On October 5, 2006, the Deputy Minister of Education sent a ‘clarification’ on the school fees court decision. Read the letter here.

Additional information can be found on the BCSTA web site. School_fees_V3_Oct03-06.pdf

FROM: BCTF web page. The Supreme Court of BC has released a decision re-affirming that the BC School Act, Section 82, prohibits schools from the charging of fees for materials that are required in courses leading to graduation. Greater Victoria school trustee John Young filed a petition to stop all school fees in BC’s public schools. The BCTF calls on the government to adequately fund the system so that students and their families do not face user fees. “All students should have access to the education experiences that help them grow and learn, regardless of their parents’ ability to pay,” says BCTF President Jinny Sims.

Over the past several years graduate and undergraduate students enrolling in research methods course have been engaged in conducting real time research on issues that matter to the wider community. These projects have dealt primarily with education issues (though some have focused on issues of natural resource policy). Full details and background can be found on my UBC faculty member web page www.charlesmenzies.ca.

Applied Anthropology, ANTH 409 / RMES 500Q (2006)

• Evaluation of Grade Ten Provincial Exams
• Globalization and Education

Ethnographic Methods Course, ANTH 516 (2003)

• EXTRA! EXTRA! Public Education Chokes on Cup of Campbell’s Soup (a report on media representation of educational issues)
• Keeping it Together: Challenges for Inner City Education in Vancouver
• An Ethnographic Analysis of Aboriginal Alternative Programs
• Death by a Thousand Cuts: B.C. Parent Ad-Hoc Organizations Concerned with Education

Ethnographic Methods Course, ANTH 516 (2002)

• Clark and Campbell Sitting in a Tree, C-U-T-T-I-N-G
• Effects of the Wrecking Crew: Maintaining the House of Education in Vancouver’s Inner-City
• Cents and Sensibility: The State of Special Education in Vancouver

A VSB report on the impact of school choice legislation, dated October 24, 2005, indicates that there is a modest increase in applicants for alternative programs. However, the data contains some serious flaws (which are all noted in the report). Primarily they have not made any attempt to filter out multiple applications by a single student. In terms of the overall number of cross boundary enrollments they tend to be clustered where one would expect them: Montessori, French Immersion, and Fine arts. The report also notes that the majority of elementary school applications (please note that applications do not equal actual enrollments) were received at the kindergarten level (878 for the 2005-2006 school year).

The number of applications for cross boundary enrollment equals about 2.5% of the overall VSB student population (not a very large number). The actual number of cross boundary enrollments for the 2005-2006 school year were about 1200 students (about one and a half percent of the total VSB enrollment).

Elementary schools with the greatest number of applications (which ranged from 44 -Carr, to 63 -Shaughnessy) were: Carr, Gordon Jamieson, Laurier, Shaughnessy, Osler, Queen Mary. Significantly fewer students where accepted than applied. Accepted to enroll ranged from a low of 4 (Shaughnessy) to a high of 20 (Gordon).

For secondary schools the largest category of cross boundary application where from nearby schools. Fore example, Templeton will typically receive cross boundary applications from students in the Van Tech and Brittania catchment. Point grey will receive applicants from Kitsilano and Magee. The other significant point here is that most applications for cross boundary occur at the grade 7 to 8 transition. The next point is for special programs like City School or IB which have grade ten intakes.

While the data is a year old there is no clear evidence for the missing students being caused by a flight to west side schools. The majority of students, about 98% choose their neighbourhood school over other schools. In addition, the report notes that a number of cross boundary students are there due to overcrowding in their neighbourhood schools.

One further point is that the VSB has decided, as of a Standing Committee I meeting of October 24, 2005, to only collect and analyze cross boundary enrollments every second year. That means that, unless they change their minds, the VSB will not analyze cross boundary enrollments this year.

SOS was founded in April 2002 as a response to news that provincial education policies would require budget cuts totaling $25 million for Vancouver schools. PAC parents met in a Vancouver living room and within just two weeks, collected over 14,000 letters to Premier Campbell and then Minister Clark supporting the S.O.S. campaign. All education partners supported this extraordinary effort, including Vancouver school trustees and DPAC.

At a January 2003 meeting, SOS parents endorsed the principles printed here – guiding principles for all SOS actions.

SOS continues to act as a loose, non-partisan network of Vancouver parents concerned about the effect of budget cuts on public education.

