Skip to main content

Full text of "For the love of learning : report of the Royal Commission on Learning"

See other formats



' ms 




7«5 «>540 

For the „ , 

Love oi LeaifBins; 

Report of the Royal Commission on Learning 

Making It Happen 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2010 with funding from 

The Law Foundation of Ontario & the Ontario Council of University Libraries 

For the 

Love of Learning 

Report of the Royal Commission on Learning 

Volume IV 

Making it Happen 

e Quean* Pnnw for Ontano. 1994 

O document est aussi disponible en fran^t 

Cenadtan Catalacuii« In Publication Data 

Onuno. Royal ConwnissKyi on Learning 
For the love of learning 

Co-cttMr: Monique B^n, Gerald L. Caplan. 

Accomparued by a publication subtitled A short version and a CD-ROM. 

luued also in FrerKh urxler title: Pour I'amour d'apprendre. 

iTKiudes tNbliographlcal rafarences. 

Contents: v. I. Marxlate. corrtext, issues - v.ll. Learning: our vision for schools - 

V. III. The educators - v. IV. Making It happen. 

ISBN 0-7778-3577O 

1. Educatiorv-Ontano. 2. Educatior>-Aims and objectives. I. B^n. Monique. II. Caplan. Gerald L, 1938- . ill. Title. 

LA418.05056 1994 370'.9713 C9S964004-5 

Copie* of this report are available for a charge from: 

Publicadorts Ontario 
880 Bay Street 
Toronto. Ontario 

Access OntarK) 
RKleau Centre 
50 Rideau Street 
OttBtf. Ontario 

Maiiordar customers may contact: 
Pubiicalions Ontarto 
SO Grosvenor Street 
Toronto. Ontarto M7A 1N3 
Teiechone (416) 326-5300 
Ton-free m Ontano 1-80O468-9938 
F«i (416) 3264317 

Anyone «ial«ng to acc«M the sutynissiorts and record* of the Royal Commission on Learning should contact ttw Raoonla 
Managamertt Unit or the Freedom of Information arid Privacy Office of the Ministry of Education and Training. The raoord* wUI be 
retained there for three years and then permanently atored at the Archives of Ontano. 

^^ Pnmad on recycled paper 

Royal Commission 

Commission royale sur 
on Learning I'education 

Co-Chairs / Copresidents 

Monique Begin - Gerald L. Caplan 

Commissioners / Membres de la commission 

Manisha Bharti - Avis E. Glaze - Dennis J. Murphy 

December 1994 

The Honourable Dave Cooke 
Minister of Education and Training 

Dear Mr. Minister: 

It is with a sense of great hope for the future of the young people of Ontario that 
we respectfully submit to you the Final Report of the Royal Commission on 

Very sincerely yours, 




Gerald Caplan 


Manisha Bhani 


Avis Glaze 



Dennis Murphy 


RaiDi Cecco 
Executive Director 

101 Bloor Street West / 13th Floor / Toronto/ Ontario MBS 1P7 

Telephone (4 16) 325-2707 / Fax (4 16) 325-2956 / TOLL-FREE 1-800-565-0861 

101, rue Bloor ouest/ 13' etage / Toronto (Ontario) M6S 1P7 

Telephone (416) 325-2707 / T^l^copieur (416) 325-2956 / Sans frais 1-800-565-0861 

Volume I 

Mandate, Context, Issues 

Introduction to the Report 1 

A climate of uncertainty 1 

Some recent history of educational 

change and reform 2 
Improving Ontario's schools 3 
News, both good and bad 4 
Our way Into the future 5 

tjriy khiMhuuJ cdui-jtiun b 

Teacher development 6 

Information technology 6 

<ommunilv education 7 
The curriculum 7 
Making change happen 8 

("haptcr 1: 

The Royal Commission 
on Learning 10 

Public consultation 11 

Talking to people 1 1 

Media coverage 1 1 

dutreach 12 
Experts and research 13 
Commissioners' meetings 13 

Chapter 2: 

Education and Society 14 
Education In Ontario: A brief history 15 

< urriiiilum jHil tcuhing mcthdiK 17 
Education rights of the French- language 

minority 17 
Questions of purpose 18 
More recent educational history 18 

Hcmcntjrv vhimls i < 
Secondary schools 20 
Declining enrolments 21 
.Ma)or legislation in the 1980s 21 
Financing education 23 
Ixgislative reports 23 
Premier's council 23 

Public funding to private schools 24 

Anti-racism and ethno-cullural 
equity initiatives 24 

Ttu- sii;nifii..iiKc dI n-ii-iit policy changes 24 
Reflecting on change 24 
Ontario: Picture of the province 25 
Ontario's changing economy 25 

Unemployment 25 

Poverty 26 

Are education ami ecomxnic 
prospcTiIv connected? 26 

Demographic factors 27 

I he lainilv 27 

Emotional well-being 28 

Fertility rates 28 

Immigration 28 

Native peoples 28 

Visible minorities 28 < .iiholk .ind tr.incophone families 29 
Values and knowledge 29 
Educational statistics for Ontario 30 
Some indicators of how we are doing 32 
Costs of education 34 

Education expenditures 35 

Cost comparisons 35 

Salaries 36 

Pupil-educator ratio 36 

language programs 36 
A national and international context 

for educational reform 36 

Chapter 3: 

People's Voices 44 

The purposes of education and 

curriculum issues 45 
Teaching and teacher education 47 
Assessment and accountability 47 
Organization of education 

(governance) 49 
Public concerns and the 

Commission's mandate 49 

For the Love of Learning 

Report of the Royal Commission on Learning 

Chapter 4: 

Purposes of Education 52 

The issues 53 
Sharpening the focus: 

A set of purposes 54 
Schools in the broader community: 

A frameworl< 55 
Primary and shared responsibilities 56 
Linking purposes with responsibilities 57 
The hidden curriculum 58 
Values 60 
Conclusion 62 

Chapter 5: 

What Is Learning? 64 

What do we know about how 
learning happens? 65 

Learning occurs from cradle to grave 65 
Learning occurs with and without 

direct instruction 66 
Learning depends on practice 66 
Learning is a social process 67 
Learning occurs most readily when 

learners want to learn 67 
Learners have to know how to go 

on learning 68 
Learning is different for different learners 68 
There are barriers to learning 69 
Learning for life: The importance 

of early learning 70 
Informal to formal learning: The 

transition from home to school 71 
Active teaching and learning 72 
Exploiting the diversity of the group 72 
Extending the boundaries of the 

learning environment 72 
Creating a learning community that works 73 

Chapter 6: 

What Is Teaching? 76 

Characteristics of good teaching 77 

Teachers care about and are committed 
to students and their learning 78 

Teachers know the subjects they teach 

and how to teach the material to students: 
In other words, they know how to make 
knowledge accessible to students 79 

Guided by clear goals, teachers organize 
and monitor student learning 80 

Teachers do not always work in isolation; they 
learn from and collaborate with others, 
including students, colleagues, parents, 
and the community 81 

Teachers critically examine their own practice, 
and continue to learn throughout their 
careers 81 
Good teachers in their schools 82 
Conclusion 82 

Volume II 

Learning: Our Vision 
for Schools 

Introduction to Volume II 1 
Key Issues 2 

( iirri>.ulum quality 3 
Curriculum focus 3 
FairncM and opcnnns 4 
Ffficicncv S 
Strategies tor improvement: A learning 
system that focuses on the learner 
and on literacies 7 
I he system 7 
The learner 8 

A curriculum for literacies 8 
The literacies across the curriculum 10 

(Thaptrr 7: 

The learner from Birth to Age 6: 
Ihe Transition from Home 
to School 12 

The learner from birth to age 3: 

The literacies curriculum of home 
and care 13 

The learner from age 3 to 6: The literacy 
curriculum in a school setting 15 

C:haptcr 8: 

The learner from Age 6 to 1 5: 
Our (Common ( Curriculum 24 

The transition to compulsory 

schooling 25 
The foundation: The essential elements 

of the elementary curriculum 26 

Litcrji.y Lommunicatums sliills 2~ 

Numeracv/probiem-tolvmg 31 

Group learning and inlerpertnnal skills 
and value* 32 

Sciratifk literacy 36 

Computer literacy 37 

Core subjects 39 

I he .iris: I ),iiKc, ilr.iind. music, visual arts 40 

Career education 41 

History 43 

Official languages and mtcrndtinnal 
languages 43 

Physical and health education 46 

Technology ( broad-based i I" 
Continuity In curriculum and learning. 

Grades 1-6 48 
The transition to adolescence: Special 

consideration of the needs of learners 

from age 12 to 15 49 

Kciationjj needs 4V 
Planning needs 51 

The need for choice, decision-making, 
and control S2 
The curriculum as the basis of a 

learning system through Grade 9 54 

1 hi- iikKisiom oI ( ii.iiii- '■) 'v'l 

The focus on learner outc«)mes 55 

Curriculum integration 60 

Inclusiveness of The Common Curnculum 61 

Ch.ipter 4: 

The Learner from Age 1 3 to 1 8: 
Further Education and 
Specialization Years 66 

The current context of secondary 

education in Ontario 68 
Suggestions for reorganizing the 

secondary school 74 

The duration 74 

Curriculum organization 76 

Flexibility 85 

("urriculum content 87 

The transition to v^ork from Khool 
(and back again) 93 

Summary 94 

Adult education 96 

For the Love of Learning 

Report of the Royal Commission on Learning 

Volume III 

The Educators 

Chapter 10: 

Supports for Learning: 
Special Needs and Special 
Opportunities 100 

Supports for some students 101 

Support for students with different 
language backgrounds and different 
learning needs based on language 101 

Support for students with disabilities, 
and for slow and fast learners 108 
Supports for learning for all 

students 119 

Career education 120 

Social and personal guidance teaching 
and counselling 123 

Chapter 11: 

Evaluating Achievement 130 

Student assessment: What people 

told us 132 
The recent history of student assessment 

in Ontario 133 
Assessing individual students 136 
Assessing for individual improvement: 

The most important reason 137 
Accounting for student assessment: 

Reporting what is learned 140 
The uses of information technology in 

improving student assessment 143 
Avoiding bias in assessment: Respecting 

differences, recognizing diversity 145 
Large-scale assessment of student 
achievement and the effectiveness 
of school programs 148 
Large-scale assessment of student 

achievement 148 
The effectiveness of school programs: 

Program and examination review 151 
Reporting the results of large-scale 

assessments 154 
Conclusion 156 

Conclusion: What We Have Said about 

the Learning System 16 

Volume II Recommendations 168 

Chapter 12: 

The Educators 1 

Section A: Professional issues 1 

A statistical snapshot 1 

Why they become, and stay, teachers 2 

The culture of teaching 2 

The teacher and time 4 

Reaching into the community 5 

School-based professional development 6 

Concerns of teacher federations 7 

Supportive technology 7 

Teaching: The vision and the reality 7 

Teacher organizations and professionalism 7 

Collective bargaining rights 8 

A college of teachers 9 
Section B: Teacher education 11 

What did we hear? 12 

Historical context 12 

Current context for reforming 
teacher education 13 

Pre-service teacher preparation in 
Ontario today 14 

Teacher education for the future 17 

Professional development and 
lifelong learning 29 

Teacher education: Summary 36 
Section C: Evaluating performance 36 

What are the issues? 36 

Purposes of performance appraisal 38 
Section D: Leadership 40 

Principals 40 
Department heads 46 
Supervisory officers (SOs) 47 
Conclusion 53 

Volume III: Recommendations 60 

Volume IV 

Making it Happen 

Introduction to Volume IV 1 

( hjptcr I V 

Learning, Teaching, and 
Information Technology 4 

A new environment 6 
Possibilities and concerns 10 
Information technology's 

contribution to learning 12 
Making It happen 15 

Icachcr rducation 13 

Hardware P 

On-line: Learning it on the grapevine 20 
Other Instructional technologies 21 
Realizing the potential 23 

rVOntjni./UChalnc 27 
Conclusion 27 

Chapter 14: 

Community Education: 
Alliances for I earning 33 

The problem: Expansion of the role 

of schools 33 
Our response: Creating communities 

of concern 35 
A local focus for community 

education 37 
Supporting and sustaining a diversity 

of models 37 
Barriers to community education: 

Recognizing them and removing 

them 39 
Community education: 

Making It happen 42 
in »<.h<M>U i. 

... with familin 43 

... and the nrw Khool-communiiy councils 44 

... tvtth Khool boards 45 

... with the provincial govcrnmrnt: 
A4lopting an agenda for redesigning 
lysiems lo support community 

Setting a timeline for action 48 
Conclusion 49 

(Chapter IS: 

Constitutional Issues 52 

The Roman Catholic education 

system 53 

A brill hiiiory ol Roman Catholic schools 54 

Issues and recommendations 56 
Learning in French: Rights, needs, 

and barriers 60 

A glimpse of history 61 

Who are the Franco-Ontarians? 62 

Their constitutional rights 63 

The recognition of constitutional rights 66 

The future of a community 70 
Aboriginal peoples 73 

\V lu> arc the aboriginal peoples 
of Ontario? 73 

History of Native education 73 

What we heard 76 

Issues and recommendations 78 
Conclusion 83 

Chapter 16: 

Equity Considerations 86 

Religious minorities 88 
Language, ethno-cultural, and 

racial minorities 90 
Conclusion 96 

('haplor 17: 

Organizing Education: Power and 
Decision-Making 100 

Stakeholders and power 101 
The players 101 
Allocating and exercising 

decltiorwnaking powers 102 

SchooU 103 

School boards 109 

The MiniMry of Kducation and Training 117 

Ihi pros nil ul government 122 
Conclusion 123 

For the Love of Leamiiig 

Report of the Royal Commission on Learning 

Chapter 18: 

Funding 126 

Historical context 127 
Education funding in Ontario 128 
Current concerns 128 

Equity 128 
Adequacy 132 

Conclusion 133 

Chapter 19: 

The Accountability of 
the System 136 

Accountability in education: 

What does it involve? 137 
Who is accountable? 138 
indicators of quality 139 
Assessment agency 140 
Accountability and consistency 141 
Reporting 142 
Conclusion 144 

Chapter 20: 

Implementing the Reforms 146 

Previous reports 148 

The change process: How educational 

change happens 148 
What about the Commission? What do 

we hope our work will achieve? 149 
Engines or levers for change 150 

Early childhood education 151 

Community-education alliances 151 

Teacher development and 
professionalization 152 

Information technology 152 
What actions are needed? 153 
An implementation commission 154 
Other support for implementation 154 
Provincial actions 155 
Suggested short-term actions for 

the provincial government and 

for the Ministry: 1995-96 156 

The framework for reform 1 56 

Curriculum 156 

Assessment and accountability 156 

Power, influence, and equity 156 

Early childhood education 157 

Teacher professionalization and 
development 157 

Information technology 157 

Community-education alliances 157 
Actions by other stakeholders 157 
Cost issues 158 
A call to action 159 

Inertia 159 

Power issues 159 

Collective bargaining issues 160 

Overload 160 

Lack of resources 160 
implementation responsibilities 161 
Appendix 1: Action Plan for 

Government 163 
Appendix 2: Action Plan for 

Education Stakeholders 164 

For the Love of Learning 

Recommendations 166 

Appendices 182 

A: Submitters 184 

B: Youth Outreach 217 

C: Consultation with Groups and 

Individuals 220 
D: Public Hearings - 

Dates and Sites 222 
E: Schools Visited 224 
F: Background Papers - 

Author and Title 225 
G: Commissioners' Biographies 226 

Monique Begin 

Gerald Caplan 

Manisha Bharti 

Avis E. Glaze 

Dennis J. Murphy 

^ i"":]^^ 

\Ki'\¥*,'. *,W : y 

Introduction to 
Volume IV 



function of how actively various political interests ... 
solve education and social problems, and the 
degree to which they are willing to orchestrate their 
actions around a common agenda that takes the 
conditions of teaching and learning seriously. 

i Richard Elmore, Restructuring Schools, 1990 

owxhat we have outlined our vision of a renewed 
education system, we must confront the challenge 
of making it happen - of moving from vision 
to reality. 

In Chapters 13 and 14, we introduce and discuss our 
final two engines or levers of change - information tech- 
nology and community education. These are strategies 
powerful enough to shift the status quo in schools, making 
significant improvements possible in student learning. They 
are, in our view, crucial to accomplishing reform. 

Information technology can change the process of learn- 
ing and allow students to move beyond dependence on their 
teachers. Along with many others in education, we are 
enthusiastic about the potential of information technology 
to make learning more relevant to young people, and to 
foster higher-order thinking. In Chapter 13, we outline the 
conditions necessary to integrate information technology 
into teaching and learning, we discuss student assessment 
and technology, and we propose the supports needed for 
effective use of technology in schools. 

Chapter 14 introduces the crucial but often difficult strat- 
egy of strengthening the ties between schools and communi- 
ties - a process that may involve building a new sense of 
community. We believe that unless some of the extraneous, 
non-academic burdens are removed from teachers, it will be 
increasingly difficult for them to do their jobs well. It is only 
through closer links (among educators and other service 
providers, both at the local and provincial levels), that 
schools will get the support they need to focus effectively on 
the academic needs of students. 

Throughout the report, we have alluded to the special 
constitutional status of the Roman Catholic and franco- 
phone communities in Ontario, as well as aboriginal groups. 
In Chapter 15, we discuss how funding and governance 

structures must change to support the constitutional rights 
of these groups. 

In Chapter 16, we extend the discussion to other commu- 
nities. Representatives of particular religious, racial, and 
ethnic groups expressed some of the same concerns regard- 
ing funding, organization, curriculum, and student learning 
as do those communities discussed in Chapter 15. We make 
recommendations designed to overcome some of the prob- 
lems faced by these communities and their young people. 

How the education system should be organized has been 
a particularly contentious issue. Our recommendations in 
Chapter 17 are intended to strike a more appropriate 
balance among the various groups and institutions in the 
education system. Some readers may be surprised to find 
that we do not support some of the changes, such as drastic 
reductions in the number of school boards, proposed by 
various individuals and groups. Although we do not advo- 
cate radical changes in governance, we do make several 
recommendations that should result in significant improve- 
ments in the future. 

The thorny issue of educational funding is dealt with in 
Chapter 18, with recommendations for a more equitable 
funding model for Ontario schools, minimizing current 
disparities. Funding must be equitable. We propose, as have 
several recent inquiries into educational finance, that for all 
school boards in Ontario, the main source of funding should 
be provincial rather than local. Boards would be allowed to 
raise only a small amount through local taxes. 

Chapter 19 examines the important question of account- 
ability - who accounts to the public for what happens in 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Introduction to Volume IV 

whooU. Two types of accountability arc relevant: fiscal and 
program. We look briefly at each, and then discuss what 
additional measures should be taken to satisfy the public 
that the educational system is operating as it should. A 
publicly funded system must be publicly accountable. 

Finally, we address the crucial challenge of implementa- 
tion - how to transform ideals into reality. After reviewing 
some of the lessons learned about management and 

Mient of educational change, we suggest actions. 

.. ftxus particularly on the provincial govern- 
ment and the Ministry of Education and Training, wc offer 
suggestions for those at the heart of our education system - 
teachers, parents, and students. They all can and should 
participate in the process of reform. We are convinced that 
(.hange is necessary and that it can be carried out 

Throughout our report, this Commission has stressed 
that, above all, schools are for learning. The value of our 

Ijtions should be judged accordingly - the crite- 

. CVS IS student learning. 

Ftt itw LOM o( LMmmg 

vi- ^^ 

~ Sfc^WF-?-^-/^! 

rning, Teaching, 
and Information 

. oorlymotivated students, of whom our system 
has more than its fair share, are poor students. 
Information technology can become the link 
between the school and the real world of Ontario's 
young men and women - the component that 
makes schools, at long last, seem relevant to their 
lives, and that provides the motivation to re-think 
their attitudes to learning and the education 

Technology stands out in our classrooms as a symbol to 
teachers, parents and students that schooling can and will 
change, that classrooms may have some bearing on the 21st 
century after all.' 

When this Commission began its wori<, the concept of an 
information superhighway was famiHar to only a handful of 
Canadians; well before we had finished our work, no-one 
could escape media focus on it. When we began, CD-ROMs 
were a series of letters decipherable mainly by "techie" insid- 
ers; now CD-ROMs are barely avoidable, and it is widely 
understood that we have only begun to scratch the surface of 
the capabilities of interactive, multimedia technology. Who 
knows? One might even have Royal Commission reports in 
the form of CD-ROMs. (In a recent cartoon, one youngster 
announces to his pal: "I'm only attending school until it 
becomes available on CD-ROM.") 

When we started, the Toronto Star did not have a weekly 
section devoted to the world of technology. Nor was it possi- 
ble to submit a letter to the editor of the Ottawa Citizen 
through the National Capital Free-Net (based at Carleton 
University) or the world-wide Internet, nor to access our 
entire report, at no cost, on a brand new Toronto Free-Net. 

In fact, at the beginning of our work some members of 
the Commission, like many Canadians, did not have the 
remotest notion of how information technology could influ- 
ence the education system. But awareness among Canadians 
is growing: according to a 1994 Gallup poll (reported in the 
FreeNET conference on TVOnline), 54.4 percent of Canadi- 
ans are aware of the information highway and, among the 
services of interest to them, education ranked first. 

This report, like much of our work, was written (and it is 
being produced) electronically. We received e-mail on our 
computers, whether in the office and at home (although we 
found that e-mailing at home can be a wondrous, but some- 
times frustrating, endeavour). 

We teamed up with TVOntario to sponsor a computer- 
based, on-going conference on education issues, where more 
than two thousand messages were posted. Each of us had a 
voice-mail system, and we checked our messages fi-om as far 
away as North Bay. We also used voice-mail in conjunction 
with our 1 -800 number, as another way for people to share 
their views with us. 

We received submissions on audio cassettes and videos, 
and sponsored both a tele-conference when we were in 
Timmins, and a video-conference, linking groups in Ottawa 
and Toronto. 

Like a rapidly increasing number of people world-wide, 
we recognize that the revolution launched by the microchip 
is permanent; it will only accelerate from here, at a pace that 
is unimaginable to most of us. 

But, while technological innovations revolutionize every 
aspect of life, and while some Ontario schools have begun to 
recognize the promise information technology holds, much 
of our education system remains relatively untouched by it. 
We are persuaded that, if it were introduced and organized 
properly, and if teachers were adequately prepared, informa- 
tion technology would have a wonderfully positive role in 
education, right from the earliest grades of elementary 

This chapter discusses that potential. We define informa- 
tion technology as one of our four engines (see Volume I: 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning, Teaching, and Information Technology 

I...1 II.CJM «ir J.c >iif;^r-vviiif; iiiai ic>. 

•nunc good in ihc learning procns. 

Intrixluction), and think that in the classroom its essentials 
comprise a computer, printer, CiD-ROM player, and modem, 
although it docs not necessarily follow that each computer 
needs all that equipment at all times. There are, of course, 
expansion components, such as stereo speakers which 
enhance sound quality, and plotters for certain kinds of 
computer-generated drawings. 

Certainly, there are other technologies that may be useful 
for instruction, such as the relatively new videodisks and 
that old standby, the overhead projector; as well, there are 
technologies used for other school-related purposes, such as 
voice- mail to allow parents to verify homework assignments: 
and there are specialized software programs for everything 
from planning the Khool bus routes to controlling energy 
use in the school. For the purposes of this report, we refer to 
these broader instruments and applications as instructional 

We begin by identifying information technology in the 
context of educational reform, based on what we heard and 
read about the way technology is driving world changes - 
though less in education than in other areas. We note the 
conditions needed to integrate information technology 
tucceufuilv into teaching and learning, and then consider 
mor> Iters help students learn, teach- 

ers t( > k with each other and with 

experts on-line 

We divcuM siiiiiviii .l^■K^^ment. students using networks 
to gather information, and the natural affinity students seem 
to h ) '^ Wc alvt talk ab<iut the 

netw together, allowing them to 

learn more easily from each other and to share lesson plans 
and teaching strategies. 

