Education funding: Is the party over?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ellie on January 20, 2012 at 10:49am

Hello Annie, any update of what the increase of the funds for the schoolboards will be yet?

thank you

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by paul taylor on January 20, 2012 at 4:44pm

A solution I believe to save education is to have a Business Unit making financial choices without the influence or direction of Teachers Unions. Teachers Unions generally sway huge powers that are overbearing on the quality of education by denying business case innovation. What business do employees have making financial choices and what are their backgrounds to make such choices in the private sector ? The Nova Scotia Teachers Union has been baled out to the tune of one billion dollars twice in my lifetime of 50 years and they are again looking for a third bale out.

In this day and age teachers are well compensated and are afforded pensions that have even built a fund with the Ontario Teachers Pension fund that purchased assets like Maple Leaf Entertainment and shopping malls. Business Unit independence should create means to profits in our education system. Profit and Capitalism is a condemned and dirty word in this country in regards to education. Profit via being a productive citizen in Canadian society is our only sustainable future. Profit and Capitalism built Canada. The placement of Solar Panels on many Ontario Schools to me is a ray of hope that school buildings are more then a building that has net costs for stakeholders in a community. Solar panels with Energy Efficiency can be another funding source for schools. with 190 school days a year the rest of the days schools are not in operation should be providing income for school boards and the taxpayer.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Shelley Stacey on January 27, 2012 at 6:55pm

The all day kindergarten has led to much discussion and possible changes in the HamiltonWentworth District School Board.

Our French Immersion program started at SK, however since the province looks at it as a Grade1 start their funding formula for the implementation of of the all day learning doesn't take FI into consideration.

Therefore, if the board sees the school needs 2 new classrooms they will fund 2.  If the board came back with the fact we need 3 due to French Immersion they will only fund 2.  Finally the capital costs given to the board doesn't take into account any necessary repairs beyond the room.  For instance a board receives x amount of dollars to build a purposefully built classroom for the all day kindergarten program.  Now in the case of older building the city may come in and say well since you are renovations you also have to do XY and Z to bring the entire school up to current building code.  However, no additional dollars will be given to offset these costs. 

Due to this extra cost that the board will have to take one they are likely going to have to move FI to a Grade 1 start.  As well, this additional cost of repairs will tax the board and likely cut funding that students would benefit from. 

I also fear that these cuts will directly impact the students as purchasing of books etc are the easiest to reduce.  Finally, I imagine there will be more pressure to raise funds through fundraising programs to enable schools to purchase items necessary to provide these items.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kate Tagseth on February 17, 2012 at 8:55pm

This report is remarkably biased, appallingly superficial, and short sighted. I understand there were limits imposed by the government on what was "on the table", however, the fact that there was no interest in cutting waste from EQAO or the Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat; there were no recommendations to cut upper management positions, just to name two obvious areas where $0.5 B could be saved, makes my point.

That it is the working class person, through increases in user fees (aka taxes), hikes in utility bills, and the short sightedness of cancelling full day kindergarten (keeps kids in school and parents are able to work and pay taxes), reminds me of a page from the Mike Harris Book of Management.

Let's hope this minority government is very selective in what it chooses to adopt from this report. The people of Ontario are watching closely on this one.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Greg Laws on February 18, 2012 at 1:43pm

In terms of Mr. Drummond's report, it actually does what he set out to do, and puts an economics only focus on public service delivery. I would agree with you/P4E that there needs to be a broader discussion of what a quality education looks like in Ontario.

Some of my reactions to the Drummond report are briefly summarized at my new blog;

Progressively (More) Educated

I'll also be one of the discussion leaders at the ConnectEd Canada Conference in May, where my session will be discussing some of the progressive models of education delivery from our neighbours to the south.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by M. Whinton on February 21, 2012 at 9:55pm

There is money in the system that could be relocated. Take as an example trustee associations like OCSTA and OPSA. It's time to rethink funding these lobbying associations given today's ability to influence Governments via social networks. With the internet and instant communication reaching across nations why would school boards (60 of them) need to take $150,000 a year each and spend it on a lobbyist group?. Many Boards already employ a communications / media officer that could perform the same function. The Catholic and Public School Boards could also start  associations that are run by volunteers. This would save between 4 and 6 million per year and 24 to 36 million by 2018 - just one idea. 

• ▶ Reply