The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10b Delegation Lamar Mason and Joan Spice re Program and Area ReviewsFrom: Joan Spice To: Ann McCrimmon Date: 05 -06 -9E Time: 10:12:32 AM Page 2 of 5 2- OTTAWA- CARLETON ASSEMBLY OF SCHO DELEGATION TO THE OTTA« A- CARLETON DISTRICT .June 8, 1998 TOPIC: Process to address the issue of school closures PRESENTERS: Lamar Mason and .Joan Spice Ottawa- Carleton Assembly of School Council: JUN 0 5 1999 cod&, td RffuhN 79 Mai EN■M The purpose of this presentation is to submit and elaborate on recommendations approved by the Assembly at meeting of May 21,1998 concerning issues related to a suitable process for addressing the issue of school closures. In our delegation presentation to the Budget Committee on May 19; 1998, we expressed the Assembly's support for the Board's strategy to delay school closures until September 1999. We also support your requests to the province: for a one -year extension in the deadline for declaring space surplus and closing schools; for additional funding to cover the cost of maintaining the "excess" school space in 1998- 99, and for a provincial review of all the elements of the pupil accommodation grant. Despite this support for the one -year delay, we would like to flag some concerns we have regarding the feasibility of arriving at school closure decisions for the secondary schools for implementation in September 1999. The new curriculum under secondary school reform is not expected to be available until next Spring. We are not sure that it is reasonable to expect that high school closures can really be implemented by September 1999. Our presentation is focussed on elementary issues at this stage though we recognize that the eventual configuration of secondary_ schools should be a factor in decisions at the elementary level. At its Max meeting, the Assembly recommended that the Board: (1) direct the Administration to develop, in consultation with OCASC, and present to the Board by the end of June, a realistic capacity model based on educational requirements and the existing characteristics of OCDSB schools: (2) commit itself to a Board -wide program and area review involving both elementary and secondary schools and a full parent- public - planner dialogue; (3) determine before the end of June the scope of the program decisions to be made during the Fall of 1998, so that stakeholders may prepare for the consultations; (4) plan for a series of inforniation/consultation meetings to take place during September and October 1998, beginning with public information sessions on the program and area review RwAftrwd # 980623 From: Joan Spice To: Ann McCrimmon Date: 05 -06 -98 Time: 10:12:32 AM Page 3 of 5 process /concepts and including 5 -8 consultation sessions involving staff. outside educational experts, and all stakeholders on the key program and area review issues; (5) commit itself to sharing data and information with parents and the community starting with the provision of background data (enrolment projections and student distribution data) this June. In speaking to you today, we would like to focus in particular on points (2), (3) and (4) dealing with issues related to the need for a Board -wide program and area review based on a genuine dialogue involving parents, the public, and the planners (Board staff and Trustees) and the need to establish by the end of June the nature and scope of the program decisions to be made in the early fall, and a detailed plan covering the review and consultation process envisaged. At the time of writing this note, we have not vet seen the staff proposals for the area review process scheduled for discussion at the June 10 meeting of the Business Services Committee. [We will elaborate on points (1) and (5) once we have seen the staff proposals, and bring our comments and concerns to the Business Services Committee.] It is our view that key program decisions which will have a significant bearing on space requirements must be made before area reviews can be undertaken and decisions made on which schools are to close. Further, if decisions are to be taken on school closures in time for implementation in September 1999, the key program decisions will have to be made sometime in the September to early November period. This would enable an area review process to be completed in the November to February period. The Assembly wants a consultative process which will allow enough time for its membership to receive the data and information, to digest and discuss it and to provide thoughtful and useful input before Trustees make decisions. We are convinced that this would not be possible unless the Board establishes and publishes a comprehensive plan and schedule by the end of this month. In our view, key elements of this plan and schedule are the following: (A) the program and other areas in which decisions must be made by mid -Fall: these are complex educationally and sensitive politically, but may be limited in number to those having a major impact on space requirements; e.g., - French Immersion programs - alternative elementary schools or programs - the deliver\, model for special education programs - school configuration (e.g. single, dual or triple track; magnet schools, clusters or families of schools). (B) the scope of the decisions to be made in each program area; e.g., - French Innnersion entry points: will the approach be a narrow one focussed possibly on what to do about only Middle French Immersion OR will there be a fundamental review of all entry points in terms of outcomes; AND would it include examination of totally different options, such as replacing either or both early and late immersion with middle immersion, or adopting a 5Oi50 program model as exists in some boards? From: Joan Spice To: Ann McCrimmon Date: 05 -06-98 Time: 10:12:32 AM Page 4 of 5 4. _Alternative schools: will the decision be limited to the expansion or elimination of the existing alternative schools OR on maintaining the status quo OR on a more fundamental review of the place of alternative programming as a fourth program option in a large number of schools Board - wide ?; - In special education, at least 10% of our students (and perhaps more) are in special education and there are significant differences in the delivery models now in place between the two former Boards. These differences (particularly in relation to the congregation integration debate) do have implications for school boundary and school closures decisions and will have to be considered in some way before these decisions are made. - It is important to maintain a focus on the shape of the education system we want to see develop in the Ottawa- Carleton District School Board in the long run. We believe that the Board should not take short-term approaches to program decisions, given the substantial cuts that will still need to be made in years two and three and four down the road. A short-tern approach might well mean further disruption to the children affected. (C) the inputs; - will there be a total population survey of parents and other stakeholders or a random sample on program choice, school configuration and other related issues: - will experts and practitioners from Ottawa - Carleton, other cities, other provinces or other countries be called in to provide advice on pedagogical issues and delivery models? OR will reliance be limited to staff. - will stakeholders be provided with bibliographies of the research and pedagogical literature on both sides of the issues? (D) the meetings - the Assembly proposes information meetings in September on both program and area review issues; - in our view, at least the first of these should be a public forum to provide basic information and set the context for both the program and area reviews -- all stakeholders would be invited: - others could take the forni of special meetings involving Trustees and stakeholders such as the two held in April on school closure criteria and guiding principles; - on some issues, focussed discussions in Board Committees may suffice. (E) detenmining and publishing the schedule and the plan - we would advise that the order, length of time and the dates for the review of each issue be tentatively established by the end of June; Le - the plan should be given wide publicity to stakeholders and the public at large as soon as possible. From: Joan Spice To: Ann McCrimmon Date: 05 -06 -98 Time: 10:12:32 AM Page 5 of 5 6-1 We believe that if the right plan is established and publicized in the next few weeks and if there is openness to a genuine dialogue in the preparation and review of options; stakeholders will bring forward the interest, the experience, the intelligence, creativity and the energy to provide you with crucial input into your decisions. OCASC recognizes that decisions on school closures, program offerings and the configuration of our schools rest with vou, the elected members of the Board, and that you must balance interests across the entire Board. We are, however, asking for your assurance tonight that if we rally our member schools and encourage their commitment to finding community -based solutions that also meet the Board's needs and objectives, that these will be seriously considered and accepted if at all possible. We ask that where such solutions are developed, they not be rejected without a full explanation based solidly on verifiable data and stated values and principles. We want your commitment that you will not vote on the basis of the strongest lobby group or backroom trade- offs among yourselves. Without these assurances, OCASC will have difficulty encouraging its membership to spend its time and energy in what will undoubtedly be a difficult and intensive process. If you can provide these assurances and deliver on them, this process could go a long way towards putting together a powerful alliance and foundation for building the best education system. P]