\Si- develop a plan with some fundamental elements: 
developing teacher knowledge and skills, providing appro- 
priate hardware and high-quality software that has Cianadian 
content and perspective, and linking such computers to local 
and regional networks. We look at other instructional tech- 
nologies, such as interactive video, and note the importance 
of lA'Ontario in this field. Finally, we group our recommen- 
dations to emphasize the co-ordinating role we would like to 
see the Ministry play. 

Before proceeding, however, we want to emphasize that 
we are talking about information and other instructional 
technologies as tools for learning and teaching. Almost as a 
by-product, students also learn ct>mputer literacy, how to 
use the intimidating box that sits on the desks of too many 
managers unable to turn it on. Our children will learn the 
skills to exploit its full range of capabilities. 

In (Chapter 8, we recommended that computer literacy 
become one of the five foundation skills in the common 
curriculum. (New Brun.swick has already established a 
computer literacy requirement for graduates of high school 
and community college, starting in 1996.) This will provide 
students with the crucial skills needed to use technology in 
the workplace - and, increasingly, in the home. Moreover, 
"technology education is more than computers,"' which is 
why our discussion of curriculum includes the place of 
broad-based technology. 

A new environment 

While we are concerned that information technology has 
barely had an impact on Ontario schools, it does not mean 
we are suggesting that technology is an automatic good in 
the learning process. As Professor Ursula Franklin reminded 
the world in 77ie Real World of Technology, the 1989 CBC 
Massey lectures: 

Many technological tyMcmt .arc hasically anliproplc. People arc 
seen at Miurcrs of problcmt while technology it teen at a tourcc of 
toluliont . . . When ttudenti are teen a* not sufficiently competent, it 
It likely to be compuicrt that the tchool purchatct rather than extra 
leachen' time and extra human help.' 

We acknowledge that machines must be at the service of 
humankind - not the reverse. That is why we insist so vigor- 
ously that, without appropriate teaching strategies, informa- 
tion technology will not do the job required. 

For ttw Lovw of LMmtnc 

To realize any vision of smarter schooling by using technology, [we| 
must prepare teachers to use the technology. Apart from funding 
considerations, adequate teacher preparation is probably the most 
important determinant of success.' 

We are also wary of the excessive claims made for tech- 
nology's potential contribution to learning. We were told of a 
claim made in the United States that "over 20 years of 
research shows that when technology is used to enhance the 
instructional process, teacher productivity doubles and 
students experience at least 30 percent more learning in 40 
percent less time at 30 percent less cost."' Such statements, 
with their precise quantification of uncertain qualitative 
processes, do little to add credibility to the genuine case that 
can be made for the role of technology in education. 

Used improperly, a computer in the school is nothing 
more than a wasted resource. As one brief put it, "The 
educational technology road of the last two decades in this 
province is littered with the wrecks of unused and ineffec- 
tively used equipment."" 

Clearly, this is not just an Ontario phenomenon: at least 
one American educator and futurist asserts that "many 
schools are barely entering the Information Age. They are 
using computers as data processing devices. Whenever any 
technology comes into education, it's generally used to do 
the old job better."' We saw classes in which inadequate 
teachers were using computers and educational television, 
but still teaching inadequately. 

However, the new information technologies do offer the 
first qualitative change in the potential for learning since 
Gutenberg, whose book-based information technology struc- 
tured the education process for half a millennium. 

McLuhan's global village has finally become a reality in 
the world of education: learning need no longer be bound by 
time and place, and continuing education is transformed 
from rhetoric to reality. 

Something new is happening, with profound conse- 
quences for our schools; the only question is whether we 
harness it, or it overwhelms us. "In the space age, an 
improved horse and buggy remains a horse and buggy."' 

Understandably, overloaded teachers may view informa- 
tion technology as just the latest set of bells and whistles that 
complicate their daily lives. They may recall that educational 
television, which does offer some programs teachers can use, 
was once over- zealously promoted as the classroom of the 

AA Ht is time that educational tedv 
Inoiogy be presented to teachers 
as a useful tool with appropriate 
supporting resources rather than 
an additional burden for the 
teacher to master." 

Association for Media and Technology . 
in Education in Canada 


future, where there would be no need for teachers. Or they 
may remember the new math, and open-concept classrooms, 
both of which came and went. 

The fact is that many - probably most - schools are bare- 
ly in a position to make a serious commitment to informa- 
tion technology. As a study for UNESCO points out: 

[Information technology] can also be a source of frustration within 
the present tight and rigid organizational structure of education. 
Work pressure, lack of (hardware and software) facilities and the 
frequent lack of proper integration within the syllabus have a nega- 
tive effect.' 

That is why the Association for Media and Technology in 
Education in Canada (AMTEC) is so persuasive when it 
stresses that, "it is time that educational technology be 
presented to teachers as a useful tool with appropriate 
supporting resources rather than an additional burden for 
the teacher to master."'" We agree with the AMTEC member 
who insists such technology is "a teaching tool, not a 

But if many schools and teachers are not yet ready for the 
brave new world of information technology, two other key 
players in our society demonstrably are. The education 
system has become a major target of the gigantic informa- 
tion technology industry, which has a huge stake in every 
kind of software and hardware, and is taking aim at schools 
across the continent in an effort to expand its markets. 

While the Canadian push is being led by such large firms 
as Rogers, Southam, Corel, Unitel, and Stentor (an alliance 
of Canadian phone companies), the international drive is 
being conducted by some of the most powerful corporations 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning, Teaching, and Information Technology 

in the world: Time Warner, Paramount C Aimmunications, 
Microsoft, the computer manufacturers, as well as the domi- 
nant players in the gargantuan computer and video-games 

Indeed, some of the biggest Canadian concerns have 
formed links with vastly larger American corporations; 
AT&T, in concert with Rogers and CP, owns 20 percent of 
Unite), while Slentor has a marketing agreement with MCI 
Communications (Corporation. 

There is a second, often -ignored stakeholder in the school 
"business" who is more than ready for the information tech- 
nology culture: the "client" - the student. "It is not entirely 
facetious," according to some educators, "to say that Sega 
and Nintendo are in control of our children's educational 

There is a portrait of today's family that has a certain ring 
of truth: the child can set the VCR and play video games, 
while parents, however many university degrees they may 
possess, are left baffled. 

However. n<»l all youngsters have expensive Super Ninten- 
do games at home, and certainly not all have home comput 
ers. with or without CCD-ROMs; it is estimated that about 
one in four homes now has a computer, and that as many as 
two in three will do so by the end of the century. Obviously, 
children who already have the greatest socio-economic 
advantages will be the most likely to have the latest, and the 
best, information technology. 

But. regardless of background, children know about 
Gar music videos, V'(,Rs, video cameras, 

Cl)s and the like: especially among 

bayt, rvm in poor neighbourhoods, arcades open to them 

the world of video games and multi function remote 

Children do not regard these as marvellous or breath- 
taking, but as part of the furniture - in precisely the way 
their parents were brought up to regard telephones. Indeed, 
even in the quintessential low-paid, dead-end job. the Mcjob 
at McDonald's itself, everything depends on computeriza- 
tion. "This technology, in their minds, is and always has 

This goes a long way, as the UNESCO report notes, "to 
explaining why teachers armed with chalk and a blackboard 
are no match for these powerful new media."" And it is why 
York University's committee on technology in education 
organized a 1994 conference, "(Ihalkdusl to Chips." 

Nonetheless, we arc aware of schools in Ontario where 
students at the senior elementary level have a computer class 
only once in each six-day cycle, with two youngsters sharing 
a single machine for .^.S minutes. Furthermore, if the 
computer classes fall on a holiday, or when a student is 
absent, the opportunity to learn computer skills can occur 
perhaps once every three weeks. 

This kind of scheduling may be done m good faith, but it 
is a bad joke for students, especially because of the strong 
affinity this generation shows, under the right circum- 
stances, to moving from games to the most sophisticated 
computer applications (e-mail, world-wide bulletin boards, 
computer-animated graphics, electronic file transfers, 
computer-assisted instruction, etc.). 

While it may be difficult to credit - for those who have 
never had an opportunity to observe school children work- 
ing with computers - we saw many remarkable classes and 
.some schools where technology is real and is having an 
impact on both leaching and learning. 

At River Oaks in Oakville, an experimental elementary 
school that begins at the junior kindergarten level, we were 
stunned by the sheer energy and enjoyment we ob.scrvcd. We 
later wondered why every Ontario school should not gener- 
ate the same sense of excitement. 

This seemed an especially sensible question because our 
personal imprevsions are apparently borne out by academic 
evaluation. Professor Ron Owston. associate dean of the 
Faculty of Fducation at York I'niversity. and director of the 
university's Ontrc for the Study of Cx»mputers in Fxlucation, 
recently completed a three-year analysis of the effect of 

For itrm Um* o( L*«ming 


computers on the writing skills of River Oaks students from 
Grades 3 to 6. Compared to a control group who wrote 
without use of computer technology, Owston found that 
"computers improved the structure and organization of 
students' work both in narrative and personal writing." 

By Grade 6, students with keyboarding skills were writing 
3,000-word stories and were impressive in their ability to 
organize these very long tales. Finally, their ability to access 
information through the Internet or on CD-ROMs - atlases, 
encyclopedias, image banks, "conversations" with peers in 
Japan - allowed them to create richer works. "Interestingly," 
Owston says, "while the quality goes up, so do the students' 

However, it is crucial to note that River Oaks is far more 
than a high-tech school: it is a highly structured operation 
based on a cogent philosophy of learning that is shared by 
all its staff. As principal Gerry Smith writes: 

Technology is a tool to help realize a school philosophy that is quali- 
tatively different from most schools in this province. Restructuring 
the curriculum has been the major focus of River Oaks since its 
inception. Curriculum should be meaningful and relevant. Curricu- 
lum should focus on a blending of theory with practice. There 
should be provision for both the "old basics" and the "new basics" 
such as accessing, managing and processing information, collabora- 
tive and co-operative working skills, problem-solving and learning 
how to learn. Learning should be integrated. Children need to learn 
with context. 

Associated with our curriculum restructuring are the three E's. The 
curriculum should be able to engage, enable, and empower students 
to achieve their full potential. That's why we can't stress too forceful- 
ly our conviction that computers used improperly are merely anoth- 
er wasted frill and a poor investment in a time of relative scarcity.'" 

At the Lambton County Roman Catholic Separate School 
Board in Sarnia, we saw a board-wide information technolo- 
gy project that was similarly impressive, and we looked on as 
students at Sir Wilfrid Laurier High School in suburban 
Ottawa used their spare periods to practise high-level 
computer graphics. We heard descriptions of enviable 
programs across the province, from Thunder Bay to Lively to 
Scarborough, where innovative teachers are ensuring that 
female students are full partners in technological areas that, 
traditionally, were assumed to be masculine enclaves. 

• children who already have 
the greatest socio-economic 
advantages will be the most 

likely to have the latest, 

and the best, information 


• teachers armed with chalk 

and a blackboard are no 

match for these powerful 

new media. 

• the education system has 

become a major target of 

the gigantic information 

technology industry. 

We've seen highly cost-effective experiments, such as the 
one at the Wellington Separate School Board's Holy Family 
Centre: timetables at three area schools are co-ordinated, 
and school buses provide transportation so that students, 
including some younger students, can use the centre's 
computer classroom. 

We had compelling briefs detailing how computer-based 
technology could be used, for example, to individualize a 
child's education from age 4, based on special needs and 
aptitudes. In Cochrane, a Grade 1 1 drop-out who is now 
involved in computer training for adult learners, told us how 
her three-and-a-half-year-old grandson uses a computer to 
do word recognition exercises. 

Of course, computers are used for distance education. We 
were told that the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education 
has experimented with a course taught exclusively on a 
computer network. With disks and CD-ROMs, courses can 
be distributed to students who have access to computers. 
Where correspondence courses used to consist of books and, 
more recently, audio and video tapes, the 1990s calls for files 
and data to be downloaded from networks. 

We studied reports of a large number of information 
technology projects and experiments in American schools, 
which those involved describe as transforming the nature of 
learning for kids and teaching for teachers."* 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning, Teaching, and Information Technology 

All tn« cttanfM m mnow*- 

. -vcnoots acrou Ontano 
ono fH««wAef« are the 
(««uR o(n«w approachM 
•■arninc and teacAin(. 
vk tated by V«e muoduc 
Uonot mformaiion 

Po»*lbilltl«« and concerns 

At ihii ^!ui:u. It li u.MtuI tu Mtcp back in order to indicate our 
concerns about the entire area of information technology 
and education. There arc. of course, some limitations related 
to the current state of the art of computers - limits over 
which we have no control and which will shrink constantly 
as science and technology progress. But we are looking at 
those caused by the system and, therefore, within our ability 
to affect. 

First, most of the success stories we have described 
involve specific projects, carefully prepared and operated by 
intensely committed and often knowledgeable individuals; 
the projects have usually received special funding. Therefore, 
It requires quite a leap of faith to extrapolate from their 
findings to a system of mass learning. And there arc many 
other conditions that will need to be met before we can 
reasonably expect all classrooms to reflect the successes of 
the few experimental ones. 

"Technology is not likely to have a qualitative impact 
unless it u deeply integrated into classroom purposes and 
activities."'' In other words, information technology by itself 
does not lead to change: the determinants are the ways it is 
used and integrated into all learning and teaching, the quali- 
ty and appropriateness of the software that is chosen, and 
the abilities and interests of teachers. 

Higher-order learning skills, for example, are not devel- 
oped unleu the right software is being used in the right way. 
Similarly, traditional didactic approaches are left behind 
only if there i* - ipment and if the particular 

teacher using if> ,:v feels comfortable with the 

changes imrolvrd." 

In sum, all the changes in innovative schools across 
Ontario and elsewhere arc the result of new approaches to 
learning and teaching, fiuihlatfil by the introduction of 
information technology. 

Second, we want tt> emphasize that, in the end, computers 
and the related technology arc nothing more than machines 
- even if their ability to process information still dazzles the 
human imagination. In fact, wc doubt they will ever replace 
the joy of reading a great book as a form of continuing 

Paradoxically, however, technology's very dynamics, and 
the furious pace at which it is being pushed, leads to a fear 
that the ability to control its evolution is already beyond our 
control. Is technology in the saddle, riding humankind? 
Perhaps not yet, but unless we attempt consciously to 
harness it for socially useful purposes, we may soon be over- 

Third, major questions remain unanswered about 
decision-making on the information highway. Indeed, the 
fascinating issue, given our mandate, is whether we are talk- 
ing about an information highway, where the public interest 
prevails, or about an information mall, where commercial 
concerns dominate. Who will decide whether the interests of 
the public and the community or of the private sector will 
be paramount? 

There arc also very important equity issues related to the 
educational use of information technology, which must be 
subject to the same high levels of equity wc expect in all 
areas of education. 

Wc are concerned that, unless it is handled sensitively, the 
introduction of information technology may well reinforce, 
not minimize, artificial barriers to learning. 

Common sense tells us that financial constraints deter- 
mine students' access to technology; obviously, children 
from poorer families arc less likely to have computers at 
home than those who are more privileged. Statistics Canada 
reports that 23.3 percent of Canadian households have 
computers, excluding those used only for games or business, 
but that this figure doubles in households with incomes of 
more than S60,000." In that sense, schools equipped with 
information technology may give poorer students far greater 
equality of opportunity than they have now. 

Wc believe that all schools need adequate numbers of up- 
to-date computers and that all schools must be part of a net. 

For t^e Lova of I.Mminc 

The only disparity that might exist between and within 
boards should favour communities where fewer homes have 

Unless we find a way for poorer children to have access, 
outside the school, to information technology equipment 
(linked to a network), it is quite likely they will eventually 
fall behind. The possibility of creating a new class of techno- 
logical literates, with disproportionate privileges, is only too 
real. And, of course, this new class comes disproportionately 
from the more affluent sections of society. That is why 
schools must offer all students the opportunity to master 
this literacy. Indeed, whether high school students choose 
the more applied or the more academic focus (as we 
describe the new options), it is certain that almost every 
conceivable future work possibility - even at McDonald's - 
will require knowledge of technology and its uses. 

In developing and using software, we must ensure that 
negative stereotypes are not reinforced. If software were 
assessed centrally, using the skills of professional educators 
across Ontario, it could eliminate the need for every school 
board or school to carry out such assessments. This would 
probably ensure that all software in Ontario classrooms, 
whether distributed directly by the Ministry, the Ontario 
Software Acquisition Program, or simply recommended as a 
resource, was of high quality and was balanced. It is impor- 
tant that the effects of information technology on various 
social groups be monitored. 

There is some concern that boys may grasp much of the 
new technology more eagerly than girls, presumably for the 
same socially conditioned reasons that girls are less comfort- 
able with science and math.'" The introduction of informa- 
tion technology to all school children when they are very 
young, as a routine and integral part of their lives in school, 
should go a long way to making technology gender neutral; 
if necessary, particular interventions should be considered to 
accomplish this. In positioning computers as centres of 
learning, we must take care that girls are not relegated to the 
periphery, or to mastering only the superficial aspects. 

Astonishing work has been done in developing software 
specifically for students with learning disabilities.'' But it can 
hardly work if these youngsters lack access to the proper 
tools. Therefore, teachers in information technology 
programs geared to individualized instruction can guide all 
students who have special education needs. Gifted children 

A Special Education 
Teclinology Team 
and Centre 

Providing computer technol- 
ogy to students with 
disabilities is not enough: 
decisions have to be made 
on the appropriate selec- 
tion of hardware to meet 
individual needs. Further- 
more, teachers must be 
taught to use hardware and 
software, and their use 
must be monitored. 

The York Region Roman 
Catholic Separate School 
Board formed a special 
education technology team 
to do just that. Including a 
speech and language 
pathologist, a vision 
teacher, a consultant for 

the developmentally 
delayed, a physiotherapist, 
and a computer technician, 
the team developed a 
system to review requests 
and to make recommenda- 
tions on hardware and soft- 
ware. The team also took 
charge of teacher in- 
service in the area, and 
established the Special 
Education Technology 
Centre. The success of the 
team and of the centre has 
led other boards to consid- 
er similar initiatives; the 
former superintendent (now 
a director in a different 
school board) who initiated 
this project suggests that 
they be developed at the 
provincial level. 

can move ahead at their own pace, and can even become 
mentors to their peers - perhaps even to their teachers. 

Another concern is a vital component of schooling, its 
social aspect. Our aim is not to have students retreat into 
themselves, talking only to the computer. We were pleased to 
see many situations in which students work in teams, teach- 
ing each other on the computer. This is important. It is also 
important that they have the opportunity to learn the impli- 
cations of computer technology: how is society dealing with 
automation in the workplace? in leisure? in learning? 
Students should be exposed to the ethical dilemmas of all 
technologies. "A technologically literate person must ... 
understand the relationship between technology and social 
change."" And we emphasize again how much we want 
students to read books, not just computer screens: books 
have a different smell and feel that must not be lost, no 
matter how attractive technology may be. 

Infusing our schools with information technology equi- 
tably and using its impact to re-create schools, curriculum, 
and teaching will not occur overnight. There are costs to 
consider, the need to develop skills and knowledge among 
educators, and the development and acquisition of software. 
And, of course, we want to create a network (or "net") to 
link schools together, so that they can learn and share as a 
global community. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning, Teaching, and Information Teclinology 


''Nothing motivates student 

to higher performances more 

than a sense that what they 

are studying is of real 

relevance and importance to 

themselves, their lives and 

personal aspirations ... the 

key to a door to rewarding 

work or exciting opportunity 

... (a| link to the real world 

of students." 

GrilMm Orpwood. Faculty of Educatton. York university 

The next part of this chapter deals with the elements ot a 
successful transformation of the school system, driven by the 
engme of information technology. We note the need for co- 
ordination, so that networks can speak to each other, so that 
software is evaluated only once. We discuss the kinds of soft- 
ware needed in our schools, emphasizing that - like books 
and other teaching materials - there must be a strong Cana- 
dian presence in information technology; and, of course, we 
discuss the need for more and better hardware in our 
schools. But first we bring this and another engine - teacher 
development - together, because teachers have a key role in 
Snneint; computers to life in our schools. 

Information technolo^'s contribution to learning 

Information technology makes a number of singular contri- 
butions to the world of learning. First, as is abundantly clear 
from all the examples we have described, it makes schools 
feel relevant m a way that nothing else has or can. Student 
after student appeared before us complainmg persuasively 
about the irrelevance of schooling to their lives. "Nothing 
mot ints to higher performances," writes Professor 

Gr.ii '<Ki, of the Faculty of Education of York 

Univenity. "more than a tense that what they are studying is 
of real relevance and importance to themselves, their lives 
and personal aspirations ... the key to a door to rewarding 
%rork or exciting opportunity ... |a| link to the real world of 

Poorly motivated students, of whom our system has more 
than its fair share, are poor students. Information technolo- 
gy can become the link between the school and the real 
world of t)ntario's young men and women - the ct>mponent 
that makes schools, at long last, seem relevant to their lives, 
and that provides the motivation to re-thitik ihc-ir attitudes 
to learning and to the education system. 

American educators use almost identical language to 
describe the consequences of strategically introducing infor- 
mation technology into schools where they teach, supervise, 
or have studied. "Teachers reported and were observed to 
interact differently with students - more as guides or 
mentors and less like lecturers," one writes about high 
school. "At times, students led classes, became tutors, and 
spontaneously organized collaborative work groups." 

After several years, "significant change" was observed in 
the way students thought and worked. In fact, the greatest 
difference between students in a carefully planned and struc- 
tured information technology program and those in conven- 
tional schools is "the manner in which they organized for 
and accomplished their work. Routinely they employed 
inquiry, collaborative, technological and problem solving 
skills uncommon to the graduates of traditional high school 

At the same time, teachers, "began teaming, working 
across disciplines, and modifying school schedules to accom- 
modate ambitious class proiects," while, in elementary 
schools, "traditional recitation and scat work have been 
gradually balanced with inter-disciplinary, projcct-ba.scd 
instruction that integrates the same advanced technologies 
in use in high school." 

No wonder the writer concludes that "the catalytic impact 
of technology in these environments cannot be under- 
estimated. We have watched technology profoundly disturb 
the inertia of traditional classrooms. For example, technology: 

• encourages fundamentally different forms of interaction 
among students and between students and teachers; 

• engages students systematically in higher-order cognitive 
tasks; and 

• prompts teachers to question old assumptions about 
instruction and learning." ' 

While the C<»mmission largely avoids the cliche "para- 
digm shift," it is surely appropriate in this context. Ortainly, 

fufi th« Lov* of L*am«n| 

Students who get into the habit of checking their ov 
learning and understanding are self-assessing, an 
important skill at a time when, increasingly, people are, 
required to consider how well prepared they are for 
jobs and a society that changes rapidly around us. 

such changes in a school environment, if real, constitute 
nothing less than a transformation of the learning culture for 
those involved. Education is being re-invented for them. 

Other researchers make equally irresistible claims. The 
heads of the Institute for the Reinvention of Education at 
Pennsylvania State University insist that new technology can 
help students learn and develop at different rates; make them 
proficient at accessing, evaluating, and communicating infor- 
mation; foster an increase in the quantity and quality of 
students' thinking and writing; help them learn to solve 
complex problems; make them globally aware and able to use 
resources that exist outside the school; create opportunities 
for them to do meaningful work; and even nurture artistic 

In an earlier chapter, we pointed out that computers have 
a role in giving students immediate feedback on their 
progress. Computer-mediated assessment can allow students 
to test themselves, checking to see if they have mastered a 
new skill or have the knowledge required to move on to 
other work. There is evidence such techniques teach students 
that they have the capacity to improve, while immediate 
feedback has been shown to motivate students who might 
otherwise have very little interest in school. 

Students who get into the habit of checking their own 
learning and understanding are self-assessing, an important 
skill at a time when, increasingly, people are required to 
consider how well prepared they are for jobs and a society 
that changes rapidly around us. As students take greater 
responsibility for assessing themselves, the pace of learning 
changes and becomes more individualized. All of this may 
unavoidably alter the way schools and learning are organized. 
We believe it is vital for schools to manage this process rather 
than simply being bystanders to it. 

