Yes, publically funded education has become self-serving, unfortunately, and children are only there nowadays for funding.  They certainly aren’t doing the children any favours…

I still keep looking at the line - “a board average of 22 students for Grades 9 to 12”

The Ontario government can also congratulate themselves in the near future, the great job in reducing the number of courses for students to select. Such courses such as robotics, law/economics, and 19th century literature, will be squeezed out by the compulsory credits,that would have to meet the board average of 22 students or so. Large urban schools, will have no choice but to cut out the ‘nice to have’ courses, as will the small high schools will do the same thing, to juggled and meet other priorities to produced student and teacher schedules within specific time parameters, and the school’s capacity for space, versus students and their learning needs.

Our local rural high school, introduced a robotics course for this year, and the school put a seating cap of 18 students. Most of the students are in grade 12, with the remainder students drawing from the grade 11 students. There was 6 spots for the grade 11 students, and more than 10 grade 11 students wanted in on robotics. I don’t know what the parameters were to picked the students for the robotics course, but my 16 year old was selected.

Why the cap?  It turns out, courses that are non-compulsory courses, often have funding issues, where school boards do not fully fund the courses, beyond the textbooks and training of teachers. Often leaving the school and students to pick up the associated costs relating to the courses. It forces schools to make decisions based on the associated costs of the non-compulsory courses., and not in the best learning conditions for students.

For next year, the robotics course may go bye-bye and the expenditures that the school has put out, may indeed go back into the biology courses for dissection of real dead animals, rather than looking at virtual dissections.

It is the ‘nice to have’ courses that are at high risk for going bye-bye in all high schools, and what really bugs me, is the press release sending out the myth that acts as the reality - “Students in smaller classes get more one-on-one time with their teachers, do better in school and are more likely to succeed in high school and beyond. Ontario’s decision to protect small class sizes will support continued student success and preserve teacher jobs that would otherwise be lost if class sizes increased.”

The myth of small classes belies the realities at the local high school levels, when course selection and the number of courses that are offered, are dependent on the teacher training, their knowledge base, students interests, the number of compulsory credits, and the biggest variable how the courses are funded and by whom.

School boards will effectively reduced the number of courses in all high schools, in order to meet the conditions imposed by the ministry of education including the average class size of 22 to obtain the extra funding that goes with it.

The Ontario government just handed the school boards an effective way to provide far less for students at a premium price. For what?  No matter the size of the classroom, a student without a solid foundation in the 3 Rs, will still be a low achiever in grade 11, and teachers will still be dealing with the same behavioural problems that results from students having different levels in the 3 Rs and schools will still be having the same problems in funding, when school boards deliberately short-change schools in funding over and beyond the textbooks and teacher training.

As for the robotics class in the local high school, it is a good thing that the robotics teacher did not make do, but found creative solutions such as asking students for the broken electronic and microwave oven gear sitting at home. for replacement parts for their robots electronic gear. Not every teacher can do what this robotic teacher did, but it became necessary because the school board short-change the school on the vital mother-boards and other such supplies to build the robots.

In part the robotics course may be no more for the next school year, plus for many high schools’ budgets, the hassle of dealing with school boards who short-change the high schools, is not worth the effort for many of a school, without a large student population of high-income parents.

Giving the school boards the gift of average class size of 22 for high schools, the school boards can continued to short change the high schools in their district. Bonus, the annual school board reports can now boast the number of jobs that are provided in their school district, without ever be held to account for their actions.

it’s deja-vu all over again. Perhaps this is more McGuinty smoke and mirrors and a way to on the one hand suggest he’s getting tough with teacher unions publicly but privately the unions still have him by the ______s. This latest is just proof of that.

Intersting…

  First McGuinty adds tens of thousands of jobs to the public payroll, via some pretty suspect assertions, and now he’s claiming to be “protecting” them.

The bottom line is that he added thousands of jobs to service a plunging number of kids…Try finding any background material/analysis at the MofEd supporting the claims.