Since it’s inception an open email discussion list has been in place. Until recently the list was run through my personal UBC faculty email services. To allow a more flexible and community-responsive set up the list has been moved to a stand alone server on the Learning Pool. To subscribe to the new SOS List click here.

Are Parents Investing More or Less Time in Children: Trends in Selected Industrialized Countries – Policy Brief (4 pages)
Anne H. Gauthier and Others
Canadian Research Institute for Social Policy
2006

Contrary to popular belief, parents these days are actually spending more time with their kids than their predecessors in the 1960s – about one more hour per day. Time use data from Canada, the U.S. and several other industrialized countries illustrate that fathers in particular have increased the amount of time spent with their children. The researchers also noted that paid work did not appear to impinge on parental time.

Source: BCTF Information Services.

Families and schools working together: A study of parents’ and teachers’ perceptions of parental involvement in education in two Fredericton, New Brunswick, middle schools
by Caines, Paul Vernon, M.Ed., The University of New Brunswick (Canada), 2000, 155 pages

Newspapers, magazines, and governments continually describe and demand increased family participation in the education of their children as a universal remedy for many educational dilemmas. In fact, much research has established a clear link between family involvement in education and student achievement. Despite this recognized value, we seldom hear about the daily problems associated with involving parents in the educational process. The purpose of this study was to explore how parents are currently involved in their children’s education and elicit the attitudes and perceptions of both parents and teachers concerning what constitutes parental involvement in education. 1219 parents and 68 teachers were surveyed at two middle schools in Fredericton, New Brunswick, about parental involvement in education. Data were gathered using parent and teacher questionnaires adapted from the work of Joyce Epstein of Johns Hopkins University. In addition, focus group interviews were used to confirm and extend the quantitative to confirm and extend the quantitative findings.

This research also serves as an effective guide for targeting specific areas where intervention is needed to improve parental involvement in their children’s education.

See also the article by the same author in Principals Online

New resources available here on School-Based Management – the model being introduced in BC.

Those interested in Bill 33 might find the April 28th issue of particular interest.

Download March 24, 2006
Download March 31, 2006
Download April 7, 2006
Download April 21, 2006
Download April 28, 2006
Download May 5, 2006
Download May 12, 2006

Previous messages from deputy minister.

Here is the letter in support of the Safe Schools Act (download letter here) approved by VSB trustees at the VSB Education Committee III yesterday afternoon, as per the recommendation from the Pride Advisory Committee. It has been sent out to MLAs and other school districts across the province.

Update: May 12, 2006 Vancouver DPAC passes motion in support of Safe Schools Act at its May 11th executive meeting and calls upon the provincial government to ensure this Private Members Bill passes through the house during this session.

Please ask your associations if they would consider sending a letter of support in favour of the Safe Schools Act as well before the end of this session of the Legislature.

May 10th Committee of the Whole House debates on Bill 33, EDUCATION (LEARNING ENHANCEMENT) STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2006

John Horgan of the NDP Introduced a series of amendments that would have:

• replaced special needs caps with a weighting formula for
  calculating class sizes,

• limited sizes of special ed classes
• factored in ESL and other learning challenges
• funded the proposed changes

These amendments would have gone a long way toward addressing concerns raised by parents and other education partners. However, the Minister stated that such amendments would add too much to the cost of public education.

Rising in the house on a point of order, House Leader. M. de Jong, had the amendments ruled out of order as they would cause the crown to incur an charge. Here is the full statement as reported in Hansard:

Hon. M. de Jong: The issue that I think the Chair has to be cognizant of is, whilst on the surface the difference between “consult” and “consent” is obviously significant, to the extent that we are dealing with imposing a charge on the Crown, the difference may be particularly significant.
I am certain that the language was chosen carefully here — and it may be language that members opposite disagree with — but in the case of consult, there are obviously different ramifications than requiring the consent. Consent implies that it could be withheld, and, in that circumstance, there would be, obviously, financial implications that flow from having to reconfigure classes.
I think I understand the point that members are trying to make around the amendment, but the rule that I believe the Chair has to be cognizant of is that proposed amendments cannot impose a charge, or the prospects of a charge, being imposed upon the Crown. I’m sure members have thoughts on that, and we might deal with that first.

Read full draft transcript of debate here ( pdf file) Original Hansard records can be found here