However, our discussion would be only half complete if 
we were to focus solely on how students make use of 
computers to learn more, better, and faster. The other half of 
learning in school is teaching; teachers have shown that they 
can make innovative uses of information technology to 
change the way they teach, responding to more student 
needs, and facilitating the better learning we have been 

Of course, it is probable that good teachers always want to 
use direct instruction, as needed, to convey certain lessons. 
Nevertheless, we are satisfied that information technology 

can be beneficial in fostering the diverse techniques of teach- 
ing/learning that the best teachers employ. 

No doubt it is true that neither all teachers nor all parents 
will welcome the greater role for student initiative and inde- 
pendent learning that is virtually the guaranteed result of 
using any good software program. They, after all, allow the 
user to navigate through the material independently, explor- 
ing directions and pathways well beyond any teacher's possi- 
ble control or planning. We welcome this new capacity, and 
are confident that the overwhelming number of children in 
our schools, if directed by well-versed teachers, will be able 
to use it productively and constructively. 

With these tools, we can "move classrooms away from 
conventional didactic instructional approaches, in which 
teachers do most of the talking and students listen and 
complete short exercises on well-defined, subject-area- 
specific material. Instead, students are challenged with 
complex, authentic tasks, and reformers are pushing for 
lengthy multidisciplinary projects, co-operative learning 
groups, flexible scheduling, and authentic assessments." 

In this kind of reformed classroom, "authentic tasks are 
completed for reasons beyond a grade. Students also see the 
activity as worthwhile in its own right." This attitude is 
greatly facilitated because students "take great pride in using 
the same tools as practising professionals," not to mention 
producing work that often resembles that of a professional." 

In the longer term, the increasing independence of most 
students should provide teachers with some relief from time 
pressures, time they might then dedicate to students having 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning, Teaching, and Information Technology 

Vicki Hancock and Frank Rctts of the Education and 
Technology Resources Centre of the Association for Supervi- 
sion and Curriculum Development stress that, in informa- 
tion technology programs, teachers "expect far more of their 
students and present more complex material. The range of 
learnmg experiences extends far beyond those offered in 
traditional classrooms."' At the same time, more individual 
attention by the teacher is possible, allowing different learn- 
ing styles to be accommodated. 

Teacher -cent red cUuroonu lend to evolve inio ttudenl-LcnIred 
ones. The lescher acts more as a coach than an information 
dupcTuer. More collaboration and imall-group work occurs. 

Another computer, this one in Maine, tells of a 
school that cancelled the computer classes in its lah and 
integrated computers into its curriculum, so that students 
would not just learn to use computers but would learn ideas. 
The exciting results: 'Students have become even more 
actively involved in their work ... [and] 'average' students 
grew as involved and interested as gifted' students."" 

Similarly, an Knglish and iournalism teacher in San Diego 
reports that the use of technology in her classes has led "all 
students, from gifted to special education, to take control of 
their learning." In a community with high drop-out rates, 
she found students fully engaged, and notes that "co-opera- 
tive learning is encouraged." enabling her to spend "more of 
my time as a facilitator of learning rather than .m .ill 
knowing expert."" 

These findings are entirely consistent with our miprcs 
sions of Ontario schools we visited, as well as with what 
both teachers and students throughout the province say 
about their own reactions." 

From their experience, educators in the Netherlands add 
that while "the computer will never replace the teacher ... it 
will change the role of the teacher to increase the time and 
attention that can be spent on groups of pupils who are 
often neglected at present - exceptionally j-ifted children and 
pupils who lag behind."" 

In its brief to us, the Association for Media and lechnol- 
ogy in Education in Canada (AMTEC) described studies 
that concluded: 

Educational technology can create nevk' avenues tor sonal exchange 
and co-operative learning. Fear* that computers will result in 
students working in isolation removed from all forms of human 
interaction can be dispelled by watching students m classrooms 
organized to promote peer interaction. Students solve problems 
collaboratively, often with their teachers as partners.'' 

They also discuss a 1990 project of the University of 
British Columbia and the Educational Technology Centre of 
British c;t)lumbia, to integrate computer-related technologies 
in 12 schools. The result was that teachers found the 
computers had a positive impact, not only on children's 
learning but also on their social and emotional growth. 
"There was a feeling," according to the report of the project, 
"that the motivational aspect of the computer encouraged 
the students to spend more time at the computer, which led 
to developing skills in critical thinking, creative thinking and 
problem -solving." 

Moreover, when multimedia programs were used, "teach- 
ers commented that children put more effort into their 
learning and reached high success levels." Those who have 
seen a group of Grade 8 boys at River Oaks - hormone- 
hoppers, as they are quaintly known - ignore the lunch-hour 
bell so that they can continue working on a collective project 
will recogni/c this rare school syndrome. 

The British Columbia project also concluded that 
computers positively enhanced students' attitudes toward 
learning in general, and belief in themselves as learners: 

There was some speculation that the intriguing mechanical/technical 
aspect of computers was a factor in motivatmg children, but more 
often teachers felt that the contribution computers could make to 
building telfesteem. empowering and enabling the learner, and 
building confidence and feelings of success were tvhat really 
sustained the high interest and use. 

For \h» Lov« of L«amin( 

With the tools of technology, students can dramatically raise knowl- 
edge levels, learn problem-solving techniques, develop the skills 
required to manage massive amounts of information, analyze 
concepts from several different perspectives, and develop the hard- 
to-quantify higher-order analytic and critical thinking skills that are 
required in the global marketplace." 

We know that individuals learn at different rates, and, 
while Howard Gardner's theory - that each of us has many 
different kinds of intelligence" - has gained widespread 
acceptance, in the real world of a large classroom, it is 
extremely difficult for a teacher to act on this knowledge. 
Information technology begins to make it feasible to order 
learning to fit the individual child's characteristics. 

Further along the continuum, a digital electronics 
program at Humber College in Etobicoke has resulted in a 
computerized learning infrastructure that made it possible 
to offer individualized instruction, continuous intake of 
students throughout the year, and computer-managed learn- 
ing (CML). According to the creator of this program, 
"perhaps the most important advantage of individualized 
instruction is the fact that students are forced to learn how 
to learn on their own . . . Most become confident learners 
and are very pleased with themselves." 

Under CML, each student progresses through his or her 
courses. The program 

delivers homework assignments, supervises examinations, checks 
answers to assignments and examinations, provides students with 
reports on test achievement, allows entry of grades from faculty 
graded projects such as labs, checks data gathered from lab measure- 
ments, and provides comprehensive statistics of the student's grades, 
classes, objectives, and test-question success." 

In addition to enhancing student learning, information 
technology offers teachers ample opportunities for using 
computers (and the communications networks they access) 
to share ideas, learn from each other, and form collaborative 
networks of professional educators. 

The Commission learned a great deal from the Culture of 
Change Electronic Village, a province-wide network of the 
Ontario Teachers' Federation, which allows teachers to link 
to each other. OTF has structured the network so that, in 
many Ontario communities, it is only a local call; the system 
features "conferences" of all types, where teachers can 
discuss issues, share lesson plans, and pose questions. 

"Some things only teachers 

can do. Teachers can build 

strong, productive 

relationships with students. 

Technologies can't. Teachers 

can motivate students to love 

learning. Technologies can't. 

Teachers can identify and 

meet students' emotional 

needs. Technologies can't. 

Technology-based solutions 

can, and must, free the 

teacher to do the important 

work that requires human 

interaction, continuous 

evaluation, and improvement 

of the learning environment." 

Kyle Peck and Demise Dorricot. 
in "Why Use Technology?" 

According to Globe and Mail education writer Jennifer 
Lewington, who solicited comments from participants, the 
results are encouraging."' Said one teacher, "It is one of the 
best sources of professional development that I have come 
across and made use of in the past 18 years." An external 
evaluator commented that the network "is one of the most 
powerful tools for policy feedback." 

We envision this network growing, increasing the number 
of teachers involved and expanding the topics for discussion. 
We also foresee the possibility of school boards, education 
faculties, and others using the net to send educational 
research, the material for an in-service course, or new 
Ministry curriculum guidelines. The possibilities are exciting. 

Making it happen 

Teacher education 

Almost all reports of successful projects in information 
technology describe its profound transformative effect on 
the role of the teacher. In the long term, UNESCO reports, 
the teacher goes from "know-all to guide, from soloist to 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning, Teaching, and Information Technology 

(A MmWI M»dl« Cwrtr*) 

■ ••'s ifi ir>e Mel/opol^ 
ronio Separate 
I Board hM« a mutti^ 
: J re«ource centre 
) they can learn about 
t tectmotoctes; K 
I computers, elec- 
iheytwards. matert- 
^mt, ana resources used to 
provide irvservtce tvorfc 

shops to teachers in (our 
schools. The vKorKshops 
are organued dunng arKl 
after school hours: 
students also txam access 
to the centre NetworVing 
among the teachers has 
already led to development 
of integrated theme units 
irKorporating the arts and 

accompanist."'' He or she tends to become more of "a facili- 
tator someone who creates the conditions for learning and 
organizes the learning processes."" 

What gives these many diverse reports credibility in our 
eyes is the sensitivity they shovk' tovk'ards the teacher's place 
in the new world of information technology. \'irtually all the 
researchers believe that information technology can work 
only if teachers are intimately involved. Some wax almost 

Som< things only icjchen can do. Teachers can build strong, 
productive rciatioiuhipi with students. Technologies can't. Teachers 
can motWaic students to love learning. Technologies can't. Teachers 
can identify and meet students' emotional needs. Technologies can't. 
Tcchnology-baied solutions can, and must, free the teacher to do the 
important work that re<)uires human interaction, continuous evalu- 
ation, and improvement of the learning environment." 

But no-one, however excited or knowledgeable about 
tech: '(.ves that teachers can play their new roles 

witt; ,>>nal doelopment. "Our teachers need train- 

ing." the lx>uncil of Directors of Education of Ontario (old 
the Commission. "We are asking professionals, educated in a 
paradigm of the teacher as information dispenser, to be 
cogi ' ' piiwers and potentials of the |new| tech- 

no!' . It funding and support, teachers will not 

likely be able to equip themselves with the tools necessary to 
be an educator in the 1990s and beyond."" 

Teacherv says an American educator, must be given the 
opportunity "for not only learning how to use the technolo- 
gy but also learning strategics for using technology with 

The first step is to make current teachers comfortable 
with information technology - using it themselves, teaching 
with it, and selecting the software that will best fit their 
courses. In fact, a number of teachers arc already familiar 
with the world uf educational technology. But the majority, 
quite naturally, are probably as intimidated by the new tech- 
nology as people elsewhere - including those on this 

We do not expect tens of thousands of Ontario teachers 
suddenly to be transformed from techno- peasants to techno- 
pedagogucs, able to turn traditional schools into cyber- 
centres where teachers and students surf the tcchno-wavcs. 

But there is no reason why all teachers cannot learn to be 
modestly at home in the world of information technology, as 
long as appropriate time and resources are made available to 
prepare them properly. Nonetheless, we have been told that 
the commitment to teacher in-service is woefully inadequate 
in most school boards across the province. While some are 
taking necessary action, it appears that most boards, already 
resource challenged, do not provide anything like sufficient 
resources for technological development.' 

The other step is to provide more and better technologi- 
cal education to all those entering the teaching profession. 
We can surely take for granted that most of them will 
already have some considerable knowledge of the world of 
information technology: at the minimum, all are likely to 
have prepared their university essays on word processors, 
and each new year's crop can be counted on to take the latest 
technology more for granted. But, as they undergo the long 
process of becoming really accomplished teachers, it is 
crucial that they know about technology and especially how 
to teach with technology. That is true whether they intend to 
teach in elementary or secondary schools, or whether they 
become calculus or literature teachers. 

In earlier chapters on teacher selection, initial prepara- 
tion, and on-going development, we recommended that 
students' prerequisites for entry to a faculty of education 
include a demonstration of a basic familiarity with informa- 
tion technology. The definition of a basic familiarity will 
change as more and more applicants see computers as just 
another tool; however, we would suggest that all applicants 
should be able to use a word processor (and use it regularly 
to do papers), know how to use other types of software, such 
as databases and drawing or painting programs. 

For the Love of Learning 

There is no reason why virtually all teachers 
cannot learn to be modestly at home in the world 
of information technology, as long as appropriate 
time and resources are made available to prepare 
them properly. 

Given our emphasis on computer-based communications 
networks, all applicants should have used communications 
software to link to an electronic bulletin board. Happily, 
there are hundreds in this country, including many that are 
school based, school-board based, or public. 

With student teachers who are equipped with this back- 
ground, the task in initially preparing them for their profes- 
sion is to give them knowledge and skills in applying infor- 
mation technology in the classroom. This means knowing 
how to integrate computers in all areas of the curriculum. 

While we are not suggesting that teachers know a given 
educational software program, we do argue that they need to 
know how to select high-quality software, appropriate to the 
age of the students and their current tasks, which might be 
available in a school or board resource centre. Teachers, with 
the assistance of their school boards, the Ministry, teacher 
federations, and education faculties, must develop a level of 
comfort with information technology. 

We emphasize that this is a joint effort: teachers must see 
the value of information technology in their work and in 
their daily lives, while school boards must see the impor- 
tance of computers in the classroom. We suggest that teach- 
ers take advantage of the educational discounts for computer 
hardware and software available to them, as well as to train- 
ing courses provided by school boards and others. Each 
person must take responsibility for achieving a level of tech- 
nological comfort and expertiise necessary for being a 
teacher in Ontario's modern school system. 

But we also suggest that the range of courses be enhanced 
to give practising teachers the knowledge and skills to use 
computers in the classroom successfully. Aside from schools 
in which there is a shortage of computer equipment, all 
teachers not now using computers in the classroom should 
be expected to modify their teaching strategies and to 
become involved. 

There is nothing irrational about teachers being afraid of looking 
stupid in front of students who know more about computers than 
they do; similarly, the difficulties of integrating computers into daily 
classroom practice with no system support are not imaginary." 

Teachers who regularly use computers in their regular 
classroom work, should have opportunities for advanced 
study. Universities, school boards, federations, and the 
Ministry must work together to ensure that both types of 
professional development are available. 

Throughout this report, we have attempted to demon- 
strate how the four engines assist each other synergistically; 
in this instance, the relationship between technology and 
teacher preparation must be organic. 

At the same time, if we are correct in believing that early 
childhood education predisposes children to learning, 
schools that offer the kind of motivation provided by strate- 
gically directed technology are building welcoming institu- 
tions. And as more and more homes computerize, the possi- 
bility of families working together on technology-related 
projects becomes increasingly likely; this makes the availabil- 
ity of computers especially important for students from 
poorer families who, while they may not have computers at 
home, will at least be systematically introduced to informa- 
tion technology at school. 


Common to much of what we heard and read is the matter 
of access. Unless both the software and hardware become 
widely available throughout Ontario schools, the bright 
promise of technology will remain a dead letter for the great 
majority of Ontario students, ft appears that, in the past, the 
government saw meeting this need as a high priority. Paul 
Ryan, a Windsor teacher and president of the Educational 
Computing Organization of Ontario, told us that 

There was a time when the province of Ontario, through the 
Ministry of Education and Training, provided vision, and leader- 
ship, and the funds to make things happen. The development of the 
Icon computer; a comprehensive computer science curriculum; the 
initiation of the GEMs [grant-eligible micro-computers, those that 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning, Teaching, and Information Teclinology 

C— pii>«n Acre** 

,ilt SL JoacfMm School m 
ffie OuffefifvP«e< Roman 

- lie Scftool Board. 
^ ixjtert are not just tAe 
JpMin o( students arxl 
-^Iwctisis m regular class 
rooms. The school, nvhich 
has tteen entirelyMred 
using ICON computers, has 

placed computers in the 
dasarooms used t>y the 
chUd/youth worVer. ESL, 
artd special educatKxi and 
resource teachers. In addh 
tton. there are workshops 
that involve parents and 
the sclKX>i IS using comput 
ers to communicate with 
students in KentucKy. New 
Orleans, arxl Maryland. 

mei ihe .Minutry* trilcru and were, ihcrctorc. lointly linjnccd by 
lh< kHooI board and the Miniur>'| (o allow whooU to purchase 
hardware and softttrarc, the cncoura((ement of the development of 
Ontario toflware for Ontario schooU by Ontario companies; [and| 
the estabiuhment o( a Ministry department to facilitate technology 
use acrms the curriculum helped us leap ahead of other provinces 
and slates. The result was not only a significant improvement in the 
classroom experience for both students and teachers, but a burgeon- 
mg of Ontario's high-tech industries. 

Over the last few years, though, the vision has clouded, the drive has 
been kwt. and the funds are drying up. Schools are hard pressed to 
continue existing programs, and Ministry policies created through 
hard work and consultation with educators and industry are down- 
graded to 'tuggestiofu* . . The recent decision to cut the existing 
GEM grants by V) percent was not a positive move." 

Of course, funds arc drying up for all manner of worth- 
while programs, and it is hardly surpri.sing that the comput- 
erization program suffered its share. As aware a.s we are of 
the financial realities, wc strongly urge the Ministry to give 
pri<" iHilicies and program.s for 

aciji. V. as well as for the develop- 

ment ot networks in classrooms, and that it maintain a sepa- 
rate budget line in thu regard. 

But we are all perfectly aware that financial constraints 
will 'Ic future, the provin- 

cial . expected to comput- 

erize the province's education system on its own. In fact, it is 
not possible to equip schrmis for the technology revolution 
without the full participation of the wider Ontario commu- 
nity. As i> 't ion of Canada 
said in it^ 1994: 

All levels of government, industry and the academic community 
must work to equip Clanadian classrooms with ihe necessary tools 
(modern computers, communication capabilities, qualified educa- 
tors and a learning infrastructure) to make IT (information 
technology) a serious learning tool." 

Given that everyone knows government alone cannot 
afford to cover these costs, we see this as a direct challenge 
above all to the business community, which has the opportu- 
nity to use its resources to back its often-stated educational 
concerns. Business demands that schools produce graduates 
who are creative, thoughtful, and problem -solvers. Because 
so many business spokespersons believe that future Canadi- 
an prosperity depends on the ability to exploit high-tech's 
new tools, we assume they will want to help schools techno- 
logically enter the 21st century. Otherwise, it is almost 
impossible to see that happening. 

In fact, while we were very impressed with the computer 
environment at River Oaks, we could hardly fail to realize 
that it is very much an experiment, apparently made possible 
only through donations from the private sector. The Holy 
Family program - a pilot project whose concept can be 
adapted to families of schools, school and public libraries, 
and school boards serving the same geographical area - was 
also able to acquire hardware at special prices. 

Lambton County, whose information technology project 
impressed us so greatly, sacrificed its music program in 
order to move toward the information superhighway - a 
Hobson's choice in a world that already has far too few good 
music programs. Education partners in this province must 
find ways to provide all students with cost-effective, technol- 
ogy-based learning, without having to sacrifice other valu- 
able learning experiences. 

There is a need for more, and more up-to-date, comput- 
ers. We have seen the way computers arc distributed in 
Ontario's schools, and wc arc less than convinced that 
computers dating back to the early 1980s arc going to help 
us move into the next millennium. Many very creative teach- 
ers arc successfully using the 20,0(X) (Commodore 64s and 
Pets (including SuperPets and 128s) that, according to 
Ministry data, were in schools in 1993. 

While it is better for students to have some familiarity 
with computers than none at all. these old machines even 
lack hard drives, let alone have the capability of running 
today's software or connecting to C^P-ROM players and 

Forth* Low of Leammg 

Education partners in this province must find ways to 
provide all students with cost-effective, technology- 
based learning, without having to sacrifice other 
valuable learning experiences. 

modems. A Commodore 64 built in 1983 has the same rela- 
tionship to today's basic desk-top that a horse and buggy has 
to a jet plane; it becomes increasingly difficult for these 
primitive machines to play the role we believe is potentially 
possible in transforming the very nature of learning. 

In 1993, the federal Department of Industry, Science and 
Technology announced it would redirect surplus govern- 
ment computers and processing software to school systems 
across Canada. As of September 1994, some two hundred 
computers had been delivered to those Ontario school 
boards designated by the national advisory board that had 
been established to oversee the allocation process. (A survey 
carried out for the program showed that more than 100,000 
computers were requested nationally.) 

Although we have some concerns that equipment consid- 
ered obsolete by industry is not going to help schools stay on 
the leading edge, we think it a worthwhile project for the 
Ontario government and the business community, many of 
whose members regularly discard large numbers of used 
computers. As it happens, computers donated to schools 
may be considered a charitable donation for the purposes of 
federal tax. 

Of course, the private sector can do more than simply 
contribute computers it no longer needs. Just as they come 
together in the Learning Partnership (formerly the Metro 
Toronto Learning Partnership), computer companies and 
others can help to ease computers into schools. While 
competition may drive the economy, it is not always the best 
way to support schools. Companies that refuse to work 
together, for example, which leads to different and incom- 
patible operating systems, do not help schools. We are 
encouraged, however, that computer companies are part of 
the Learning Partnership. 

It also seems to us that students who have access to 
computers after school, on weekends, and in the summer 
have access, in effect, to the school. They can continue their 
learning as if they had never left the building, while those 
without access may be left behind. Therefore, we are heart- 
ened by such examples as the North York Public Library's 
Children's Computer Centre, which consists of nine comput- 
ers in three branches, used by children during library hours. 
While some 25,000 did so in 1993, the centre is not linked to 
a net, and a library is not the same as having access at home. 

In the meantime, we believe that as part of a communi- 
ty's support system, such facilities and services as communi- 
ty recreation centres and public libraries should have 
computing centres where families can learn about and 
through computers. While we have been told that such a 
program existed some years ago, we are not certain that it 
was given the resources and priority required to establish it 
for the long term. Such centres might well be located in 
schools but, wherever they are, they must be accessible for 
extended hours. 

The best hardware is just a great paperweight unless it 
can run excellent software: the instructions that tell comput- 
ers how to compute, that make up the programs which tell 
them what function to carry out, and that are necessary for 
communicating with other computers. 

There are two types of software for schools: first, the 
many programs that have been developed especially for 
schools and that revolve around some particular part of the 
curriculum (geography or problem-solving, for example), 
and second, the kinds of programs that are widely used at 
home or in the workplace: word processing, databases, 
CADD, communications, graphics, and machine control, for 
example. Both are needed in our schools; relying on only 
one is not in the best interests of students. Educational soft- 
ware can become outdated and boring very quickly, while 
business or personal software can help students learn or 
practise certain skills, but is not directly linked to the 

We are concerned about the quality of software, educa- 
tional software in particular, and about who creates that 
software. The Ministry has taken a very positive step by 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning. Teaching, and Information Technology 

Mump4« Um« 
•f T*C*HM>tOC> 

'■*ary s Sscondary 
bt ' ocH. m WW PetsftXK- 

I. vtctona. NorttHjmb«f 
and NmcasM Roman 
Cathode SctKMX Board, 
mcorporates technoto^ m 
■ wrtde van«ty of learning 
•nvtrorvnenis. In one 
■Uarx). students experv 
tnoe a wtde vanety of the 
type* of software used 
commof^ m todustry 

Of course, the sctKKM 
canrwl have all the soft- 
ware that IS available, but 

It strrves for a reasonable 
cross-section a«>d develope 
skills readily trartsferable 
to other computerued 
processes St. Mary's 
currently has a PC-dnven 
LEGO robotics kit. 
computerassisled design 
(CAO). multimedia 
development artd scannlr\g 
capability, colour pnnting, 
computer photo retouching. 
computer-tMsed silk 
screening, video editing, 
computer graphics, 
desktop publishing, 
animation, and interactive 
multimedia software. 

making CorelDraw and ClarisVVorks available in every 
school, but much more needs to be done. It appears, for 
example, that software is not reviewed for quality, appropri- 
ateness, and bias in the way books arc in the Circular 14 

Software is shared haphazardly, and teachers do not have 
effective ways of sharing their evaluations of software with 
each other. We know that individual boards are dedicating 
scarce resources to writing software and selling it to other 
boards, when joint projects or provincial initiatives might be 
more appropriate. 

