrollments of 34 to 39 students, it is day care and not as they would have us to believed,  providing an education in an education setting.

A comment - an excerpt - ”  We treat our children like cattle in a feedlot with industrial ways of raising them.”  That sounds about right. and then Pascal expects miracles from his vision of industrial methods of raising children.

It`s a huge waste as the Ministry has insisted it be a play based curriculum.

Queens Park is a melting ground for zealots to try to figure out how to waste money.The people who run for government and are elected are tragically incompetent.
Somehow we should try to find a way to get higher level
individuals instead of “political aspirers”-everything they do is to get in next time!