Mind you its coming back to haunt him…He’s lecturing us on the need for “fiscal restraint” and “salary freezes” and people just burst ot laughing.  I suspect hundreds of thousands on the public payroll will take their leads from how he handles the teacher unions with his pleas for salary and grid freezes.

Nancy - if the robotics team at your high school was a priority for your school then the principal could put some pressure on the board to loosen those purse strings.

I wouldn’t lay this all on the school board. If the teacher, and principal aren’t getting the message to the higher-ups the money will not materialize.

I can give you some small board that DO give schools money for their robotics team because they see a school community behind the effort.

Local news media was behind the efforts locally and still are.

Chuck, school is located in rural NL within the largest school board in NL. That said, the small high school of 200 students or so, is the best equipped high school on the Peninsula, technology wise. It is named the i-phone school for good reason. Even I finally caved in, and consented to buy an i-phone for my 16 year old.

Ever since the school board dumped 3 million dollars in renovations two years, that arose from workmen working on the roof, that led to damage, which led to finding asbestos, which led to plumbing leaks and ultimately two electrical fires, the board has been kind of cheap in the extra goodies, including transportation monies for sports. The old fundraising has kicked backed into action, and believe it or not, last year graduating class raise 14,000 for their graduation festivities. I know of parents who have paid over $1200 to have their kids attend the championship games, that are half-way across the province. The school staff and the principal are strong advocates for their school, and have some political heavyweights sitting in cabinet or in high profile public servant jobs behind them.

Even though the school is in the top 25 schools of NL, the school really focuses on the students and what it will take to get them into post-secondary. Most parents around here, like that, and they see the results in their child’s progress. They give out zeroes, if kids don’t do their homework, they stay after school until it is completed, even if it takes them to 5:00 p.m. Zero tolerance in name calling, and the little stuff that leads to bullying incidences. where they have developed a few tactics to change the students’ behaviour that is more acceptable and tolerant. As a result, kids actually wants to come to school, and enjoy going to school. I can’t say anything negative, because the educators have gone the extra mile for my 16 year old, lifting the weight that I had at home, unto their shoulders to improve her writing. She is maintaining a mid 70 average, and which was the best I could hope for, considering her LD problems in writing, and the lack of the correct help in the earlier years. Otherwise, she slated for an Ontario university in 2013, and she will do it under her own steam. And she won’t be sitting in remedial English or math courses at the university level.

I won’t say anything negative about them, but there is lots of things that have not change at all with the school board. The denials for education services, including the one for my child, to relearn reading from the beginning. It was turned down, even though it was 20 students involved. It is all about the politics, and I am still scratching my head, how a school of 150 students,  45 kms away, has 4 SE teachers. When I look at the CRTs, the percentage of students below standard, is really low, compared to my local area at the elementary level.

As for robotics club, there is about 4 schools on the east coast of the school board district have very strong and robust robotics clubs for over 10 years, and have the full support of the board and the ministry. The thinking is, if the robotics course goes, the school is thinking about a robotics club. They already put out feelers for student interest, and approach my 16 year old. She came home, they want me, because I am really good at fixing the robots to make them go. She be called the head mechanic, and who knows, they probably kick some butt, and give the other 4 schools a run for their money.

The fundraising is back into place, and there is always strong community support especially the service clubs and churches in the community.

Funny thing, in Ontario religion and church is being targeted, and yet in NL, secular it may be, religion and the churches play a large role in our schools, our communities and fundraising activities. I wonder what some Ontarians would do, if they saw the Salvation Army Major, the United Church minister, the Anglican minister and the Pentecostal minister.all sitting together at a school function, as well as participating in school functions?  It is normal in NL, but in Ontario that would be sight to behold after reading the Ontario news today?

I still maintain the board average of 22 at the high school level, will eventually reduce the number of courses offered at all high schools. The math does not work out, given the other variables at play in the operations of a high school. Time will tell, but my gut instinct tells me, it will lead to the reduction of courses offered at all high schools. I can’t shake it, my accounting nose is a twitching.  ,

“I still maintain the board average of 22 at the high school level, will eventually reduce the number of courses offered at all high schools.”