It seems to us that if a piece of software is effective, there 
is no justification for it being used only by boards that can 
afford it; there is a need for far more cost sharing and co- 
ordination in this area. 

Above all, a wide range of high-quality C'anadian software 
is needed: using American-oriented software is no more 
acceptable in Ontario schools than using American-oriented 
textbooks. VNlien Microsoft ('orporation and Sega decided to 
produce educational software, as they have done aggressively 
in the past year, we can be confident that the Canadian 
perspective will not be among their priorities. 

For that reason, we agreed with the suggestion of the 
Minister of Culture, Tourism and Recreation that Circular 
14, the list of texts approved for Ontario schools, be broad- 
ened to include other learning materials, such as videotapes 
and software, and that it focus more on Canadian materi- 

\: IS been made. For example, 

the ' I Program (OSAP) exists to 

obtain educational discounts on selected software and to 

distribute a catalogue of these titles to school boards. Its 
advisory committee includes teachers from across the 
province who recommend exemplary software t»i the 
Ministry, based on suggestions from school boards. OSAP 
also arranges for discounts; individual school boards are free 
to buy the software they deem most worthwhile at the 
discounted price. 

Through its role in distributing master copies of the soft- 
ware, TV'Ontario is a partner is this process. We believe this 
model has a good deal of merit, and we hope it can be the 
main vehicle for software acquisition in Ontario. 

While we do not want to prohibit the use of software 
from other jurisdictions, we do want to ensure that students 
have access to software with Canadian content and a clear 
reflection of the Canadian perspective. There is a strong 
federal regulatory process for the electronic media, which 
ensures minimum levels of Canadian content. We believe 
that nothing less should be acceptable for educational soft- 
ware. We considered two routes: either to provide incentives 
for software development in Ontario or Canada, or to 
contract with Ontario or Canadian software companies to 
develop software that meets the curricular needs of schools. 
Given our earlier recommendation that the Ministry take 
direct responsibility for developing a provincial curriculum, 
we are drawn to the latter option. 

On-line: Learning it on the grapevine 

At ihc beginning ol ihc icnliirv. the utile red st.h<>ol housc 
contained more Icnowlrdgc than the surrounding community; today 
the opposite is true. Schools leading in this area are creating links 
using the technology to these information resources using modems 
and networks.'' 

The potential educational value of such networking 
should not be underestimated. It opens up a way of expo- 
nentially expanding the physical limits of the school. Some 
students and teachers already have access to other students, 
teachers, experts, and resources, including the Internet. 
Although such networks as the OTF C^ulture of (Change F.lec- 
tronic Village (to be further developed into the Educational 
Network of Ontario), TVOntario's TVOnlinc, the 
Network, and SchoolNel exist, and the Ontario Education 
Highway is "under construction." most schools and students 
are not on-line. 

For tfw Ijom of Loamlitg 

We believe that, while every school should probably have 
its own net, every school - every classroom, in fact - should 
have access to at least one net beyond the school, one that 
has a link to the Internet. 

Another wonderful example is the writers in electronic 
residence program (WIER). Begun in 1987 by Trevor Owen, 
then a high school teacher but now teaching at York Univer- 
sity's Faculty of Education, it began with two schools and 
was originally networked through Simon Eraser University. 
Today, the program has links with 70 schools, where 2,500 
students from as far away as Baffin Island and the Northwest 
Territories can ask any one of seven distant poets and novel- 
ists to critique their efforts. Owen calls it an electronic liter- 
ary salon."* 

One of the exciting implications of such a program is 
that it is genuinely equitable. As anybody on the Internet 
knows, social leveling is intrinsic to information technology; 
Trevor Owen calls it "on-line equity." Suddenly, students are 
not judged on where they live, what they look like, what 
gender or race they are, or on anything other than the quali- 
ty of their communications. However unintended, this is 
potentially an enormously gratifying consequence of infor- 
mation technology. 

It is worth noting that, aside from other benefits, 
networking schools and school boards can produce signifi- 
cant cost savings. By making documents such as curriculum 
materials, policy documents, and news releases available on- 
line, the Ministry could reduce expensive printing and 
distribution charges - a good example of working smarter. 

The investment in the creation of a province-wide "electronic 
highway" would guarantee small schools in remote parts of the 
province or schools with limited library budgets the same access 
to the information source as large schools in affluent, major, 
urban areas." 

The Ministry's announcement, in mid- 1994, that it would 
be providing $5 million to link existing computer networks 
in the education community is a positive first step to 
strengthen existing alliances among education partners. But 
it is only a first step. 

The private sector has been active in this area. Rogers 
Cable Systems is testing the use of cable (in place of tele- 
phone lines) in delivering access to information networks in 
schools in North York, Ottawa, London, and Woodstock. 

School Net in London 

Both Princess Anne Public 
School and H.B. Seal 
Secondary School in the 
London Board of Education 
are participating in School- 
Net, a pilot project connect- 
ing schools across Canada 
to networks. In addition to 
providing access to 
libraries and databases, 
experts and others, individ- 
ual students find that 
SchoolNet offers more 

personal opportunities. For 
example, one Princess 
Anne student is playing 
chess with a rated player in 
Saskatoon. Others are 
sharing poetry and letters 
with students in the United 
States, Denmark, Hong 
Kong, and Russia. One of 
the authors of a Grade 8 
textbook has offered to 
answer any math questions 
via e-mail. 

Their competitor. Bell Canada, is working in communities 
around Sault Ste. Marie to enhance their ability to access 

School and public libraries must be one of the major 
resources for storing and transmitting electronic informa- 
tion. Some of the most valuable software is expensive, and 
cannot and need not be duplicated in each classroom. 

In either case, students and teachers should have access to 
such information, and both school and public libraries 
should be developed as public access points. It may also be 
possible for software to be located physically in one building 
but be accessible by modem to a family of schools. 

We have already recommended that the provincial 
government support the establishment and operations of 
community computer centres. If these are to achieve their 
full potential, they will have to have access to national and 
international networks at rates they can afford. The public 
libraries of Ontario have already signalled their interest in 
developing and participating in networks to provide every 
Ontarian with access to information.^" 

Other instructional teciinoiogies 

As we said at the beginning of this chapter, we focus on 
information technology as one of the four engines for 
change, recognizing the power of the computer, especially 
when it is linked to computer networks beyond the school. 

However, there are other technologies that are potentially 
useful. Most students and teachers are already familiar with 
overhead projectors, film projectors, video cassette recorders, 
tape recorders, and calculators. There are, in addition, other 
technologies that are, or should be, used in classrooms. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning, Teaching, and Information Teclinology 


a ^Ptie investment in the creation of 
I a province-wide 'electronic high- 
way' would guarantee small schools 
in remote parts of the province or 
schools with limited library budgets 
the same access to the information 
•ourc« as large schools in affluent^ 
mafor, urlMMi areas." 

Sax <nd f- Ls'- ten. 

Wc arc particularly excited by the potential contribution 
interactive telephone and video-conferencing can make to 
learning. Where there are too few students in one school to 
warrant a course in a specialized field of enquiry, interactive 
conferencing offers a solution. If schools are equipped writh a 
conferencing facility, one teacher might be able to teach 
students in a number of schools, thus givmg them the 
opportunity to take the course v^ithout incurring the high 
cost of human resources. 

Naturally, there is an advantage if students can both see 
and hear each other, rather than just hearing their peers. We 
believe there is room for the development of an interactive 
video-conference facility, perhaps in every secondary school 
in the province, starting with those that are small or isolated. 

A more mundane use of technology involves the tele- 
phone. We have all faced the sometimes-daunting task of 
climbing through a voice-mail tree, trying to reach the right 
person. However, we believe that, despite sometimes negative 
experiences, voice- mail can be a very useful tool for schools. 
It might, for example, provide a menu of recorded messages 
for parents with such information as a schedule of report 
cards and parent-teacher interviews, plans for an open 
house, or other events. Or the system might be structured tn 
allow parents and students to verify the evening's homework. 

Another device, now being used by s<jme schfKils, is record- 
ed me^vigcs on public libraries' telephone lines. Thi.s. too. 
might be used to give parents important information. 

Here is a role for the private sector - the phone companies 
in particular - if these technologies are to become a reality in 
the education system. Schools can be given special rates, for 
example - also an important element in achieving the 
nctwDrkmtf of Ontario's schmtis that wc described earlier 

There arc other tcchnt)logics that arc familiar today or 
will become so in the future, including videodisks, which are 
superior to videotapes. (As we note later, TVOntario is 
working with vidcodisk technology.) Computers equipped 
with software and hardware that convert text to speech are 
useful for students with disabilities. There are other innova- 
tions, such as pen-based computers, computers that recog- 
nize speech commands, and others. Each may have a role to 
play in enhancing learning. 

Wc cannot overlook the usefulness of technology in the 
business side of schooling - administration, human resource 
management, busing, property management, etc. Already, 
the Ministry has taken a leadership role in this area, working 
through the Educational (iomputing Network of Ontario 
(ECNO), a partnership with Ontario school boards, which 
can use the software ECNO develops. We laud this initiative, 
and encourage the Ministry to extend it, in order to elimi- 
nate any existing duplication in the development and 
purchase of software that could be centrally developed and 

Because they reach beyond local communities, conferenc- 
ing facilities arc an important component of distance educa- 
tion, which is an area where others around the globe share 
our concerns. UNESCO, for example, is very interested in 
the uses of technology, including communication technology 
such as video-conferencing, in promoting adult education 
and distance education. It is encouraging governments to 
"I enable I large groups to take part in education irrespective 
of time and location." 

Contact North is an interesting example of what is possi- 
ble. It is a tele-conferencing (auditory) network in Northern 
Ontario used by secondary schools, community colleges, and 
universities to offer courses and other instruction to a 
student population that is sparsely distributed across a vast 

Moreover, interactive conferencing facilities can make a 
major contribution to the professional development of 
teachers. Imagine a consultant or professor of education 
offering a course in acquiring a second language (or even in 
the use of computers in history classes) from one central 
location, and teachers "plugging into" it in the local high 
school's conferencing facility. 

Like the collaborative networks being created on the 
( ulture of Change computer network, a network of confer- 

For 0w LOM or Laamlng 

encing facilities has the potential for sharing and joint learn- 
ing. It might even allow the board director or the Minister to 
address the profession directly when announcing major 
changes to the system. (It remains to be seen whether this 
would alleviate the sense many teachers have that innova- 
tions do not always reflect their concerns or needs.) 

The New York Times reports that North Carolina is push- 
ing ahead to make the best use of interactive video technolo- 
gy in schools. From a base of 16 schools in a pilot project, 
recent legislature-approved funding will extend the network 
to more than one hundred high schools and community 
colleges across the state, where it will be used for teaching 
and for planning among teachers. The pilot project included 
the teaching of Japanese, Latin, and marine oceanography.^' 

Among Canadian provinces. New Brunswick appears to 
be taking the lead, with TeleEducation courses offered in 50 
sites by interactive video." We are also aware that the 
University of Ottawa is using an interactive video network, 
and that other universities are probably doing so now or are 
on the verge of using this technology. 

We believe that it is important to move ahead to support 
a network of interactive video-conferencing facilities. At the 
same time, the opportunity also exists to build on the equip- 
ment base already present in many high schools offering 
communication technology, funded through the Ministry's 
Technological Education Program and the Equipment 
Renewal Fund. 

Let us now turn to the means by which the great poten- 
tial of information technology for learning, teaching, 
communicating, and evaluation can be made real. 

Realizing tiie potential 

Frequently in this report, we call for the Ministry of Educa- 
tion and Training to take a leading role in reforming 
Ontario's education system. This is particularly true in the 
area of information technology. We want to avoid the folly 
of establishing networks that do not allow students and 
teachers to talk across school or school board lines. (We 
discovered that individual ministries of the provincial 
government developed their own networks and some still 
cannot send electronic mail to others.) 

We want to avoid duplication while, at the same time, 
ensuring that all students have access to more and better 
computers and software that speaks of Canadian life and 

This is an excerpt of a note 
sent by a teaclier in 
London, Ontario, to TVOn- 
tario's program, "Inside 

"Our latest project is 'A 
Day in the Life of a Teenag- 
er.' March 2 was the target 
day my three Grade 8 
classes used to log every- 

thing they did that day. 
There are 104 schools 
from the U.S., Canada, 
Russia, England, and 
Finland participating. So faij 
I've received over 50 
responses from schools all \ 
across the U.S., Canada, 
Israel, Finland, England, 
Australia, and Russia. 

Canadian perspectives. And we want to cut costs. For 
example, by bulk buying of software and purchasing the 
rights for all schools to use programs, we can effect 
economies of scale. 

Our recommendations for the use of information tech- 
nology in schools are directed, for the most part, to the 
Ministry because of the central role it must play in co-ordi- 
nation and implementation, if we are to achieve significant 
progress before the turn of the century. 

The Ministry must ensure that school boards move swift- 
ly to get computers, loaded with high-quality software, into 
classrooms supervised by well-prepared teachers. It must 
help to guarantee that there are networks through which 
students and teachers can communicate, to seek information 
and work together. 

The first priority, then, is clearly for overall co-ordination 
of all these many aspects. This, it seems to us, is the natural 
responsibility of the Ministry. It should set up a co-ordinat- 
ing body to bring boards and community partners together 
to equip schools with necessary software and hardware, and 
to create much-needed networks. It would also ensure a co- 
ordinated approach to software development, assessment, 
and distribution, and could significantly help with the 
continuing education of teachers in these matters. (We 
believe TVO/La Chaine has an important role to play in 
distributing software and contributing to the on-going 
professional development of teachers.) 

The co-ordinating function would also include bringing 
together all the public- and private-sector partners to plan, 
implement, and monitor introduction and on-going use of 
information technology in schools. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning, Teaching, and Information Technology 

TN- efforts of tfie pnnctpal 

■dff of Don Mills 
vv>ait*a(e in North Ytorh m 
partrwrships wiO\ 
ana Alias soflwarv 
co-operauve educa- 
ptacemefits for 
s arxJ irvs«rvK« 
for teachers 

Other kjTKte or a^raefnents 
delivered by private- sector 
comparwes should be 
identifked to inspire ottwr 
schools to make arrarige- 
merrts best suited to their 

Co ordination. Irom our point of view, needs to go 
beyond the plans school boards are now required to develop 
and submit annually to the Ministry; it must actually lead to 
real change in the use of computers by teachers and 
students. Therefore, accountability must include setting 
measurable outcomes that allow progress to be evaluated 
effectively. In other words, success is not to be measured by 
the number of available computers, or even the amount of 
work students produce on them. It is the quality of the work 
that seems to us the key measure of whether the new tech- 
nology is being used according to its potential. 

Recommendation 93 

•kVe recommend that the Ministry be responsible for over- 
seeing the increased and effective use of information tech- 
nology in the province's schools, and that its role include 

a) determining the extent and nature of the computer- 
related resources rww in use in schools across Ontario: 

b) functioning as an information clearing house for these 
resources, ensuring that all tyoards are privy to such infor- 
mation, artd preventing unnecessary duplication of effort: 

c) facilitating alliarKes among the Ministry, school tmards, 
hanSware and software firms, and the private sector: 

d) developirtg common standards jointly with system 
partners, for producing and acquiring technology: 

el developing license protocols that support multiple 
remote users accessing centrally held software in a local 
area network (LAN) or wide area network (WAN) structure: 

f) co-ordinating efforts, including research and special 
projects, to refine effective educational assessment 

We stress that we see the Ministry as having a role in 
co-ordinating various aspects of information technology 
related to education. But we are not suggesting that it focus 
on a single model - even River Oaks, for example - and 
impose it on all boards in Ontario. First, the province's very 
diversity makes this unthinkable: what works in Oakville 
may not be appropriate on Manitoulin Island. Second, one 
of technology's great strengths is that it encourages creativity 
because it can encompass variety, rather than requiring a 
lock-step approach to education. 

We need to learn what works best." We believe that the 
way to make significant changes is to proceed as quickly as is 
prudently possible to establish centres of innovation in what 
we hope would be a trans-Canada partnership. Only then 
can Ontario, and indeed all Canadian schools, benefit from 
the broadest possible range of experiences in funding, 
structuring, and implementing information technology. (We 
know there already exists a number of projects on which 
such a network can build.) To be effective, of course, the 
work on best practices must be made known to rank-and- 
file teachers. 

Recommendations 94. 95 

'We recommend that school boards in co-operation with the 
Ministry, the private sector, universities, and colleges, initiate 
a number of high-profile and diverse projects on school 
computers and learning, to include a major infusion of 
computer hardware and software. These projects should 
reflect the province's diversity, include a distinct and compre- 
hensive evaluation component, and be used for professional 
development, software design, and policy 

'In addition, we recommend that the Minister approach 
colleagues in other provinces, through the Council of Minis- 
ters of Education of Canada, to establish a national nefwort* 
of projects on computers and learning, which can inform 
leaching and learning from sea to sea. 

Our next recommendation focuses on teachers 
as we have stressed, computers aren't teachers, they arc 
teachers' aids. Hut it would be unreasonable to assume that 

For (he Uwe of laamtng 

most teachers can use them effectively today. On the other 
hand, already a heartening number of Ontario teachers have 
become leaders and resources for information technology in 
their schools and on their boards, and we are confident that, 
given proper preparation, many others will emerge to play 
innovative leadership roles. 

Recommendations 96, 97 

*We recommend that the proposed College of Teachers 
require faculties of education to make knowledge and skills 
in the educational use of information technology an integral 
part of the curriculum for all new teachers. 

*We further recommend that teachers be provided with, and 
participate in, professional development that will equip them 
with the knowledge and skills they need to make appropriate 
use of Information technology in the classroom, and that 
acquisition of such knowledge become a condition of 

We then focus on the use of computers in schools. There 
is an urgent need for many more modern computers, stand- 
alone or linked in a LAN, loaded with excellent and balanced 
software that has strong Canadian content and perspective, 
tied together in local, regional, and international networks. 
We have been told that a wealth of computers of good quali- 
ty, regularly being replaced by the private sector, could be 
available for use in Ontario schools. Business representatives 
told us repeatedly of the need for schools to develop in their 
students the most up-to-date skills; here is a practical way 
business could help schools achieve that goal, and receive a 
tax benefit at the same time. 

We have also emphasized the social danger: information 
technology can easily become yet another tool by which 
more affluent students can further enhance their learning 
advantages over poorer students. For that reason, since we 
understand that not every school can be fully computerized 
immediately, we believe the Ministry must assure that 
schools with students who are less likely to have computers 
in their homes receive priority in the allocation of new tech- 

Recommendation 98 

*We recommend that the Ministry of Education and Training 
and the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade, work- 
ing through learning consortiums and existing federal govern- 
ment programs, co-ordinate efforts with the Ontario business 

We have emphasized the social danger: information 
technology can easily become yet another tool by 
which more affluent students can further enhance their 
learning advantages over poorer students. For that 
reason, since we understand that not every school can 
be fully computerized immediately, we believe the 
Ministry must assure that schools with students who 
are less likely to have computers in their homes receive! 
priority in the allocation of new technology. 

community to distribute surplus computers through Ontario 
school boards, and that, as more computers are introduced 
into the school system, priority be given to equipping schools 
serving low-Income and Franco-Ontarian communities. 

For the potential of information technology to be real- 
ized, it is important to ensure that there is sufficient high- 
quality educational software, that it be Canadian in content 
and perspective where that is appropriate, and that it be fair 
and unbiased in its approach to subject matter. 

Recommendations 99, 100, 101, 102 

*We recommend that the Ministry increase the budget 

allocated for purchasing software on behalf of school boards 

in Ontario, and that it increase boards ' flexibility in using 

funds to permit leasing or other cost-sharing arrangements, 

in addition to purchasing, in acquiring information technology 


*Computer software and all other electronic resources used 
in education should be treated as teaching materials for the 
purpose of Circular 14 assessment (for quality, balance, 
bias, etc.). 

*The Ministry, with the advice of educators in the field, 
should identify priority areas in which Canadian content and 
perspective is now lacking. 

*ln addition, we recommend that the Ministry exercise 
leadership with the Council of Ministers of Education of 
Canada to initiate a program promoting production of 
high-quality Canadian educational software by Canadian 
companies and other appropriate bodies, such as school 
boards, universities, and colleges. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning. Teaching, and Information Technology 

i!ompuJer» must reach beyond the walU of particular 
'I buddings - into other schools, libraries, data- 
La:.*^- They must connect students with each other, 
with teachers and with experts in various fields. We 
tu . >c It crucial that every classroom in every Khool 
'.'< . .u( ol' the information highway. 

Finally, computers must reach beyond the walls of partic- 
ular school buildings - into other schools, libraries, and 
databanks. They must connect students with each other, 
with teachers and with experts in various fields. VVc believe it 
is crucial that every classroom in every school be part of the 
information highway. 

Recommendation 103 

•kVe recommend that the Government of Ontario, working 
¥fith school t)oards and other appropnate agencies, commit 
itself to ensuring that every classroom in every publicly fund- 
ed school in Ontario is connected to at least one local 
computer network and that, m turn, this network be connect 
ed to a provincial network, a national network, and to the 

Having developed the necessary components of a 
computer-use strategy in schools, we turn our attention to 
computer access after school hours, on weekends, and 
during vacations and holidays. Since children who have 
computers at home have a distinct advantage over those who 
do not. access to computers at school for the latter becomes 
a matter of utmost priority. But wc remain concerned about 
the increased likelihood that access to networks and to the 
Internet will be commercialized; in fact, companies are 
already charging for access, and wc are troubled by the 
prospect of access being limited by economics. 

Recommendations 104. 105. 106 
•We recommend that school t)oards, in cooperation with 
government ministnes and appropriate agencies, establish in 
rteighbourhooda where personal computer access is less like- 
ly to be prevalent, community computing centres, possibly in 

school buildings or in public libraries, and provide on-going 
funding for hardware, software, and staffing. 

*We also recommend that the Ministry support boards in 
pilot projects that extend the opportunity for learners to 
access funded programs and equipment outside the defined 
school day. 

'Furthermore, we recommend that the Government of 
Ontario advocate that public facilities, such as public libraries 
and schools, and such non-profit groups as 'freenets. ' be 
given guaranteed access to the facilities of the electronic 
highway at an affordable cost (preferably free for users of 
these facilities). 

Wc should also say that while most parents arc enthusias- 
tic about the use of computers in schools, by no means all of 
them arc personally comfortable with computer technology. 
These parents - and it is no mystery from which socio- 
economic background most of them come - feel helpless to 
provide their children with support as they move into infor- 
mation technology in schools. Accordingly, we encourage 
school boards and other bodies to provide opportunities for 
parents to develop that comfort with computers. TVOntario, 
the proposed community computing centres, "freenets," 
community colleges, public libraries, and others have a role 
to play in this area. 

We discussed earlier the education potential of interactive 
conferencing facilities, and referred specifically to the exam- 
ple of Contact North. Our view is that Contact North needs 
to be upgraded to an interactive video-conference network, 
as well as being available to all potential users, particularly 
small aboriginal communities, and meeting their demands 
for secondary school, college, and university courses, and for 
professional development of teachers. This upgrade would 
strengthen the link between students and instructors, 
substantially enhancing student learning. 

Recommendation 107 

•We recommend that the Ministry proceed to upgrade 

Contact North from an audio to an interactive video network. 

TVOntario/La Chatne 

We could not complete our discussion of technology with- 
out mentioning TVOntario/I.a ("hainc. which has been 
providing television services for teachers and students since 
1970, and continues to play an important role in this area. In 

Forttw I^MVOfLMmmc 


fact, those outside the school system might not know of the 
abundance of materials produced by TVO for schools that 
are never shown on-air. 

Its most recent annual report identifies a number of 
programs for children at school in its children's and youth 
programming department. In addition to series on televi- 
sion, these include material on videodisks, audio cassettes, 
and posters. It also provides distance education for adults, 
often in partnership with colleges and universities. It has 
joined with the Federation of Women Teachers' Associations 
of Ontario and the North York Board of Education, among 
others, to distribute teacher development programs. 

Our only TVO-related recommendation is that it contin- 
ue to do what it does well. We hope that a common provin- 
cial curriculum will make it easier for TVO to develop 
programs, computer software, and such initiatives as TVOn- 
line and videodisks, which support the learning objectives of 
the curriculum. It remains important for Ontario's educa- 
tion system that TVO continue its contributions to the 
learning goals of our schools, and in assisting students in 
reaching those goals. 


On the basis of considerable and rapidly accumulating 
evidence that information technology is profoundly chang- 
ing the nature of learning for children and must become 
incorporated into our teaching strategies, the Commission is 
convinced that information technology is one of the engines 
needed to drive the necessary transformation of the educa- 
tion system. 

The point is that new technologies have already changed 
our lives in ways that would have been unimaginable only a 
few short years ago. Here is where an old cliche is unusually 
appropriate: the only certainty is change. We can count on 
today's leading-edge concept being outmoded tomorrow. 

We acknowledge - and, in some cases, share - techno- 
logy-related concerns, but some simply do not lend them- 
selves to ready solutions. Will computers lead to increased 
isolation among young people, or fail to recognize their 
emotional and spiritual needs? The evidence so far is reas- 
suring, but we must pay attention. Will computers that 
respond to voice commands - and these already exist - 
undermine any motivation students have for learning to 
write and spell properly? Strategies - including computer- 

Will computers lead to 
increased isolation 
among young people, or 
fail to recognize their 
emotional and 
spiritual needs? 
Will computers under- 
mine any motivation 
students have for 
learning to write and 
spell properly? 

ized techniques - must be developed to prevent this unac- 
ceptable outcome. 

Will schools as we have known them for the past century 
and a half finally become obsolete? If the virtual office is 
already becoming a reality - businesses whose employees 
work at home and communicate through information tech- 
nology - why not virtual schools? But then where will the 
children of tomorrow learn all the many non-academic skills 
that schools teach along the way, such as dealing with other 
people in a constructive way? Will there someday be a school 
cheer rooting on good old Virtual High?^^ Here is one vision 
of the education system of the early 21st century: 

Gone will be the days when students were lumped into grades 
according to age, when learning took place solely in a classroom, 
and when school was out for the summer. Older students will be 
packing pocket computers instead of notepads, and the only apple 
on the teacher's desk will be a high-tech piece of equipment 
designed to communicate with youngsters at home, in the work- 
place, and abroad. Learning, widely accepted as a lifelong process, 
will take place much more outside the school as our youth experi- 
ence the real reality - life in the community." 

It is a vision both exhilarating in its possibilities and 
daunting in its uncertainty - terrifying in the sense that 
much of it is being driven, not by human needs but by the 
imperatives of technology or commerce. But if society at least 
acknowledges the phenomenon, it can attempt to shape it. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning, Teaching, and Information Technology 

'ow's sdwois wtM not 
^udpgR Wie those of today - 
'' "^Mnks. >n the mam. to 
■ nf technology. 

At the very least, we can 
no* »ay that cotnputer 

1- y has become one of 
■j.~ ew t>asics. 

ttw bfoadest sense, the 
Of our schools IS to 
ensure that children are 
computer irterate, arx) rt is 
a job that must t>e done 

well Adding new machines 
to classrooms does not 
txry instant learning. But 
learning to use those 
machines well can help 
prepare our children for a 
new world that is already 
here. Perhaps this is the 
way to guarantee that our 
schools remain relevant to 
our lives, to the lives of our 
children. ar>d to our 

In fact, no-onc has the remotest idea of what tomorrow's 
schools will look like; we can confidently assert only that 
they will not look like those of today - thanks, in the main, 
to evolving technology. Indeed, we can predict with equal 
certainty that the report of the Royal Commission on the 
crisis in education of 2020 will find this entire discussion of 
today's state-of-the-art technology wonderfully quaint and 

At the very least, we can now say that computer literacy 
has become one of the new basics, and that an inability to 
use a computer well is becoming as great a handicap as the 
inability to read. 

In the broadest sense, the job of our schools is to ensure 
that children are computer literate, and it is a job that must 
be done well. Adding new machines to classrooms does not 
buy instant learning. But learning to use those machines well 
can help prepare our children for a new world that is already 
here. Perhaps this is the way to guarantee that our schools 
remain relevant to our lives t.. iFn- In.-, ol our iliiKlnn. .md 
to our communities. 

For ttie Love of Laammg 


1 David Dwyer, "Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow: What We've 
Learned," Educational Leadership 51, no. 7 (1994): 9. 

2 As G.R. Cooke entitled his 1994 submission to the Commis- 
sion, in critiquing the 1993 submission from the Council of 
Ontario Directors of Education. 

3 Ursula Franklin, The Real World of Technology (Concord, 
ON: House of Anansi Press, 1992), p. 76. The Massey 
Lectures, CBC, 1989. 

4 Vicki Hancock and Frank Betts, "From the Lagging to the 
Leading Edge," Educational Leadership 51, no. 7 (1994): 29. 

5 Association for Media and Technology in Education in Cana- 
da (AMTEC), brief to the Ontario Royal Commission on 
Learning, 1994, p. 8, 9. 

6 AMTEC brief, p. 2. 

7 Frank Betts, "On the Birth of the Communication Age: A 
Conversation with David Thornburg," Educational Leader- 
ship 5\, no. 7 (1994): 20. 

8 George Leonard, "The Great School Reform Hoax: What's 
Really Needed to Improve Public Education," Esquire 101, 
no. 4, quoted in Kyle L. Peck and Denise Dorricott, "Why 
Use Technology?" Educational Leadership 51, no. 7 (1994): 

9 General Union of Educational Personnel (GULP) and the 
National Institute for Curriculum Development, "Teaching 
in the Information Age: Problems and New Perspectives," p. 
4. Contribution to the International Commission on Educa- 
tion for the 21st Century, 1994. 

10 AMTEC brief, p. 8. 

1 1 Hancock and Betts, "From the Lagging to the Leading Edge," 

p. 27. 

12 AMTEC brief, p. 2. 

13 GUEP, "Teaching in the Information Age," p. 19. 

14 Quoted in Michael Todd, "Chips, Not Chalk," Profiles, the 
York University Magazine for Alumni and Friends (May 1994): 

15 Gerry Smith, "Restructuring Education at River Oaks P.S.: A 
Vision for the Future." Draft report for the Halton Board of 
Education, 1993. 

16 Many of these projects are described in 22 articles in Educa- 
tional Leadership 51, no. 7 ( 1994). The theme of this issue of 
the journal of the American Association for Supervision and 
Curriculum Development was "Realizing the Promise of 

17 Karen Sheingold, "Restructuring for Learning with Technolo- 
gy: The Potential for Synergy," in Restructuring for Learning 
with Technology, ed. Karen Sheingold and Marc S. Tucker 
(New York: Center for Technology in Education, Bank Street 
College of Education and National Center on Education and 
the Economy, 1990), p. 14. 

18 Probably because their school lacked computers, only 35 
percent of Lillian Elementary School teachers agreed that 
they had changed their teaching styles. This pilot project in 
the North York Board of Education acknowledged from the 
start that the school board did not have the resources to 
allow Lillian to match River Oaks' level of computer 
resources. See Sandra Sangster, "Implementation of Comput- 
er Technology Across the Curriculum: Lillian Elementary 
School, 1991-92," a research project for the North York 
Board of Education. 

19 Jennifer Lewington, "Plugging in Without Plugging Out," 
Globe and Mail, 19 August 1994. 

20 Ronald Anderson, University of Minnesota sociologist and 
co-author of "Computers in American Schools," quoted in 
Newsweek, 16 May 1994, p. 51, and Duncan Mckie, VP of 
Decima Research, in study by Times Mirror Centre for 
People and the Press in the United States, quoted in Chris 
Cobb, "Affluent Males Benefit Most from Computers," 
Ottawa Citizen, 4 June 1994; also noted by Terry Woronov, 
"Six Myths (and Five Promising Truths) about the Uses of 
Educational Technology," Harvard Education Letter 10, no. 5 
(1994): 2. 

The following papers, given at the Gender and Science and 
Technology 7 International Conference (Montreal, 1993), 
give examples of particular interventions: Jo Sanders, "A 
Large American Project That Got Thousands of Girls into 
Mathematics, Science and Technology," p. 1 10-17; Val Clarke, 
"The Rationale, Development and Evaluation of a Video to 
Encourage Girls to Study Computing," p. 47-55; G. Joy 
Teague, Valerie A. Clarke, and Marion L. Lyne, "A Computer 
Holiday Program for Year 10 Girls," p. 159-67; Sharon Frantz 
and Catharine Warren, "A Kid's Computer Camp as a Social 
Microcosm for the Study of Female Avoidance of Technolog- 
ical Training," p. 236-43; and Sandra Acker and Keith Oatley, 
"Gender Equity and Computers in Context," p. 309-17. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Learning, Teaching, and Information Tecrinology 

2 1 ludith Zorfau, Patricia Corley, and Arlc nc Rem/, "Helping 
Students with Disdbilitm Become Writers," Eiluiaiionul 
UaJerihtp 51. no. 7 ( 1994): 62-«6; Terry Woronov, "Six 
Myths (and Five Promising Truths) about the Uses of Educa- 
tional Technology.' Harvard EJucaiwn Ltttrr 10. no. 5 

22 Reg Fleming, "Literacy for a Technological Age," Science 
Education 73. no. 4 ( 1989): 398. 

23 Graham Orpwood, "Scientific Literacy for All." p. 16. Back- 
ground paper written for the Ontario Royal Commission on 
Learning. 1994. 

24 Dwyer. 'Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow." p. 4- 1 0. 

25 Peck and Dorricott. "Why Use Technology?" p. II - 1 4. 

26 Barbara Means and Kerry Olson. "The Link Between Tech- 
nology and Authentic l.earning." Educational Leadenhtp SI, 
no. 7 (1994): 15-18. 

27 Hancock and Belts, 'From the Lagging to the Leading Edge," 
p. 28. 29. 

28 Mike Muir, "Putting Computer Projects at the Heart of the 
Curriculum." Educational Leadership 51, no. 7 (1994): 30. 

29 Linda Taggart, "Student Autobiographies with a Twist of 
Technology." Educational Leadership 5\, no. 7 ( 1994): 34-35. 

30 See, for example: "Learning Through Play," re Henry Street 
High School, Whitby, Othawa Times. 20 May 1994; "Today's 
Classrooms Going High Tech," re Hammarskjold High 
School, Thunder Bay. Welland-Port Colhorne Tribune, 5 May 
1994; "Shop Class Has Changed." re Lively District Secondary 
School. Sudbury Star. 5 May 1994; and Eric Dempster, 
teacher at R.H. King High School, Scarborough, 'Vision for 
Future," submission to the Ontario Royal Commission on 
Learning, 1994. received via TVOnline. 

3 1 GUEP. 'Teaching in the Information Age." p. 5. 

32 A.MTEC bncf, p. 5-7. 

33 lulia Slapleton. Educational Technology in Sew fertey: A Plan 
for Actum (New ]eney Stale Department of Education, 
1992). p. I. 

34 Howard Gardner, The Unschooled Mind: How Children Think 
and How Sthoob Should Teach (New York: Basic Books. 

35 Humber College, brief to the Ontario Royal Commission on 
Ixaming. 1993. p 5 

36 lennifer Lewington, 'A Computer Network for Teachers," 
Globe and Mail. 19 August 1994. 

37 GUEP, "Teaching in the Information Age," p. 3. 

38 GUEP, "Teaching in the Information Age." p. 18. 

39 Peck and Dorricott. "Why Use Technology?" p. 13-14. 

40 Council of Ontario Directors of Education, brief to the 
Ontario Royal Commission on Learning. 1993. p. 14. 

4 1 Betts. "On the Birth of the Communication Age." p. 23. 

42 Educational Computing Organization of Ontario, brief to 
the Ontario Royal Commission on Learning, 1994. 

43 Woronov, "Six Myths (and Five Promising Truths) about the 
Uses of Educational Technology," p. 1,2. 

44 Educational Computing Organization of Ontario, brief. 

45 Information Technology Association of Canada, "Education 
Statement." 1994. p. 6. 

46 Letter from Anne Swarbrick. Minister of Culture, iourism 
and Recreation, to Dave Cooke, Minister of Education and 
Training. 2 )une 1994. 

47 Memo from Ken Stief. superintendent. Curriculum and 
Instructional Services. North York Board of Education, to 
Commi.ssioner Avis Glaze. 22 September 1994. 

48 Todd, "Chips, Not Chalk," p. 1 1 . 

49 Paul Swan and Bill Utham, school librarians, Middlesex 
County Board of Education, brief to the Ontario Ro>'al 
Commission on Learning, 1994. 

50 Ontario Public Library Strategic Planning Group, "One Place 
to Look: The Ontario Public Library Strategic Plan" (Toron- 
to: Ontario Ministry of Culture and Communications and 
Ontario Library AsstKiation, 1990). 

51 Michael Winerip, "Classrooms on the Information Highway," 
New York Times. 20 July 1994. 

52 Robert Brehl, "Info-age Gold Rush I urcs Business to N.B.," 
Toronto Star, 14 May 1994. 

53 See Sheingold, "Restructuring for Learning with Technology," 
for a discussion of high-technology schools in the United 

54 The (".ouncil of Ontario Directors of Fxlucatinn coined this 
phrase in referring to British (>»lumbia's high tech 
Wondertree school in their 1993 submission to the Ontario 
Royal Cximmission on Learning, p. 1 1. 

55 "F>ducalion: The City Becomes a Ixarning Laboratory," in 
"Our City/Our Future," supplement to Toronto Star. 

I May 1994. 

For ttw Um* of U«m«n( 


?«^A^-:i •• 

Community Education: 
Aiiiances for Learning 

"It takes a whole village to raise a child." 

African Proverb 

Second only to exhortations about competitiveness, 
the proverb above was probably repeated most 
frequently during our public hearings. Teachers, 
school board administrators and trustees, 
community services, and others said time after 
time: "Schools cannot do it alone." Despite their 
heroic efforts, schools are encountering growing 
difficulty in responding to the Increasing needs of 
children. Indeed, these efforts have diverted the 
energy of teachers and administrators from 
meeting their primary education objectives, and 
have caused them to focus on providing ancillary 
services for which they don't have the training, 
the time, or resources. 

The responsibilities pushed on schools and teachers in 
recent years have become unrealistic and onerous. 
Under these circumstances, serious reform of school- 
ing will be difficult indeed. Those responsibilities simply 
must be shared, the burdens reduced, if schools and teachers 
are to do the jobs we need them to do. It was this thinking 
that led us to name community education as one of the four 
key engines needed to drive the educational reform that this 
report advocates. 

Schools must foster the healthy development of all 
students by harnessing the various resources of the commu- 
nities they are a part of Bringing these resources together in 
a new structure should make it possible to launch a series of 
local initiatives and programs, based in or around each 
school and designed to meet its particular needs. Teachers 
would be released to do the academic work that is their 
primary responsibility. Not surprisingly, this long-term 
strategy calls for a fundamental questioning not only of 
existing roles and organizational models, and especially the 
very way we think of schools and community. Our ambition 
should be to find new ways of supporting the raising of chil- 
dren, and in doing so to weave a new a sense of community. 

Community building must become the heart of any school improve- 
ment effort. Whatever else is involved - improving teaching, devel- 
oping sensible curriculum, creating nevs^ forms of governance, 
providing more authentic assessment, empowering teachers and 
parents, increasing professionalism - it must rest on a foundation of 
community building.' 

In this chapter, after an analysis of the problem and its 
causes, we outline our proposals for helping schools cope 

with expanded pressures. We also address ways to successfully 
translate into action our ideas about community education. 

The problem: The expansion of the role of schools 

Our public consultations throughout the province and the 
submissions we studied underline that everywhere teachers, 
principals, and school boards have stretched their mandate 
for schooling today's children into various supports well 
beyond their traditional educational domain. Their reasons 
for expanding their role are understandable. We frequently 
heard that changing social conditions for families have 
compelled schools to develop more extensive support 
services for their students. The Ontario we discovered 
through our consultations is almost unrecognizable from the 
Ontario of three or four decades ago. 

Since the 1960s, societal changes of all kinds have placed 
great stress on families as an institution and on parenting as 
a function. Once we could count on children walking home 
at lunch hour from the nearby school for a hot meal or on a 
parent helping the children with homework. Now, both 
parents work, even if they live together; they have less time 
for their children, unless they are unemployed. The discus- 
sions they should be having with their children about rela- 
tionships and sobriety, highly awkward between generations 
at the simplest of times, have become infinitely more diffi- 
cult lectures about sex, AIDS, drugs, and violence. It is 
evident that meeting all of the challenges of the 1990s is 
beyond the capacity of an increasing number of parents. 

If changing socio-economic conditions of families have 
affected children, so have other socio-cultural factors such as 
the youth consumers' culture (and economy), or the anony- 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Community Education 

mous urban life that has often replaced traditional commu- 
nities' cohesion and support. Cutting across all social classes 
and cultures are the many barriers to learning created by 
emotional problems resulting from family breakdown, isola- 
tion, and loneliness, inter-generational confrontation, 
conflicting values, family violence, sexual abuse, sexism, and 
racism. These barriers may affect children and youth in any 
kHooI, anywhere, any time. Most alarming are the increasing 
rates of pre-teen and teen suicides found in all segments of 
society. For example, 

• the suicide death rate for teenage men has increased four-fold 
from 5.3 to 23.0 per 100.000 between I960 and 1991: 

• the tuicide rate for young women also increased from 0.9 to 4 per 
100.000 between I960 and 1991; 

• in 1989-90 the second leading cause of hospitalization for young 
women aged IS to 19 is attempted suicide: 

• girts 10 to 14 years of age are hospitalized for attempted suicide at 
a rale five limes that of boyv 

• ihc suKide rate among Indian youth was five times that of the 
(^nadun population: 

• Urge proportions of aboriginal people identified 
unemplormeni. alcohol, drug use. family violence, sexual abuse and 
suKide as significant social problems in their communities.' 

Ai well, for loo many families and neighbourhoods, 
additional barriers are created or compounded by poor 
socio-economic conditions: poverty, unemployment, malnu- 
trition, chronic health conditions, substandard housing, and 
lack of recreational facilities/services. 

Indeed, our consultations confirm the conclusion of 
other reports - Canadian families "are not the idealized 

haven we wish they could be, not the private places in which 
we retreat from society, but an integral part of society, and 
thus, intertwined with social changes in the wider world."' 

What is more, as studies show, the structure of the family 
is changing, many more marriages arc breaking up, and the 
number of single-parent families is increasing. More of these 
and other families now live in poverty than in past decades. 
According to Statistics Canada, 4.5 million people live in 
poverty - people who spend at least 56 percent of their 
income on food, shelter, and clothing.' One recent Ontario 
study found that "one in every six children is in a family 
receiving social assistance. About three-quarters of them are 
children of single-parent families, a majority of these parents 
being female. Child poverty in Ontario is on the rise, stand- 
ing at 15.3 percent in 1990."' 

Social policy analysts believe that the impact on families 
of economic restructuring caused by automation in the 
manufacturing sector has been significant and is escalating 
at a rapid rate. The greatest victims in the slide toward low- 
paying and temporary jobs arc young families - those with 
parents under 25, who have seen their incomes drop from 
the 1980s by nearly 20 percent. Our conclusions have been 
influenced by the growing number of studies warning of the 
impact of these conditions on an increasingly impoverished 

Our consultations suggest that more than any other social 
institution, schools have felt compelled to address these 
problems in increasingly direct ways: by providing meals, 
family counselling, and mental health services. \Mierc fami- 
lies are unable, or unwilling, to teach their children about 
human sexuality and human relations or about protecting 
themselves from the dangers of illegal drug use or sexually 
transmitted diseases, schools have stepped in and included 
these subjects in the curriculum of the classroom. Schools 
now carry most of the responsibility for orienting new 
young immigrants to Canada, teaching them English, and 
providing support for their culture shock. Many schools now 
provide a safe haven in the morning and late into the day for 
children whose parents work early and late. Some provide 
breakfast programs, and counsel children in single-parent 
families, and blended, re-combined, and same-sex families. 

Schools have increasingly assumed responsibility for 
satisfying all but the most severe social needs of children and 
youth. However, these efforts have the potential to weaken 

For Vt» lov« of Laammg 

the ability of schools to fulfil their primary educational 
objectives. The efforts of schools must be redirected to their 
intended focus on education. 

These expanded services, which schools have adopted by 
default, have not always been of the highest level and quality. 
Despite their best efforts, schools face significant limitations 
in their ability to provide a full range of services. Educators 
do not have the specialized training required to develop and 
implement many social-service-type programs. School 
boards often lack properly trained professionals to supervise 
the development and implementation of these programs. 
Moreover, the use of school funding to provide expensive 
ancillary services may be a drain on program resources. 

Despite positive intentions, the best efforts of schools to 
provide a broadened range of social services are often inef- 
fective and inefficient. More often, the result is that the 
general social needs of all children, and the special needs of 
some children, are unmet. Successful interventions depend 
on the capacity for a flexible response by professionals, 
including teachers and other school personnel who share 
understanding of the child's real world. This requires, at the 
minimum, the co-ordination of the efforts of professionals 
providing services for children. More than that, it requires a 
rethinking of the relationship between schools and the 
parents, and other members of their communities, in order 
to enhance the capacity of the community as a whole to meet 
the needs of all children and youth. 

Our response: Creating communities of concern 

We believe it is now time to "re-invent" schools by drawing 
from, and enhancing, the strengths of their communities. 
Service systems must be a public responsibility shared with 
families, schools, and communities, rather than solely a 
government responsibility. We believe that "when communi- 
ties are empowered to solve their own problems, they func- 
tion better than communities that depend on services 
provided by outsiders."' The challenge is to overcome the 
isolation of potential partners and, by redirecting their 
resources, capacities and, commitment, develop communities 
concerned about raising our children. We must rethink the 
partnerships required in educating our children. 

In our consultations in communities throughout the 
province, we found a number of school projects that open 
for students "a window on the world out there." We applaud 

-> The old communities - family, village, parish, 
and so on - have all but disappeared in the 
knowledge society. Their place has largely 
been taken by the new unit of social integra- 
tion, the organization. Where community was 
fate, organization is voluntary membership. 
Where community claimed the entire person, 
organization is a means to a person's ends, 
a tool... But who, then, does the community 
tasks? Two hundred years ago whatever 
social tasks were being done were done in all 
societies by a local community. Very few if 
any of these tasks are being done by the old 
communities anymore. Nor would they be 
capable of doing them, considering that they 
no longer have control of their members or 
even a firm hold over them. People no longer 
stay where they were born either in terms of 
geography or in terms of social position and 
status. By definition, a knowledge society is a 
society of mobility. 

Peter F. Drucker, 
"The Age of Social Transformation," Atlantic Monthly, 1994 

the wonderful efforts that are encouraging students to 
participate in environmental projects, to interact with other 
students through computers, or to share in co-operative 
education. We believe these kinds of initiatives should be 
actively encouraged and supported. Some success stories are 
described in Chapters 7 to 10, giving our vision of what 
good teaching and great schools can be. 

In this chapter, we focus on the need for schools to go 
beyond the clearly instructional partnerships — for exam- 
ple, early remediation programs such as reading recovery — 
which can and should be developed. This chapter is not 
about alternative schools or more imaginative special educa- 
tion programs, or projects for high-risk kids, or outstanding 
ways of enriching the curriculum through technology or 
work experiences. Although the form of community educa- 
tion that we advocate may encompass such efforts to 
enhance the instructional function of schooling, it requires, 
fundamentally, that schools assume a broader vision of the 
goal of schooling. In our vision, community education takes 
a distinct orientation, one that supports the raising of chil- 
dren and their healthy general development. 

The needs we want to address with this key strategy of 
community education are common to all children and youth 
growing up in these challenging and changing times. If the 
needs are general, then the solutions will have to be universal. 
And when, in addition, more specific problems have been 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Community Education 




South Simco PuMtc School, Ovhawa 

South Simcoe Public School is a small, inner-city school, with about 200 students in Grades 7 
and 8. It has developed a program to increase the contacts tjetween the school and the commu- 
nity, and at the same time to motivate students to work hard and to do well at school. Their expe- 
nential learning program is a partnership between the school and local businesses. Business 
representatives come to the school to \x interviewed by students, who are prepared by reviewing 
Interviewing, questioning and note-taking skills. The interviews are published in the school news- 
paper. Students complete a survey to establish their areas of interest, and pairs of students are 
matched with appropnate placements and spend short periods of time in workplaces to gam real- 
life expenences. They write up descriptions of their activity for the school newspaper. 