Sorry, Nancy, the opposite is true.  I won’t pretend to know how classes are allocated in NL, but in Ontario this is the way it works:

# of students x # of credits / average class size = # of classes

Let’s take an easy example:

- a school of 1,000 students
- students take 7 credits / year on average

If we assume that the average class size is 25, then we make this calculation:

1,000 x 7 / 25 = 280 classes

If you assume that the average class size is 22, then the calculation becomes:

1,000 x 7 / 22 = 318 classes (approx.)

By having smaller classes, we have 38 more classes in the same school.  That’s 38 more opportunities for physics, chemistry, psychology, drama, and so on.  Having smaller classes INCREASES the variety of courses offered, it doesn’t decrease it. 

Another way to look at it is to think of pie slices.  Assume I have two pies, one cut in six slices and the other in eight.  The pie cut in six slices has fewer slices, but each slice is larger (class size of 25).  The pie cut in eight slices has more slices, but each slice is smaller (class size of 22).

If the above weren’t true, then the original article becomes nonsensical.  McGuinty is saving jobs by having smaller classes - that means there must be more classes.

Wayne - consider the credit system model in Ontario

18 credits must have

4 in English, 3 in Math, 2 in Science, 1 in history, 1 in geography, 1 in Arts, 1 in PE,  1 in French, 0.5 in career studies, 0.5 in civics.

Plus 1 credit from each of the following groups: 1): 1 in English or French or Native languages, or International languages, or Social Studies, or the Humanities, or Canadian and World studies, or guidance and career education, or cooperative education

2) Plus 1 additional credit in - in PE, or the arts or the business studies, or French or computer studies or cooperative education

3) Plus 1 additional credit in - science in grade 11/12 or French or technological studies or computer studies or cooperative education

In addition to the above - other must haves

12 optional credits
40 hours of volunteer service
the provincial literacy requirement

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/extra/eng/ppm/graduate.html

Now consider the 2012 budget - “Cap number of high school credits at 34 to curb number of students – now about 20,000 – who take a fifth year.
Encourage consolidation of small school boards, saving $27 million.”
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/03/27/ontario-budget-2012-highlights/

Now consider the student’s interests as well as the must haves to continued on into post-secondary studies?  Courses such as robotics, will go first and than the eventually paring down of the compulsory credits according to the teachers’ skills and knowledge and the type of students.

The cap of 34 credits, will now regulate the students’ selection, much the same way NL students are being regulated of the desired number of 40 credits, no more or no less, but there is no official cap. Plus NL, full time students are require to take a full course load of 7 to 8 credits, without any free period breaks. The 34 credit cap, will rule the roost, where 33 credits are the must-haves to meet the criteria for a secondary diploma, leaving 1 credit left for the students discretion.

My 16 year old,will have 44 credits at the end of grade 12, plus 5 more credits dealing with the Red Cross LIfe Saving certificates, and a certified coach for the Special Olympics. The total will be 49 credits. She is not the only one, and our local school give up trying to keep it at the 40 limit, because her grade 11 class, has about 30 students out of 60 or so,  who are heavy in the math and sciences, and are the courses that are necessary if one wants to applied at the post-secondary including the trades at the colleges

Lastly, ” If you assume that the average class size is 22, then the calculation becomes:
1,000 x 7 / 22 = 318 classes (approx.)
By having smaller classes, we have 38 more classes in the same school.  That’s 38 more opportunities for physics, chemistry, psychology, drama, and so on.  Having smaller classes INCREASES the variety of courses offered, it doesn’t decrease it. “

That is and if the , the student population equally values all of the course selections available to them. Physics, chemistry, or even psychology are the type of courses that reflects the student population. What happens if over 60 percent of the demographics are not the type of students who would meet the parameters to succeed in physics or chemistry?  In the local school, two years ago, it sure look like my 16 year would be taking quite a few courses online, but that will not be the case for her, because there is 30 other students that have joined her in the last 2 years. For the first time in a long well, there is a class of over 25 students taking the grade 12 calculus course. At the other end, there is 22 students taking basic courses in science and math. How many courses will fall on the wayside, when there is little demand for them?