At a monthly community meeting, representatives of the businesses and of the service agencies, 
along with teachers, parents, and students, get together at school or in one of the community 
settings to discuss the various programs and plans for the future. When the school plan is drawn 
up annually, the community representatives and parents work from a draft prepared by the teach 
ing staff to participate in formulating the Tinal plan. 

Parent participation has increased from a handful to a healthy number - 35 to 40 - who regulariy 
attend the monthly parent meetings to help solve problems and to make decisions to assist the 
school in its mission. 

The community outreach programs at South Simcoe Public School have widened the decision- 
making base at the school, so that the "ownership" of the school and its students has beconr>e 
much more shared. 


In Welland the local FrancoOntanan community is moving to develop a multi-purpose centre. In 
phase one. the existing secondary school will be joined to a new building housing a health 
centre, a food-preparation centre, a community-education and cultural centre, and a campus for 
the new francophone college. The second phase will add a recreation centre and provide a link to 
the daycare already on site. 

Iroquoi* Ridge High School, Oakvllle 

Iroquois Ridge High School is the product of a three-year collaboration of the pnncipal. staff, and 
individuals in Oakville. The physical design is the product of monthly meetings t)etween the princi- 
pal and the parents, and the principal and members of the regions Community Integrated 
Services Advisory Council, composed of representatives of the Children's Council, the District 
Health Council, the Ministries of Community and Social Services, and Tounsm and Recreation. 
These agerKtes agreed to provide a range of services in the 2.000 square feet of concourse 
space in the new school - space dedicated to the provision of programs for families. 

The coTKept was originally proposed by the pnncipal based on the changing needs of the commu- 
nity, which were recently docunrtented by the Integrated Services Advisory Council of the region. 

The school has also organized a close collaboration with families and community members m 
order to enhance Its students' learning. The school has identified goals for its programs, and the 
School A<Jv»sof y Council is mandated to advise the pnncipal about the relevance of the school's 
programs for the community. 

For th« LoM of LMmmg 



created by poor environments, these additional needs will call 
for more complex solutions, adapted to local priorities. 

Community education, then, works by enlisting and, co- 
ordinating all the help offered. No longer can teachers be 
considered the only human resources involved in schooling. 
Within our concept of community education, many 
resources will be involved: business and industry, health-care 
institutions, and social-work agencies, municipal infrastruc- 
tures and services, community associations, religious groups, 
and especially families. Teachers supported by these resources 
will continue to fulfil their own primary responsibility. 

This pool of possible resources, which already exists in 
one form or another for every school, is usually located close 
to our elementary schools. There is, of course, a less obvious 
local community in the case of many high schools, especially 
in larger urban environments. When the available space does 
not permit the new partners to operate in the school build- 
ing itself, mobile vans could offer needed services; nearby 
offices and facilities could be used; and provincial and 
municipal services might re-locate near the school. Students 
and their families should be able to look to the school build- 
ing and its extensions as a place that responds to their vari- 
ous needs. 

Our vision of community education is grounded in a 
society that recognizes a need to give high priority to assist- 
ing all parents in the raising of their children. A web of on- 
going supports, articulated in and around the school, will be 
both preventive and remedial if they are locally based. This 
is a concept that insists "... strategies which focus on indi- 
vidual children must be integrated with strategies which 
improve each part of the environment within which children 
spend their time - homes, child care, neighbourhoods, and 
schools,"' and so are intended to benefit all children. It is a 
concept that serves society as a whole because it is built on 
the foundation of equitable educational opportunities for all 
children in Ontario. 

A local focus for community education 

The value of the school as a hub for the community and a 
focus for community education is not new. Already in 1973 
the provincial legislature was aware that there were better 
ways to use school facilities. They acknowledged the centrali- 
ty of the school in most communities, and the many ways 
schools could be of assistance to the life of the broad 
community." However, community education is much more 

e must find ways to strengthen 
the ability of parents and 
families to meet the needs of children 
in those crucial early years ... We 
must recognize that all children will 
require a variety of opportunities, and 
some will require more opportunities 
than others. That means a wide range 
of support services, particularly for 
pre-adolescents and adolescents 
within our communities." 

Charles Beer. M.P.P. 

than that. Not only will schools open their facilities to the 
community, but they will also become the hub for all 
services that assist families in child raising. Schools in this 
vision are the physical centres, thus simplifying access to a 
wide variety of social, health, and recreational programs. 

The recent report. Yours, Mine, and Ours: Ontario's Chil- 
dren and Youth,'' from the Premier's Council on Health, Weil- 
Being, and Social Justice, reinforced previous reports'" by 
making clear that, at present, family services are unco-ordi- 
nated. The report also recognizes that often the school is the 
single, shared experience of most adults. Earlier, the 
Premier's Council had released its report People and Skills in 
the New Global Economy," which recommended both school 
councils and community linkage committees at the school 
board level. The school lies at the heart of the community, 
and is the only resource that exists in practically every 
neighbourhood across the province. Therefore, schools 
should be the centre of the community and the focus point 
for providing a range of services to children and youth. The 
school building can be the site where community and social 
services, ranging from medical and dental services to daycare 
and public libraries, are provided. 

Supporting and sustaining a diversity of models 

Just as we recognize that community-to-school linkage is not 
a new concept, we also resist the notion of one single form 
of community education. The differing environments in 
which young people grow up and the wide diversity of 
factors that affect individual children demand a wide variety 
of models and types of alliances embraced within the 
concept of community education. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Community Education 

ii«l C^luiractmstics of Community 
I .rmcnl/ttlucalion NfixlrU 

s^...l•^^lul prcvcniion progr«mi undcr»tjnil that the 
^1: : Ilv» in tht limily and the family in the commu- 
nity, to components of successful programs address the 
«»holeneu of the child and the environment. 

Tuhrril to meet local needs and desire*: 
Risk factors and protective factors vary from commu- 
nity to community - for example, some communities 
have high rates of teen pregnanc"y; some communities 
are bedroom communities, and parents are employed 
out of the community from dawn to dusk. Therefore, 
the successful local models will vary from community 
to community depending on local needs and desires. 

High quality: 

Successful programs have high-quality management 
and administrative approaches. The staff have enough 
time set aside for planning and preparation. There is 
good supervision, and staff are well trained. People are 
paid well for the work they do, and there are funds 
available for supplies and equipment. 


Successful prevention programs link with other 
programs, schools, and community activities. This 
requires developing common goals, objectives, and 
collaborative plans for sharing human financial and 
material resources. 

Meaningful, significant parent and community resident 

The concept of community, family, and parent empow- 
erment was strong, and the ecological model of healthy 
child development certainly supports parent and 
communiry resident involvement. 

Ministry of Education and Training. 
Bett»f Begmmngs. Betlw Futures Protect 

\Vc have been guided to this view by the recommenda- 
tions of the communities we consulted and by research on 
effective practices of promoting community involvement. 
\Vc have considered the recommendations of authors of 
better Beginnings, Better Futures Project, who suggest that 
models of community involvement be tailored to meet local 
needs and desires, since risk factors and protective factors 
vary from community U) community. These authors observe, 
for example, that some communities have high rates of teen 
pregnancy, and some arc bedroom communities with 
parents employed out of the community from dawn to dusk. 

Our consultations confirmed that variability. We learned 
of the partnerships that made up the communities of 
concern in many schools. We highlight some such examples 
in the pages of this chapter. Some involved basic physical, 
material collaboration, such as the Stratford Education and 
Recreation Centre and the Wclland Franco-Ontarian initia- 
tive, where good thinking linked building and facilities - a 
prelude probably to other linkages of people and services. In 
other communities, wc found schools and teachers interact- 
ing in their day-to-day operations with one significant part- 
ner group such as the parents. 

Other projects express ways of creating multi-partner 
participation, including parents, social services, businesses 
and the community, in their search for a better approach to 
raising children and nurturing the growth of pre-teens and 
teenagers. Some of these local initiatives are lop-down ideas 
originating with federal, provincial, municipal, or school- 
board levels of government, where schools were selected on 
the basis of their match with the goal of the programs. Wc 
found other examples where new community education 
initiatives were the result of the single-handed efforts of a 
dynamic school principal. 

For some, community education means parental involve- 
ment or community use of educational facilities and perhaps 
co-operative education: for others, it involves alliances 
between many more partners including health-care givers; 
libraries: business, and industry; and recreational, religious, 
and social welfare groups. For yet others, and perhaps in its 
most sophisticated application, the concept of community 
education embraces the involvement of the community at 
large in the educational process, with a view to setting much 
of the social agenda of the community, particularly as this 
agenda touches the lives of children. The Sparrow lake 

Rxttw IjOM o( L«amtn| 

Alliance is a coalition of 250 members of 11 professions 
providing services for children, including experts from 
teaching hospitals and community health clinics as well as 
professionals from social services, with the goal of answering 
emotional and mental health needs of children and adoles- 
cents of Southern Ontario.'^ 

We do not, therefore, focus on agencies only. We believe 
that there is every reason to include a range of community 
and neighbourhood people in the school. There should be a 
diversity of models of community education. We imagine, 
for example, as more and more children have less and less 
access to grandparents, that retired individuals in the 
community may be invited in to listen to children read, to 
read to them, and otherwise support their learning. Such 
forms of community education tell us much about the 
mutuality of learning and its value to all members of the 

Similarly, a local community sports association might 
take over responsibility for giving children a period of physi- 
cal activity every day, with the added benefit of releasing 
teachers to do planning, meet with parents, or have more 
time for professional development activities. We envision 
sports clubs or municipal recreation departments taking 
some responsibility for the students physical activities. 

We imagine local businesses in another domain of 
community life expanding their links with schools beyond 
providing sites for career visits, to take responsibility for 
providing part-time jobs for students who need them. Busi- 
nesses may lend staff to augment teachers' efforts in convey- 
ing certain knowledge in particular courses, co-ordinating 
workplace visits by students, providing schools with equip- 
ment that has become unnecessary at work. They may even 
promote healthy communities though their internal prac- 
tices by developing family-friendly policies that assure time 
for employees who are parents to maintain regular contact 
with their children's schools. 

We imagine a local college or university using a school as 
a teacher-development laboratory, thus placing more adults 
at the service of the children. The college or university may 
also work to forge links between schools and themselves 
through such means as campus visits. 

These new forms of community education or alliances 
could give special prominence to the role of parents and 
families. Elsewhere in this report we emphasize that 

research, time and again, substantiates the intuitive wisdom 
that children do well in the school when their parents create, 
within the home, an attitude that values learning. The link- 
age with parents by the schools and with the other alliance 
partners is crucial to any long-term success. But the attitude 
within the home remains the most difficult. 

Barriers to community education: Recognizing 
them and removing them 

The only way to provide services to children and youth, in 
an equitable and financially efficient fashion, is through the 
use of collaborative and co-operative models. The imple- 
mentation of collaborative delivery models has, however, 
been a long time in coming. There are obvious reasons for 
this. Some relate to the different mandates, policies, and 
organizational models of the various ministries and agencies 
that serve youth; others relate to the natural tendency of 
institutions to build walls around themselves and to jealous- 
ly guard their own areas of responsibility; and yet others 
relate to the variety of ways that child service institutions 
are funded. 

Much work remains to be done to remove obstacles that 
inhibit the necessary flexibility, authority, and funding. Ways 
must be found to ensure that support staff or personnel have 
defined responsibilities for co-ordinating efforts and estab- 
lishing liaisons between local groups and agencies; collabo- 
ration has not been the hallmark of inter-agency relation- 
ships. There are obvious needs for changes in the way local 
initiatives are supported through central funding mecha- 
nisms - changes that will be based on the recognized need to 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Community Education 




Walpo4« Island, Lak* St. Clair 

Better Beginnings. Better Futures is a joint venture of three provincial ministries and two federal 
departments established in 1989. This First Nation project, located halfway between Sarnia and 
Windsor, is one of 11 pilot projects. Walpole island has high seasonal unemployment. The project 
Shkimnoyaawin Niigaan Nigeeya. is for children to age 4 and their families. It focuses on the 
rediscovery of life-preserving. Iife^nhancing values of traditional Native culture through community 
healing and wellness, and is charactenzed by significant inter-agency coordination. 

The project features a home-visiting program, a drop-in centre, a toy- and book lending library, 
clothing exchanges, a play group, field tnps, and a coK)perative nursery to help the families renew 
their capacity to care for children. Cultural components of the program, such as Nechi training to 
promote community healing, citizenship awards, courses on social reforms. Native language 
classes, medicine wheel teachings, and dramatic art round out the program. 

Lakashore Collaglata Instltuta's CLUE Projact, Toronto 

LaKeshore Collegiate Institute, serving one of Toronto's urban areas, has a long history of involve- 
ment with its community. Established from an amalgamation of several other high schools in the 
early 1980s, it has an enrolment composed of a diverse student population. 

In responding to the increase in the number and seventy of problems brought to class by 
students, the school first developed a referral program, and later broadened its action to reach 
out into the school's community of social-service agencies for support. 

The program has evolved to provide on-site presence by several groups who are not available to 
the entire student body. Lakeshore freed up office space and, with the assistance of students, 
named this new collaborative project CLUE: Community Link Up Education. CLUE provides a range 
of general information counselling, workshops, and in some cases independent learning credits to 
students on site. Community agencies and groups are scheduled in at the CLUE project on a regu- 
lar basis. One of these groups is the Best Start Program, an outreach program for adolescent 
mothers and fathers, offering workshops on childrearing, and independent learning credits for 
expectant or new teenage mothers. CAWL, the Centre for the Advancement in Work and Living, 
offers stay-in-school and youth employment programs. Another group, the Women's Habitat- 
Community Outreach Program, offers support services and counselling for young women in 
abusive dating relations, and for sexual assault victims. The Metropolitan Toronto Police Commu- 
nity Patrol is an active member of CLUE, offering general information and dealing with the law. 
prevention/awareness programs regarding drugs, alcohol, and street proofing. The Public Health 
Department also participates, addressing birth control, stress, suicide, substance abuse and 
other health-related issues. 

Along with the schools Referral Program, project CLUE has given teachers concrete ways of 
addressing the student problems that interfere with their learning or with the learning of the class 
8S a whole. 

YMCA Blacli Ac*ii«v«r* Program, M«tfo Toronto 

Funded by the tchool boerdt and Unned Way contributions, the YMCA Black Achievers pracram brtngs black 
youth «Kl succaMful Macfc rrwntors together at »ct>ools in North York. Etobtaoke. ScattKHOUgh. and Toronto. 
Each yew mora than 300 students are Involved in the program, twttich includes aelf-esteeni worVshops. mottva 
tlonal talks. Mack Mstory lessons, carear advice, and study sMIls. 

For the Love of teaming 

provide services tiiat co-operate with each other rather than 
compete for the care and support of children and famiHes. 
We recognize that, at present, advocates of children, whether 
they be child-care workers, educators, or social welfare 
people, are constrained by the institutional norms of the 
agencies in which they work in surrendering any of their 
turf. Experience tells them that their job is to advocate for 
their service agency, whether they be a clerk at the local level 
or the Deputy Minister. 

The experience of collaborative child-service models and 
of community education in recent years reveals that where it 
has worked well, it has done so because of committed indi- 
viduals at the local level. Educators and others who assist 
parents in the raising of children do not hesitate to say that 
the first indicator of the likelihood of success in co-operative 
or collaborative efforts in favour of children relates directly 
to commitment at the grass-roots level. Nowhere in recent 
years was this demonstrated more graphically than in the 
results of the research on local parent involvement done for 
Better Beginnings, Better Futures Project. One of the power- 
ful findings gleaned from that experience and research was 
that local collaborative projects were successful only if there 
was "a minimum of 50 percent parents or community lead- 
ers on every major committee" and on the steering commit- 
tee responsible for the initiatives." We also learn from these 
Ontario experiences that real transfer of decision-making to 
such a local steering committee is also an essential ingredi- 
ent of success. 

Time, of course, is the other key factor. Often, in any 
given local community education project, the whole first 
year is needed for participants to build trust, a process that 
cannot be rushed; the second year is required to identify and 
solidify support for the project and to develop the necessary 

We also recognize the problems caused by the philosophi- 
cal and administrative differences between ministries: those 
offering universal services, like education, and those whose 
services are directed to a specific clientele, like correctional 
services. These difficulties are further compounded by the 
ways that different ministries in Ontario are organized to 
provide services to children. There are effectively two kinds 
of services: those for "normal" children and those for chil- 
dren defined as straying from the norm in some way. The 
different clienteles of ministries make it more difficult to 

integrate services. The risk, of course, is that the targeted 
groups of children are always further marginalized by 
services that should be helping them to avoid just such stig- 
mas and labels. 

We know that the pervasive effects of jurisdictional 
protection at the provincial level have led the authors of 
such studies as the Ontario Child Health Study'* and Children 
First to insist on the development of provincial policies that 
would mandate and reward co-operation between the vari- 
ous Ontario ministries concerned with children. Nonethe- 
less, questions of jurisdictional turf, and dollar allocation, 
especially in times of economic constraint, continue to 
inhibit meaningful integration of services. As well as frus- 
trating action provincially, "... resulting multiple lines of 
accountability among local service providers are a major 
impediment to service integration at the local level in the 

A laudable initiative of the provincial government in 
response to the Children First report was the establishment 
in 1990 of the Interministerial Committee on Services for 
Children and Youth. It consisted of assistant deputy minis- 
ters and representatives from nine key ministries and several 
other provincial agencies'* with an interest in children. Orig- 
inally it received staff support from within the Ministry of 
Education and Training, but over time, interest and support 
for the initiative dwindled, and the Integrated Services for 
Children and Youth Secretariat created earlier was disbanded 
in 1992. 

Two years later, a new inter-departmental committee was 
reactivated, the Tri-Ministry Committee on Services for 
Children and Youth. Limited, by choice, to the three key 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Community Education 

AA ■ n order to address the co-ordination 
I of the numy social services that are 
available to schools in respect to 
outside agencies, the principal's 
auttfority needs to be extended in 
order [that ttie principal] t>ecomes 
mmnagpr and coordinator 
of the social services.' 

hand, community education and its alliances will take a wide 
variety of forms, depending on local circumstances. Because 
the needs vary enormously from school to school, so will the 
pace of change people are ready to accept, their various 
philosophies of v^hat is good for the children in their care 
and, and of course, the available local resources. In the final 
analysis, the solutions cannot come from the top - they can 
only come from the local school and its community of 
parents and other players. What "the top" must undertake to 
do is facilitate access by local schools and their communities 
to Vkhat are defined as the positive assets that will meet their 

ministries - Education and Training, Health, and Communi- 
ty and Social Affairs - it has as current chair an assistant 
deputy minister of Community and Social Affairs who has 
sent a call to all interested parties ( 17 ministries or agencies 
replied). They are kept informed of the committee's work 
and might participate on an ad hoc basis. One of the lessons 
learned by government's responses to the challenges posed to 
bureaucratic structures by community education is that 
a separate, dedicated secretariat responsible for inter- 
departmental action and top-down links is a critical element 
of change. 

We are proposing that to ensure an integrated approach to 
(he care and nurturing of children, we think of the responsi- 
bilities of schools in a broader way and acknowledge the 
need for some restructuring in the delivery of not only 
educational but of all supports for children. This requires 
that together with families, a wide variety of community 
agencies, groups, and institutions can, and should, be 
brought to the table through the school so that they can 
determine how to best work together to support the develop- 
ment and learning of young people. It is not the school, and 
certainly not the teachers, who must assume prime responsi- 
bility for responding to the needs of young people. But, in 
our vision, the school must a.tsume responsibility for bring- 
ing together the people, the groups, and the agencies who 
can respond to these needs. In other words, the school is the 
central player m this concept. 

We are convinced, therefore, on the one hand of the 
importance of developing clear provincial policies that will 
encourage and support collaborative efforts in a variety of 
ways at both the provincial and the local level. On the other 

Community education: Making it liappen 

1 or slIuxiIn to bci-omi.- ctti-ttivi- .is ci'iitrcs tor services 
offered by a community in support of children, they must 
become the primary agent in searching out partners who 
will form the community of concern. Schools must broker 
and cement the necessary alliances among the partners to 
ensure an integrated approach to the delivery of care and 
support for children. We have no illusions that the task is 
easy. This concept can be realized only if there is staff 
commitment within the school. This commitment, we 
believe, must start with the leader of the school, the princi- 
pal. Because the role requires a broad sensitivity to the needs 
and resources within the community, we have recommended 
that school-community councils be formed to advise and 
assist principals. 

... in schools 

As a key strategy, community education involves changes in 

the role of the principal and in the training and attitudes of 

teachers. It also implies the addition of differentiated staff to 

schools - human-resource people who will not be certified 

as teachers, although they will be sharing in the education of 


In keeping with our vision of a principal who knows and 
is involved in the community from which the school draws 
its students, we believe that together with the task of instruc- 
tional leader, the principal must be the active agent in the 
development, fostering, and sustaining of the alliances that 
form the heart of community education. Principals are key 
to the success or failure of schools. Principals can be spark 
plugs for efforts to foster children's growth and develop- 

For Vm IjOvv of Ltamtng 

ment, by co-ordinating the services that help students. Our 
report and its recommendations ask principals to move out 
into the community both as ambassadors of good will, and, 
more important, as agents of change to establish a new 
understanding about the school and its responsibilities. 
Crucial to our recommendations, therefore, will be a clear 
redefinition of this new dual role of school principals. 

Although through community education we hope to 
lighten the teacher overload of recent years, we believe that 
teachers must be able to recognize a wide variety of social 
needs among their students, and be aware of the various 
services available within the new community of partners. 
Ensuring that teachers are equipped for this becomes an 
important task for principals. Too often the very people who 
are essential to such new structures have not been prepared. 
Indeed, we often heard that teachers have been trained to 
close the door of their classrooms and do whatever they do 
without the benefit of colleagues and community. One result 
is that parents have often been kept outside. We see changing 
these kinds of attitudes as fundamental to the role of the 
principal in community education. In Chapter 12 we address 
the need for all teachers to learn to work in collaboration 
with their colleagues as well with parents and others in the 

The notion of differentiated staff is key to improving 
education in Ontario schools and as an enrichment to 
school life. It may involve volunteer parents, paid or unpaid, 
helping in classes, or other professionals and para- 
professionals, as well as aides. But in fulfilling their new dual 
responsibility, principals will also need some assistance from 
school boards in the task of community development - 
assistance in implementing the recommendations of the 
school-community council and the initiatives developed by 
the principal. 

... with families 

There are still educators who say, "If the family would just 
do its job, we could do our job." That statement represents a 
view of "separate spheres of influence." According to one 

In effect, these people are saying, "Let's separate the family and the 
school in order to have the most efficient organization possible. If 
the family carries out its mission, we educators can teach the chil- 
dren what they need to know ... This has been the prevailing theory 

in sociology from the turn of the century until approximately the 
mid-1970s ... As we began to study school and family partnerships, 
we found that the theory of separate spheres was not useful for 
explaining the effective organization of education for children. 
Rather, our data suggested the need to push the spheres together so 
that they overlap somewhat."" 

All of the alliances that we are suggesting, the web of 
supports and resources, are to be at the service of the child. 
The child, then, is at the centre of our concept of communi- 
ty education. And connecting the child to this broad 
community of concern is his or her family unit. Given the 
increasing stresses and pressures on families discussed earli- 
er, assuring the establishment of this vital link is the most 
difficult challenge of all. The efforts of principals, school 
boards, school-community councils, and provincial policy 
frameworks must be directed to ensuring the active partici- 
pation of this essential partner. 

As with community education itself, there is not one 
magic formula or strategy that adapts to all families. In light 
of the research linking student achievement inextricably to 
parental involvement in the child's education, participation 
must be encouraged. Though the kind and the degree of 
involvement may vary, it is essential to the success of the 

There is no shortage of strategies to make schools "family 
friendly." Perhaps most important are those strategies that 
actively encourage parent participation. We have heard of 
schools approaching families in their catchment area, imme- 
diately following the birth of a child, to make parents aware 
of the school's interest in a future pupil. Other schools 
provide parent-education workshops to familiarize parents 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Community Education 

with their childrens sthool programs and provide parenting 
advice. In the TIPS (Teachers Involve Parents in Schoolwork) 
program, teachers design homework assignments in such a 
way as to encourage children to discuss their schoolwork 
with parents. 

Because of the difficulty many parents have in attending 
teacher-parent interviews, many schools arc using telephone 
calls or home visits to facilitate the involvement of parents. 
We even heard of schools where each teacher, each day, spells 
out the program of the day and the homework for the 
evening on a voice-mail message that parents can access easi- 
ly at any time after school hours. The increasing use of tech- 
nology in schools - another of our main engines of educa- 
tional reform - opens the door to a variety of new tech- 
niques to better link the home and the school. 

... and the new ichool-community councils 
At the heart of our conception of a new approach and 
commitment to community education is the recognition of 
the need for a local structure that will place the school at the 
hub to build community support of student learning. This is 
the school-community council that we have already referred 
lo. Our arguments in favour of this new structure are much 
akin to those in favour of community education. We see this 
local structure as the vehicle for empowering communities 
close to a school to rediscover their assets: those of "commit- 
ment, understanding of local problems, a problem-solving 
rather than a service orientation, caring, flexibility and 
creativity, efficiency, shared values, and a focus on human 
capacity rather than deficiency." ' Wc also believe that 
Khool-community councils will enhance the primary role of 

parents in the education, growth, and development of their 
children by putting parents in regular contact, not only with 
teachers, but with the various community agencies that assist 
parents in their responsibilities. 

To meet these cornerstone needs for supporting our 
vision of a new community education. 

Recommendations 108, 109 

•We recommend that the Ministry of Education and Training 
mandate that each school in Ontario establish a school- 
community council, with membership drawn from the follow- 
ing sectors: 

- parents 

- students (from Grade 7 on) 

- teachers 

- representatives from local religious and 

ethnic communities 

- service providers (government and non-government) 

- municipal government(s) 

- service clubs and organizations 

- business sectors 

* We recommend that each school principal devise an action 
plan for the establishment and implementation of the school- 
community council. 

We conceive of the school-community council as an 
essential underpinning or resource in aiding principals in 
the determination of the kind of alliances needed and 
resources available in a given community. We see principals 
playing pivotal roles in convening the council and in moti- 
vating its work. School boards and government ministries 
and agencies should define a support function and support 
services available to principals according lo local needs. 

Because of their representation from health care, social, 
and recreational agencies, families and business, these coun- 
cils can be of particular assistance to principals by advising 
how parents in a given area can best be contacted and 
encouraged to participate more in the education of their 
children and in the life of the school. School-community 
councils bring together many of the partners in education to 
reinforce their understanding of how they can influence and 
complement one another in their efforts on behalf of chil- 
dren. Within the area of the school and among the networks 
associated with the school, these councils should play an 

Forth* LoM or L««ming 

educative role in making all aware of the necessity of this 
community approach to education, which we are recom- 
mending. They will liaise with the business community, 
health-care groups, municipal facilities, and the like. 

In establishing the framework for school-community 
councils, we take for granted the principle that local deci- 
sion-making must recognize the various constituencies 
represented in public and Catholic, English, and French 
schools. Although drawing on many common groups, 
services, and associations, schools differentiated by religion 
or language will also draw on specific groups that can be of 
assistance to their particular school. 

Recommendation 110 

*\Ne recommend that school boards provide support to prin- 
cipals to establish and maintain school-community councils 
and that the boards monitor the councils ' progress and indi- 
cate the progress in their annual reports. 

... with school boards 

We see the role of the school-community councils as 
complementary to the role of school boards. We believe that 
these councils can provide the depth of response to local 
conditions that has been lost at the school-board level. 
Parents entrust their children to schools so that the latter 
can assist them in the task of child raising. This expectation 
lies at the heart of the trusteeship exercised by members of 
school boards. This responsibility can be fulfilled by trustees 
only if they share this task with the many other community 
groups who serve children. School-board trustees in most 
instances can best fulfil their chief task, that of policy 
setting, when they acknowledge the need for community 

This reliance on community has obvious practical conse- 
quences. School boards must take the leadership in estab- 
lishing regular, structured liaison among themselves, munic- 
ipalities, business groups, health-care facilities, recreational 
and social agencies, religious and other groups to facilitate 
the development of the alliances and communities of 
concern. Principals and school-community councils must be 
encouraged by boards to develop the kind of alliances best 
suited to their area, and must be given substantial support 
by supervisory officers acting as leaders at the 
municipal/county level. Principals and school-community 

councils will therefore require greater local autonomy and 
budget control. 

Achieving such a vision can in many instances involve the 
location of community services, other agencies, and schools 
in one building. Although Ontario is not currently in a 
school-building boom, new schools are being built, and 
older schools are being renovated, added to, or replaced. 
Now is the time to ensure that multi-purpose perspectives are 
taken so that we have multi-purpose facilities. 

A collaborative approach to meeting the needs of chil- 
dren should also result in cost savings. Now, there is duplica- 
tion between school boards and other services as schools try 
to cope with problems of a social, health, or psychological 
nature, with insufficient expertise, and spend considerable 
time trying to get other agencies to deal with the problem. 
Those agencies likewise spend time trying to get into 
schools, but an us-versus-them attitude sometimes intrudes. 

Recommendation 111 

*We recommend that the Ministry of Education and Training, 
teachers ' federations, and school boards take whatever 
actions are necessary to ensure that community liaison staff 
persons are sufficiently available to assist principals in 
strengthening school-community linkages. These staff, who 
would not be certified teachers, would be responsible for 
helping to implement decisions and initiatives of the school- 
community councils as well as other school-community initia- 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Community Education 



I.S. 21t Salom* Ur*n« Middle Acad«ml«ft, N«w Yorti, N.Y. 

This Junior high school, which serves 1.200 students In Grades 6. 7, and 8. is located in the 
Washington Heights-lnwood section of Manhattan, a neighbourhood clearly having great needs on 
all fronts. The partnership project, a joint venture involving the Children's Aid Society (an agency 
with a purpose that's different from the Canadian version), the Board of Community School 
District Sixth and the New York City Board of Education and local parents, is unique in that its 
definition of partnership goes beyond most understandings of the concept. 

The school, and the community facilities built within it. did become the centre, even a second 
home, for its entire community, playing for its students a role well t)eyond the traditional school 
day arKJ school ways. All of this was accomplished by educators and social service groups wor1<- 
ing closely together, in full partnership - truly the school as the hub of community life. 

In addition to its four specialized academies (Business Studies: Community Service: Expressive 
Arts: and Math, Science and Technology) into which the student body has t>een divided, the 
school includes the Family Resource Centre and a medical/dental facility, both run by CAS. 
Besides the Extended Day Program (7 a.m. to 6 p.m.), there are programs for teens, parents, and 
other adults, all defined locally by community needs. There is the SUMA Store, a for- 
profit student-run corporation offenng books, school supplies, snacks, comics, posters, to name 
a few Items. There are also classes, workshops, and services, often on evenings and weekends, 
for parents and other adults. A few of the parents work almost full-time in the school and some of 
them receive a small stipend from CAS. 

Partir d'un bon pas pour un avanir maillaur, Cornwall 

Cornwall's Better Beginnings. Better Futures project Involves both a breakfast project and school 
facilitators (mostly parents) who are hired by the project. These facilitators are trained in child 
development and specialize in French-language development, culture, and self-esteem. Child-care 
services assist parents who would not otherwise be able to obtain child care on Saturday morn- 
ings, dunng the summer, or on professional development days. The community development 
component includes numerous activities, most of which focus on parent Involvement and the 
volunteer training program for the four basic planning committees. 

Tha Stratford Education aitd Racraation Cantra 

The Stratford Education and Recreation Centre (SERC) is an exciting shared development of the 
City of Stratford, the Perth County Board of Education and the Huron-Perth County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, and is located on a 60-acre site in the northwest sector of Stratford. 

Included in the development is the new St. Michael Catholic Secondary School, containing 30 
teaching spaces on two floors, plus a double gym. cafetena. communications lab and a main floor 
chapel. Next to St. Michael is another two-storey building containing a library resource centre on 
the upper floor that will be shared by St. Michael School and Northwestern Secondary School. On 
tf>e lower floor of this building is a child<:are centre operated by the Stratford-Perth Family YMCA. 
which accomrTKXlates 72 children, as well as the media centre for the Perth County Board of 

Substantial coat savings have been achieved by three public bodies shanng land and buildings. 

For tha Lofm et Uamtnt 

... with the provincial government: Adopting an agenda for 
redesigning systems to support community education 

Government must become the leading partner in creating a public 
agenda for children and in establishing an integrated framework 
that ensures that the entitlements of children are met through a 
holistic system of supports and services." 

Developing a strategy at the provincial level has proven to 
be difficult, not least because of entrenched bureaucracies. 
By their very nature, bureaucracies are resistant to change 
and to surrendering turf. Although precise recommenda- 
tions to address the requisite new structures at the provincial 
level are beyond the mandate of the Commission and the 
time constraints under which we have been working, we 
raise a number of broad policy issues in regard to provincial 
government action. 

We cannot ignore the criticisms of studies that document 
the effects of the fragmented non-systems of children's 
services in Ontario. Their crisis orientation focuses on reme- 
dy rather than prevention. Instead of considering the inter- 
action of causes and solutions for children and their fami- 
lies, professionals tend to rigidly categorize problems. The 
lack of communication among systems is well documented, 
as is the specialization of the service providers that often 
renders them unable to propose effective solutions to 
complex problems. Most troubling for our conception of 
community education is the failure of ministries to work 
towards a common goal of supporting children's learning. 
Ministries in Ontario, as in other jurisdictions, have created 
discrete local service systems characterized by differences 
and even contradictions in the assessment of child and fami- 
ly needs, and by solutions (to the complex problems of chil- 
dren) that are too narrowly focused. We are troubled by the 
tendency in these systems for clashes in approaches and by 
the tendency to ignore problems because they fall into 
another ministry's mandate. 

One suggestion made to address the question of the 
bureaucratic divisions and confusions is found in the 
Children First report. The report recommends that a 
Ministry of the Child be established. Although we discussed 
this idea during our public hearings, and are in principle not 
opposed, our sense is that immediate action at the local level 
is more critical to the lives of children and their families. 
Such immediate local action must not wait for such complex 
provincial restructuring. 

Obviously, provincial policy must address issues such as 
the funding of education programs dealing with sex, AIDS, 
and drugs if these are to be assigned to another community 
partner. If other agencies either deliver or assist in delivering 
fitness programs, job or career counselling, or other services, 
there must be new determinations for the allocation of 
human and financial resources. And in all of this, account- 
ability mechanisms must be built in so that students in need 
of services do not fall through the cracks of integrated 
services, and so that principals have some guarantee of co- 
operation in seeking to build the necessary alliances for their 

If we want genuine collaboration, significant change in 
provincial structures is necessary, now or eventually. But it 
must not be the sine qua non for the development of 
community education. The provincial government must 
both get out of the way and give collaboration a push. By 
getting out of the way, we mean that legislative, regulatory, 
and administrative restrictions should not intrude in making 
the best decisions or providing the best services for children 
at the local level. By giving collaboration a push, we suggest 
that there should be incentives for local agencies and 
managers to work together. In fact, it may well be necessary 
for legislation to be enacted that clarifies the primary and 
secondary responsibilities of schools and the Ministry, and 
those of other ministries and agencies. 

These conditions have led other provinces and states to 
initiate efforts to redesign and to even reinvent children's 
services systems. We recognize the difficulty of these efforts 
and the need to initiate change at the local community level. 
Our recommendations so far have taken this "bottom-up" 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Community Education 



e recommend] that govern- 
ment and community 
services for children and family, 
including "head start" programs, be 
integrated for seamless delivery 
through tt>e local school, but ttiat ttie 
expertise, funding and responsibility 
for outcomes t>e clearly and appropri- 
ately delineated; ttvat all children 
receive the full program available at 
their neighbourtK>od school." 

approach. However, we have been warned by professionals 
from local agencies, schools, and school boards that bottom- 
up initiatives can only succeed if the constraints to collabo- 
ration and community outreach that have their source in 
provincial-level institutional structures are removed. We 
believe the time has come to set out the direction for long- 
term systemic reform of the multiple, hierarchical, children's 
service systems that have evolved in the province. The 
redesign initiative we propose reflects our conclusion that 
the expansion of the large children's service systems already 
in place does not promise greater well-being for our children 
and youth. We have in this chapter argued for a new direc- 
tion that builds on the strengths of communities, families, 
children, and youth. 

The systemic changes in provincial children's services 
systems that we believe are needed to fulfil our vision of 
community education require significant political leadership 
committed to redesigning existing flows of authority, 
resources, skills, and capacities. 

Recommendation 112 

*We recommend that the Premier assign responsibility for 
retormir\g children's services to a senior Minister, in addition 
to his/her regular portfolio: and that this senior Minister be 
supported by an Intermimstenal Committee of Ministers 
responsible for children's services: and that 

a) the Committee be assisted by permanent staff: 

b) the Committee irKlude the systematic review and revi 
sion of 

- service approaches taken 

- quality of services provided 

- funding mechanisms 

- legislation 

- regional organization of authority 

- provincial structures: 

c) the Committee establish, through the regional offices of 
the MET. a leadership and coordinating plan between the 
school boards and the other local providers of services to 
develop and help implement the mechanisms necessary 
to support the work of school- community councils. 

Community education can only become an effective 
engine lor changing supports for children's learning with 
strt)ng leadership and co-ordinatit)n at the regional and 
local levels. 

We believe that a review of present legislation and regula 
tions would lead to the removal of impediments to the kind 
of alliances we are advocating. Also needed is a policy frame- 
work to clarify how partnerships might be structured and 
funded. Such a review should also identify the necessary 
additional mandates to be given to ministries other than 
Education and Training and to agencies other than schools. 

Recommendation 113 

• We recommend that the provincial government review 
legislative and related impediments, and that they develop 
a policy framework for collaboration to facilitate partnerships 
between community and schools. 

Sattln^ a tlm«llne for action 

II tlusi iii.iiinm(.iul.itiiiiis .III Id h.ivc effect, they must be 
supported by a timeline for action that recognizes the 
complexity of the changes proposed. We remind the govern- 
ment of the lessons from decades of research on the condi- 
tions required to support implementation. 

Recommendation 114 

*We recommend that the Interministenal Committee of 
Ministers, under the senior minister responsible, as its first 
task set a sustainable timeline for implementating 
community partnership, policies, and mechanisms, with 
specific points for reporting and disseminating the results 
of the efforts. 

For \h» Love o< LNrnlnc 

These recommendations should signal the importance we 
place on the need for long-term systemic reform of chil- 
dren's services. 


Defining what we mean by community education has been a 
difficult part of our work in this Royal Commission. Our 
conception recognizes the variety of local influences that 
change the form and nature of community education. This 
is as it should be. Only by developing the capacity for 
communities to re- invent their relations with schools can 
student learning be supported and ultimately sustained. We 
recognize that the redesign of schooling we have proposed in 
this chapter is complex. It requires a change in what school- 
ing means and what schools are for. It amounts to social 
change of the highest order. 

Despite these difficulties, we are convinced that commu- 
nity education is central to education reform in the 
province. It is one of the essential levers to the changes we 
are recommending. Teacher education (Chapter 12) will 
remain a keystone of the profession only if it is based on the 
needs of schools as rooted in contemporary communities. 
Our recommendations regarding early childhood education 
(Chapter 7) find their genesis in the necessity of forging 
developmental links between schools and children's homes 
and communities. Information technology (Chapter 13) as a 
lever or strategy of educational change depends not only on 
children's being immersed in this new way of learning, but 
on many partners being brought together through this tech- 
nology in what might be called electronic communities. 

In short, it is the concept of community education ties 
together with the four key levers that we hope will provide 
the impetus for tomorrow's education in Ontario. 

Community education is potentially powerful: it can 
provide the most economic use of the community's financial 
resources; schools can become more effective in supporting 
their students' academic achievements and general develop- 
ment; and if the pressure on teachers to meet non-academic 
needs is relieved, we can expect renewed commitment to 
teaching. Finally, parents with strong community support 
are likely to carry out their parenting responsibilities with 
greater confidence and skill. 

Joining Hands for Student Success 



Give life and love, 
food and shelter. 

Learn how to learn 

and achieve their 



Nurture, instruct, 

guide, and support 

students. Relate to 

students, parents, 

and community. 

_ 1 

Provide safety, ^M 
support, and ■ 


W Principals 

' Manage, evaluate 

staff, use vision to 

k coordinate and 

f communicate 

school initiatives. 


Represent people 
by listening, facili- 
tating communica- 
tion and decision 

Business Industry Labour 

Lend Leadership through 


Support students, staff, 

parents, or community 

through assisting, 

providing, planning, and 

reviewing educational 

economic strength, clear 
direction, and role models. 

initiatives and stan- 

Source; North York Board of Education Newsletter, 1994. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Community Education 



Thunrui ]. S«rgiovanni. BuiUing Community in Sthools 
(San Francisco: losscy-Bau, 1994). p. xi. 

Canadian Institute of Child Health. "Suicide," factsheet. 
Ottawa. 1994. 

Bntuh Columbia, Office of the Ombudsman, Public Strvices 
to ChiUren, Youth and Thetr Families in British Columbia: 
The Seed for Integration, Public Report no. 22 (Victoria. 
1990). p. 60. 

M. Philp, "Welfare Spicm Shaiicrs Dreams of a Better Life," 
Globe and Mail, 21 January 1994. 

Ontario, Ministry of Community and Social Services, rime 
for Action: Towards a New Social Assistance System for Ontario 
(Toronto, 1992). 

D. Osborne and T. Gaebler, Reinventing Government: How 
the Entrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforming the Public Sector 
(Readmg. .VIA: Addison -Wesley, 1992). p. 51. 

Ontario, Ministry of Education and Training. Belter 
Beginnings, Better Futures Project: Model, Program and 
Research Ovrrvio*- (Toronto, 1994). Prepared by R. DcV. 
Peters and C.C. Russell. 

Ontario, Select Committee on the Utilization of Educational 
Facilities, Interim Report Number One and Interim Report 
Number Ttw ( Toronto, 1973). 

Premier's Council on Health, Well-Being, and Social lustice. 
Yours, Mine, and Ours (Toronto: Ontario Children and Youth 
Project. 1994). p. 53. 

The Better Beginnings. Better Futures Project was established 
in 1989 as a joint venture of three Ontario and two federal 
departments. It supports 1 1 pilot projects in Ontario 

Alberta. Ministry of Education. Coort/inarion of Services for 
Children: Terms of Reference (Edmonton. 1992). 

MSrrta. Ministry of Family and Social Services. Reshaping 
( hiUI VvVZ/arr ( F^monton. 1993). 

British Columbu. Ministry of Education, Report of the 
Rpyitl Commission on Education: A Legacy for Learnen 
Vutoru. I9M). 

Ontario. Advisory Committee on Children's Services, Chil- 
dren Firii (Toronto, 1990). 

Qurhrt. Ministry of Health and Socul Service*. Vn Quibec 

' intf: Rapport du Croupe de travail pour les jeunes 

Saskatchewan, Ministry of Education, Integrated School- 
Based Services for Children and Families (Regitva, 1992). 

See Rrcommrndation no. 9, "Building a New Relationship 
for School. Community and Workplace," in Premier's 
Council of Ontario. People and Skills in the New Global 
Economy (Toronto. 1990). p. 51. 

Sparrow Lake Alliance, submission to the Oniariu Royal 
Commission on Learning. 1993. 

Ontario. Ministry of Education and Training, Better 
Beginnings, Belter Futures: The 199} Progress Report 
(Descripiwn and Lessons learned} (Toronto. 1994). p. 5. 
Prepared by R. DeV. Peters and C.C. Russell. 

D. OfTord. M. Boyle, and Y. Racine, Onrdrio Child Health 
Study: Children at Risk (Toronto: Queen's Printer. 1989). 

Hanne B. Mawhinney, "The Policy and Practice of School- 
Based Interagency (Collaboration " Research paper prepared 
for the Ontario Royal CCommission on l.earning. 

The tommitlcc consisted of Assistant Deputy Ministers and 
representatives from the Ontario Ministries of Education, 
Health, (Community and Social Services. Housing, Tourism 
and Recreation, the Solicitor (Icncral, the Attorney (ieneral, 
(Correctional Services, and Natural Resources, as well as 
representatives from the Ontario Women's Directorate, the 
Ontario Anti-Racism Secretariat, the Office of Disability 
Issues, and the Premier's CCouncil on Health Strategy. 

Joyce L. Epstein, "School, Family, and Community 
Partnerships: Building Blocks for Education Reform" 
(paper presented at the Short CCourse for Educational 
Leaders. Canadian Education Association. Banff, May 1994). 

D. Osborne and T. Gaebler. Reinventing Government, p. 10. 

Ontario, Advisory Committee on Children's Services, 
Children First, p. 107. 

For ttt« Lo««o(LMmir\( 



any of the concerns expressed by these three 
groups with special constitutional status mirror 
those of the broader community, and thus are 
part of other sections of our report. For example, parents in 
these three communities share the concerns of parents of 
children in the public system about having greater involve- 
ment in their children's education and about effective 
communication between home and school. This chapter, 
however, deals only with issues that are the specific priorities 
of these groups. 

Roman Catholics, who have constitutional rights to their 
own system, are concerned about barriers to equal opportu- 
nities for excellence: funding, preferential hiring of Roman 
Catholic teachers, teacher education, and structures in the 
Ministry of Education and Training. We make recommenda- 
tions in three of these areas, while those related to funding 
can be found in Chapter 18. 

Franco-Ontarians, who also have constitutional guaran- 
tees, are pressing for full implementation of their legally 
awarded right to manage their French-language education - 
a right that they believe is related to the opportunities for 
their students to reach a higher level of academic excellence, 
as well as to equity measures. Like the Roman Catholic 
community, Franco-Ontarians are concerned about having 
the resources to support and enhance their education 

Aboriginal communities seek self- governance in educa- 
tion, and most of this concern must be dealt with at the 
federal level. However, aboriginal people articulated to us, 
and we responded to, several specific concerns about the 
quality of education for their children as it relates to language 
of instruction, curriculum content, resources, and teacher 
training - issues in which the province does have a role. 

The Roman Catholic education system 

During the public hearings, we spoke with a wide range of 
Roman Catholic educational representatives, as we did with 
public and francophone representatives. We found much in 
common among these systems, just as we discovered that 
each system has qualities and features distinctively its own. 
This suggested that while we must ensure equity and excel- 
lence in all three systems, their diversity means we do not 
have to have a one-size-fits-all approach to our strategies for 
educational reform. 

The fact of the Roman Catholic system as a distinct 
educational community became particularly evident to us in 
a presentation by the Council of Ontario Separate Schools 
(COSS), an umbrella organization made up of the provincial 
associations of Roman Catholic parents, trustees, teachers, 
supervisory officers, and bishops. In their joint presentation, 
these groups focused more on their common vision of 
education than on their different tasks and responsibilities 
within their educational system. They told us: 

This grouping of associations comes to you together because in the 
separate schools of the province we are a community. We consider 
ourselves as participants in a deeply held covenant. The philosophi- 
cal and theological underpinnings of our approach to education 
hold us together in ways which the exigencies of daily operations 
cannot alter. 

They went on to develop a series of common positions and 
declarations that had a high degree of congruence and 
agreement on the major concerns of the Roman Catholic 
educational community. Consequently, as a commission, we 
had very little difficulty in getting a clear sense of their 
priorities for educational reform. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 

On UM waN of Room 2S7, F xk Elementary ScNxM. 

C«t«ton Roman CathoMc Saparale Scnooi Board (reproduced here 
•ucuy as \Morded). 