If the small school boards consolidate, course selection will be reduce by a combination of the students’ course selection and the skills and qualifications of the teachers. The cap of 34 credits will effectively reduced the number of courses available. Then there is the other problem, staffing qualified teachers, who have crucial under-graduate degrees in math, the sciences, French, and the other courses that requires teachers to have the background to teach such courses such as Robotics or computer studies in senior courses.

But the reality is, a lot of teachers are teaching out of their field in Ontario. Plus 38 classes will also require the addition of staff, and if not, most of the teachers will no longer be able to enjoy their free period that were hard fought for by the union.Either urban or rural, it will happen, and I am predicting some school boards will opt for a longer school day in the near future, to accommodate the students and their course selections.

Yes the Liberals are saving jobs, but at the expense of the students’ interests and their futures after grade 12.

Years ago, we had a shortage of math and science teachers in our county.  With smaller class sizes requiring more math and science teachers, will this occur again, or will they limit the number of students taking these classes, or will they have people who don’t hold a degree in m & s teach the courses?

Nancy,

To be honest, in all of my years in education, I have never heard anyone argue for a LESS rigorous education system.

Bev,

Probably all of the above.

If they do ‘all of the above’, as you suspect, Wayne, then there will be fewer subjects available to students.  Aren’t the maths and sciences of paramount importance nowadays?  Capping class size therefore is not a good thing, as this will compromise some students’ futures.

Bev,

Let’s take your original points in order:

1) “With smaller class sizes requiring more math and science teachers, will this [teacher shortage] occur again…?”  Yes it probably will.  There have been problems finding qualified candidates in STEM subjects as is.  Further complicating recruiting will be the change to a two year B. ed.

2) “... will they limit the number of students taking these classes…?”  Possibly, but I doubt it.  It is more likely that they will find alternative delivery models like ELO (online).  Let’s say that a board has a small high school with some 150 - 200 students, and 5 have signed up for grade 12 Physics.  They have a medium-sized high school with 400 - 500 students and 14 have signed up for the same course.  The course may not run at either school because the numbers are too low.  However, if they give the five students access to computers, they could be added to the class list at the larger school making a class of 19.  Caveat:  this is not a good situation as I have mentioned - the success rate offering courses in this manner is very low.

3) “... will they have people who don’t hold a degree in m & s teach the courses?”  Bingo!

Now, to your second post:

4) “If they do ‘all of the above’, as you suspect, Wayne, then there will be fewer subjects available to students.”  No - both for the reasons above, and knowing the way administrators work.  I can tell you from experience that trying to justify to a principal why they should run a class of fifteen when the average class size is 25 is EXTREMELY difficult.  You may wonder why an average of 22 is any better - it is only different by three.  Here is the way their minds work:  a) we need to maintain an average of 22 students per class; b) a class of 15 is 7 below the average c) if we let that class run, then we need to have a class of 29 (22 + 7).  A class of 29 students is not great; but you can sell that to parents.  If your average class size is 25 instead, then you need to run a class of 35 (25 + 10) students somewhere if you are going to run a class of 15 (25 - 10),  Surprisingly, parents, students and teachers dislike classes of 35.

Sorry, I’m still not getting it why the government somehow expects that 2 or 3 fewer studends in a class is going to make a difference in terms of achievement.

Achievement can be increased sharply by grouping students by mastery, by teachers only teaching the subjects they have expertise in and by having clear behavior requirements for our students: show up on time, be quiet, pay attention, do your homework and to it on time.

Whoever does not at least want to learn, as proven by their attitude, should not be in a regular school.

I think treating high schools as a holding pen for teenagers who don’t want to be there is a misuse of everybody’s time and money.

At one level I agree their lives have a chance to be marginally better with a high school diploma than without one. However since the high school is really just a piece of paper that does not guarantee any skills most of them do not end up being better off.
I think it is high time we analyze the data and stop treating the high school diploma as a marker of success in education. It isn’t as long as it remains as it is today just a piece of paper that shows one HAS STAYED in school long enough and not a guarantee of basic skills and work attitudes.