Help u« lo do weli at tcttooi and oMam eicellem a xacaga a . 

BieM our tamtltes 

Help aM of us oveftoofc peoples differences and find there ftreat points. 

RemirKl me to IM kind to others. 

Help treat others as you want to t>e treated. 

^ase guide us m our directions. 

Fbrstve our stra. 


A brief history of Roman Catholic schools 
The first classes csubluhcd by huropcans in Ontario were 
for Native children, offered by French Jesuit priests in Huro- 
nia in 1634. which can he said to mark the beginning of 
Roman Catholic education in this province. These classes 
were followed in the 17th century by classes for the children 
of settlers in New France. 

Veiy early in the 19th century, one-room English- 
language Roman (.atholic schools were opened, the first in 
Glengarry County in eastern Ontario. Under the leadership 
of Bishop Alexander Macdonell in Kingston. Catholic educa- 
tion expanded when the first Catholic grammar (secondary) 
Khool was established in Kingston in 1839: it still operates 

Initially. Roman Catholic schools were made possible by 
religious communities of women and men who organized 
the settlers to establish the schools, and who ensured their 
fmancial support. 

We were told that the contribution of these communities 
- particularly the communities of sisters - to Roman 
Catholic education in this province cannot be overstated. 
Indeed, until the past quarter century, the history of 
Catholic education in Ontario is inseparable from the histo- 
ry of these communities and the people who led them: until 
the 193CK. their members constituted the majority of princi- 
pals and teachers in Catholic schools. 

This pattern of Khool development and organization 
created the distinctive three-part character of Roman 
' >ols m Ontario. Church leaders, with parents 

A- rs. created these schools from a joint vision of 

(he place of education in the life of the broader community. 

The schools existed only because of the conscious and delib- 
erate effort of parents to establish and financially support 
them. Many Ontario Roman Catholics acknowledge that 
constructing these schools was possible only through the 
efforts of the local church, and operating them was afford- 
able only through the contributed services and sacrifice of 
the religious communities who staffed them. Thus, the part- 
nership of home, school, and parish was always the ideal that 
guided their development. 

Pre-Confcderation legislation passed by the united legis- 
latures of Canada West (later Ontario) and Canada East 
(Quebec) gave more formal recognition and support to 
Roman Clatholic education. Notably, the lache Act ( 1855) 
and the Scott Act ( 1863), among other things, allowed the 
election of separate school trustees, established separate 
school zones, and provided legislative grants to separate 

By the time of C'onfederation, Roman t^atholic schools 
were well established: 18,924 students were being educated 
in Catholic elementary schools in 1867. The existence of 
denominational schools became a key feature in the discus- 
sions over the unification of British provinces into one 
country. The guaranteed maintenance of C^atholic denomi- 
national schools in Ontario, and of Protestant denomina- 
tional schools in Quebec, was part of the "historic compro- 
mise" that made possible the union of Canada. 

Section 93 of the British North America Act (now the 
Constitution Act, 1867) said clearly that such schools were 
guaranteed, and it placed a constraint on provincial authori- 
ty over education, an otherwise unrestricted jurisdiction. 

Section 9.^: 

In ind for each Province the Legislature may exclusively make Laws 
in relation to Education, subject to and according to the following 

( 1 ) Nothing in any such Law ihall prejudicially affect any Right or 
Privilege with respect to Denominational Schoolt which any Ga»» of 
Person* have by Ijw in the Province at the Union; 

(2) All the Powers, Privileges, and Duties at the Union by Ijw 
conferred and imposed in Upper Canada on the Separate Schoolt 
and School Trustee* of the Queen'* Roman ( jtholic Subiect* ihall 
be and the vime are hereby extended lo the Di»*enticnl School* of 
the Queen'* Prole*tant and Roman tjlholic Subfecti in Quebec; 

For the Lo«« of Learning 

(3) Where in any Province a System of Separate or Dissentient 
Schools exists by Law at the Union or is thereafter estabhshed by the 
Legislature of the Province, an Appeal shall lie to the Governor 
General in Council from any Act or Decision of any Provincial 
Authority affecting any Right or Privilege of the Protestant or 
Roman Catholic Minority of the Queen's Subjects in relation to 

AA Vihe Catholic school aims to extend 
I for the child the micro community 
of the home, first to that of the 
school, then into the parish and, 
thence, outward into the neighbour- 
hood and ever larger communities 
into which the child will grow." 

Ontario Catholic Supervisory Officers' Association (OCSOA) 

(4) In case any such Provincial Law as from Time to Time seems to 
the Governor General in Council requisite for the due Execution of 
the Provisions of this Section is not made, or in case any Decision of 
the Governor General in Council on any Appeal under this Section is 
not duly executed by the proper Provincial Authority in that Behalf, 
then and in every such Case, and as far only as the Circumstances of 
each Case require, the Parliament of Canada may make remedial 
Laws for the execution of the provisions of this Section and of any 
Decision of the Governor General in Council under this Section. 

Constitution Act, 1867 

The constitutionally guaranteed rights were confirmed in 
Section 29 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 
which is part of the Constitution Act, 1982. 

Section 29: 

Nothing in this Charter abrogates or derogates from any rights or 
privileges guaranteed by or under the Constitution of Canada in 
respect of denominational, separate or dissentient schools. 

Constitution Act, 1982 

In the decades that followed Confederation - and despite 
substantial financial obstacles, particularly to the creation of 
secondary schools - Roman Catholic education continued to 
flourish. By 1900, there were 42,397 students in Catholic 
schools; by 1925, the number had more than doubled to 
95,300 students. Religious communities of sisters, brothers, 
and priests continued to take the lead in setting up schools, 
including many secondary schools, with both residential and 
day students. 

In 1969, provision was made for the creation of county 
and regional separate school boards, similar to the provision 
made the previous year for public school boards. For histori- 
cal reasons, these separate boards operated with some degree 
of public funding through Grade 10. Tuition fees were paid 
by parents of children in Grades 11, 12, and 13. 

Through partnerships between the religious communities 
that owned and operated the schools and the newly created 
school boards, a small-scale secondary school system 
emerged - small not only in terms of the number of 
students it could educate but also in the limited range of 
course offerings it could make available. 

Typically, Roman Catholic secondary schools at that time 
offered only core academic subjects such as math, English, 
science, and then only at the advanced level. Catholic 
students who could not afford the tuition, or who did not 
match the academic profile of Catholic secondary schools, 
either went directly to the local public secondary school or 
left at the end of Grade 10. 

Furthermore, the fact that parents had to pay tuition fees 
in Grades 11, 12, and 13 ensured that a Roman Catholic 
secondary school education was a possibility for only the 
wealthier or most educationally committed families. This 
system could operate only on the basis of tuition fees paid 
by parents, lower salaries paid to teachers, and services and 
facilities provided by religious communities. Even this on- 
going sacrifice and commitment left the system on the verge 
of financial insolvency throughout this period. 

In 1984, then-Premier William Davis announced his 
intention of completing the Roman Catholic education 
system by granting public funding through Grade 13 in 
Catholic schools. The Conservative government initiated the 
legislation, but the process was concluded by the minority 
Liberal government that won the next provincial election. 

While Bill 30 was supported in its amended form by all 
three political parties, and was passed in the House on June 
24, 1986, it was and still is the subject of much controversy. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 

i£ ^^atholic schools provide a full and 
\# integral education thanks to the 
spiritual and Christian aspects of 
their teaching. To become ful^fledged 
humans, we must interact with four 
realms of our being: the physical, 
cultural, social and spiritual spheres. 
Any day-toKlay practice of education 
ttiat fails to promote <iny one of 
four roakns cannot claim 

Issues and recommendations 

Alter we reviewed the tour months of our pubMc hearings, a 
group of issues of particular concern to the Cathohc 
community clearly emerged. The following sections summa- 
rize these specific issues, some of which are also shared by 
the French community. Essentially these are related to the 
provision of resources and support services needed to 
preserve and enhance the Roman Catholic education system. 

In a 1987 legal proceeding, the Supreme Court of Canada, in 
a 7-0 decision, ruled that the legislation was constitutional. 

This completion of the Roman Catholic school system 
has resulted in both growth and change, especially at the 
secondary school level. With tuition fees abolished, children 
who previously could not afford to go to (Catholic schools 
were given an opportunity to attend; this reduced the 
private-school, elitist image of Roman Catholic education, 
and made it authentically public and of service to all. 

Moreover, improved funding made it possible to 
construct better facilities and to offer a wider range of 
courses. For the first time. Catholic schools had automotive 
shops and technical departments, as well as Latin programs 
and theology courses. The schools began to look more like 
the whole Catholic community, and not just a segment of it. 

The development has brought substantial discussion in 
the Roman Catholic educational community on the issue of 
remaining faithful to its religious origins while being 
responsive to its public mandate. 

In 1993, there were 621,143 students in Ontario Roman 
Catholic schools, 30 percent of the 2,042,710 students 
enrolled in the province. Of the total Roman Catholic 
student enrolment, 444,990 were at the elementary level and 
171,153 at the secondary level. They were being educated in 
1,343 elementary schf>ols by 23.570 teachers, and in 201 
tecondary "school* by 10,444 teachers. 

Ovcrwhelmmgly, teachers m Roman Catholic Khools 
today are not members of religious communities: laypeople 
make up 97 percent of the teaching body. VXTicther they 
teach in the English- or French-language sections of the 
separate Khool system, these teachers have a shared vision of 
the education process. 


Without exception, every significant provincial Roman 
Catholic organization spoke to us of the need to reform 
education financing in Ontario. Trustees, parents, teachers, 
supervisory officers, principals, and clergy identified historic 
underfunding of Catholic schools as a province-wide prob- 
lem and as an unjustifiable inequity, one that leaves 
hundreds of thousands of students without educational 
resources that meet generally accepted standards. 

We were told that while there have been some recent 
changes in funding practices, several separate school boards 
hover on the edge of bankruptcy. Growth in the Catholic 
school system over the past two decades has compounded 
the problems caused by underfunding, and has resulted in 
inadequate facilities and permanent overcrowding. 

Of the 40 boards in the province with the lowest pcr- 
pupil income from property assessment, 39 are Catholic. Of 
the 60 boards in the province with the highest such assess- 
ment income, only three arc (Catholic, and none of these 
three is among the top ten. This province-wide situation 
means profound disparities in programs and facilities 
between and within the same municipalities and counties. 

Wc were told of a board that was compelled to choose 
between computers or musical instruments for its schools. 
The times being what they arc, the board chose computers, 
but it was the kind of necessary choice that diminishes us as 
a society. 

We were told of C^atholic boards with schools in which, 
except for kindergarten, children spend their entire elemen- 
tary level years in temporary facilities - a euphemism for 
portables - to be followed by life in a high school where 
lunch begins at 9:00 a.m. the cafeteria holds only 
300 of the school's 1,800 students. In this context, it is 
understandable that a sense of desperation was evident in 
some submissions from the (Catholic community. 

For ttw IjOw* or LMmmc 

In Chapter 18, we discuss the present structures in educa- 
tion funding that have caused this situation, and make 
recommendations for comprehensive reform of education 
financing to ehminate these inequities. 

Section 136 of the Education Act 
As described earher. Bill 30 did not accord funding to 
Catholic schools equivalent to that of public schools, but it 
did permit completion of the Catholic education system as a 
publicly funded education entity. Specifics of the revised 
funding are discussed in detail elsewhere; essentially, the 
Roman Catholic system became fully public in that it was 
funded totally from public sources. 

Section 136 of the Education Act, covering hiring prac- 
tices of separate school boards, was passed as part of the 
legislation enacted with Bill 30; it was an amendment to the 
original Bill, and, beginning in 1995, will have the effect of 
denying Roman Catholic school boards the right to favour 
Catholics in hiring teachers for Roman Catholic secondary 

At the time, the Catholic community strongly opposed 
this amendment, and it remains convinced that the section 
would be declared unconstitutional should any legal chal- 
lenge be raised. During the public hearings, there was a 
clearly stated belief, expressed especially by trustees, that 
over time the very identity of Catholic schools is at risk if 
boards lose the right to hire, preferentially, Roman Catholic 

Catholic schools have always hired a number of 
non-Roman Catholic teachers, and we encourage them to 
continue to do so. Most of these men and women are recog- 
nized by Catholic boards as excellent teachers who have 
made substantial contributions to their schools. However, 
these teachers have always been a small minority, and with 
the exception of the designated teachers who were trans- 
ferred to the Roman Catholic from the public system after 
Bill 30 was passed, they were freely chosen by the boards that 
employ them. Thus the religious orientation and character 
of the Roman Catholic school was never at risk. 

The concern of the Catholic community is that once 
section 136 comes into effect, the inability of the boards to 
guarantee Catholic teachers in the classrooms will erode the 
school's religious foundations. Parents who have specifically 
chosen to send their children to Catholic schools - some- 

iiMf Catholic schools are to continue 
I to exist, it is essential that Catholic 
school boards also continue to have 
the right to hire only Catholic teach- 
ers to teach in Catholic schools. 
Allowing noivCatholic teachers to 
have equal access to teaching posi- 
tions in a Csitholic school system 
would destroy the Catholic character 
of the system. Non^atholic teachers 
cannot use their faith experience as 
witness to a Catholic doctrine which 
they do not believe." 

St. Aloysius Parent Advisory Council 

times at considerable inconvenience - have particularly 
strong feelings on this issue. 

Central to the curriculum in any school is its culture: the 
sum of the dominant values, ideas, and beliefs that shape the 
learning environment and give the school its character and 
identity. It is evident that in Roman Catholic schools, reli- 
gion is a core element of the school's culture and its reason 
for being. Throughout, this report has made clear the 
centrality of teachers in creating and sustaining the learning 
culture of the school. Thus, the religious commitment of the 
teachers in Roman Catholic schools is a vital element in 
establishing and maintaining their religious focus. 

The declared expectation in Catholic schools is not that 
teachers will be spiritually neutral but that they actively 
attempt to blend their professional abilities and skills with 
their own spirituality. Presenters to the Commission 
frequently repeated that Roman Catholic schools attempt to 
be communities of faith as much as they attempt to be 
centres of learning. 

In order for Catholic schools to maintain their identity 
and preserve their unique philosophy of education, Catholic 
school boards should not lose the right to favour hiring 
teachers who are members of the community of faith that is 
itself at the heart of the school. 

The members of the Catholic education community have 
clearly stated that the potential introduction of large 
numbers of non-Catholic teachers into the system places the 
religious identity of Catholic schools in jeopardy. The main- 
tenance and promotion of this identity is crucial to the work 
of the school and is part of the very reason it exits. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 



e also welcome the opportunrty 
to explain Catholic education 
to you, since our experience suggests 
ttvat ttie nature of Catt>olic education 
and the means by wtiich K is provided 
are not well und e r st ood." 

<<iilOS<ratnt* en' Trus'-'S Assoc, idon bSTA) 

Recommendation 115 

*We recommend that section 136. which restricts preferen- 
tial hiring in the Roman Catholic school system, be removed 
from the Education Act. 

Representation in the Ministry of Education and Training 
Many Catholic stakeholders told us that although Roman 
Catholic schools educate 30 percent of Ontario students, 
including almost 83 percent of all francophone students, and 
constitute a province-wide education system from kinder- 
garten to OAC, that system is not appropriately represented 
at the Ministry of Education and Training. 

This is particularly evident in two ways. First, the number 
of Ministry education officers with a separate school back- 
ground is not always representative of the size of the Roman 
Catholic system; consequently, there is a lack of understand- 
ing by the Ministry of the Catholic system's priorities and 
concerns. Second, the Ministry has no "team" (formerly 
called a "branch") comparable to the French -language 
Education Policy and Programs Team, which would be 
responsible for presenting the Catholic education viewpoint. 

These numeric and organizational deficiencies account 
for the repeated references made during our public hearings 
to an inability by the Ministry to understand and meet the 
specific needs of the Roman Catholic education system. 

The Common Curriculum, Grades 1-9, released in Febru- 
ary 1993. readily demonstrates the point. In the words of 
The Common Curriculum. "The outcomes in this document 
shall form the basis of the programs, learning activities, and 
specific outcome* that school boards develop for each 
grade ' Although it is supposed to be the province's core 
curriculum document for Grades I to 9, the 97 pages of the 

document contain one reference to Catholic curriculum - a 
footnote on the bottom of the first page. The subsequent 
version, written for parents and the general public later that 
year, contains no reference whatsoever to curriculum in 
Roman C^alholic schools. 

Without a Catholic Education leam, the document did 
not receive essential expert curriculum input from that 
perspective at the design stage. Therefore, before it is 
implemented, enormous work will have to be done by 
boards to make the document consistent with the education 
philosophy and priorities of separate schools. 

This does not appear to us to be an appropriate curricu- 
lum development process for the Ministry to follow, 
especially in light of the added curriculum responsibilities 
that elsewhere in this report we recommend the Ministry 
undertake. The Catholic education community does not 
experience this as an isolated example of Ministry unaware- 
ness of the curriculum differences between public and 
separate schools. 

We recognize that there are two English-language compo- 
nents in the province's publicly funded education system, 
and that each has a distinct curriculum orientation and 
philosophy. It is imperative that the Ministry, in the develop- 
ment of its programs and curriculum, be aware of these 
differences and be capable of meeting the needs of both 
components. WTiile an element of Roman Catholic educa- 
tion comprises courses in religious education, the fact of this 
additional subject in Catholic schools is not the e.ssential 
curriculum difference between public and Catholic schools: 
the essential difference is the philosophy and values that 
shape the rest of the curriculum. 

At present, there is no structure in the Ministry to ensure 
that an appropriate curriculum is developed for a school 
system that educates one-third of Ontario students. 

In order to meet the curriculum needs of separate 
schools, as well as other system-wide needs, it is essential 
that the Ministry have adequate and influential representa- 
tion of the Roman (Catholic system among its education offi- 
cers, senior administrators, and other professionals. Further- 
more, the Ministry should have a team with the specific task 
of representing Catholic education concerns. Its responsibili- 
ty could include co-ordinating Ministr)' policies related to 
Catholic education and mainlaining liai.son with the 
Catholic education community. 

For Vm Lov« of L«amln( 



The focus of this discussion has been on curriculum 
issues, but assessment, teacher education, and governance 
are other areas where the Roman CathoHc system perspec- 
tive would vary from that of the public system. 

Recommendation 116 

*We recommend that, with reference to the role of the 
Roman Catholic education system, the Ministry of Education 
and Training ensure appropriate and Influential representation 
from the Roman Catholic education system at all levels of Its 
professional and managerial staff, up to and including that of 
Assistant Deputy Minister; and that the Minister establish a 
Roman Catholic Education Policy and Programs Team or 
branch in the Ministry. 

Teacher education 

The vision of education and the nature of curriculum in 
Catholic schools imply a specific professional preparation 
for teachers intending to work in the Roman Catholic 
system. If Catholic schools are to meet the mandate they 
have been given by their community, they not only require 
teachers who are Roman Catholic but people who are 
professionally prepared to teach in a Roman Catholic 
context and tradition. 

Part of the pre-service formation of all teachers who wish 
to work in the separate school system should include at least 
one course dealing explicitly with Catholic education theory 
and practice, and there should be one course specifically for 
teachers who will be teaching religious education. The first 
course is described by the Catholic community as a founda- 
tions course, while the second is referred to as a religious 
education course. 

At the present time, pre-service teaching programs at 
English-language faculties of education in Ontario do not 
differentiate in their degree requirements between teachers 
who wish to teach in the public school system and those 
who wish to teach in the separate. Programs offer mandato- 
ry foundation courses that do not adequately prepare teach- 
ers to work in the distinctive Catholic education context and 
thus do not meet the needs of the separate school system. 
Candidates aspiring to teach in Catholic schools need to be 
familiar with the history of Catholic education in Ontario, 
with the governance and organizations in the separate 
school system, and with the approach to curriculum used in 
these schools. 

hile we support the contempo- 
rary programs of the faculties, 
we are amazed at and frustrated by 
the void of programs designed specifi- 
cally for those preparing to teach in 
Catholic schools ... OSSTA's position 
is that the Ministry of Education and 
Training and the faculties of educa- 
tion have a responsibility to ensure 
that the needs of both branches of 
the publicly funded system of educa- 
tion in Ontario are satisfied. We call 
on the Ministry of Education and 
Training and the Acuities of educa- 
tion to accept this responsibility." 

Ontario Separate School Trustees' Association (OSSTA) 

In the area of religious education, faculties currently have 
limited programs available, some of which are for credit and 
some of which are not. Courses vary in length from 15 to 40 
hours, with program content differing substantially among 

Characteristically, these pre-service religious education 
courses, accredited or not, are optional and taken in addition 
to a full academic program. This program and credit dispar- 
ity causes problems for the Catholic education system 
because religious education in Catholic schools exists at all 
grade levels as a core subject area and is based on province- 
wide curriculum documents. The random, ambiguous status 
of pre-service religious education courses at faculties does 
not do justice to the importance of this subject in Catholic 

While the pre-service religious education courses are of 
value to student teachers and school boards, and while the 
people who teach them work very hard to provide the best 
possible programs, irregular credit status and content 
restrict their effectiveness in preparing religious educators. 

If we take seriously the proposition that education in 
Roman Catholic schools is based on an educational philoso- 
phy and practice distinct from the public system, we must 
also conclude that the preparation of teachers for the Roman 
Catholic system must have distinctive elements. 

In current pre-service programs, the Catholic component 
of teacher preparation is treated as an add-on and discre- 
tionary, not as fundamental and mandatory. In their 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 

£i fof teachers preparing for the 

I Catholic school system we require 
professjonal deveiopfnent in religious 
education and family life education as 
is accorded ottver teaching subjects. 
The pre-service training must include 
a foundation course in tt>e history 
and philosophy of Ontario Catholic 

n (OCSOA) 

programs, faculties ot education do not reflect the reality 
that Catholic education philosophy is derived initially from a 
theological foundation, not from pedagogical theory, and 
they do not give student teachers exposure to this philoso- 
phy as part of their initial training. 

Nor do faculties take seriously the fact that religious 
education is a core part of the curriculum in Catholic 
schools, and that teachers require professional preparation 
in order to teach the subject effectively. 

The Ministry of Education and Training has a responsi- 
bility to ensure that professional preparation of teachers 
reflects the needs of the separate and the public sections of 
the publicly funded education system. Some people in the 
Catholic education community have suggested that to 
accomplish this effectively, a Catholic faculty of education 
with its own program is required for those preparing them- 
selves to teach in Roman Catholic schools - although by no 
means does it seem to be a unanimous opinion in this 

Having considered the various options, the Commission 
IS of the opinion that in order to respond to the Catholic 
education community's legitimate request for professional 
preparation of its teachers, it is not now necessary to create a 
Catholic faculty of education, nor are two completely differ 
enl tracks or streams required within faculties. However, we 
are convinced that faculties of education should respond to 
this request by providing a single core course (a foundations 
of Catholic education course) and a religious education 
course for all Catholic teachers. 

Recommendations 117. 118 

• liVe recommend that the Ministry of Education and Training 

and the faculties of education establish a pre-service credit 

course in the foundations of Roman Catholic education, and 

that this course be available at all faculties of education in 


'We recommend that the religious education courses current- 
ly offered at faculties of education receive full credit status 
and be made part of the regular academic program. 

Learning In French: Rights, needs, and barriers 

More than 250 briels and presentations were made to our 
Commission by Franco-Ontarians, both young and old. This 
is a clear indication that they participated fully in our delib- 
erations. We also held a special day of consultation in 
Timmins for Franco-Ontarian associations involved in 
education, as well as a comprehensive video-forum in both 
Ottawa and Toronto with ethno-cultural francophones. Both 
individuals and associations spoke passionately of the histo- 
ry that has led to the development of their schools and of 
French-language education in Ontario. They expressed hope 
for the (Commission's recommendations, taking great care to 
clearly spell out their viewpoints and claims. They conveyed 
their vision of a French education system "from cradle to 
grave," even sharing with us plans for their budding commu- 
nity colleges and dreams of a francophone university. 

Their presentations repeatedly echoed the injustices they 
suffered at the turn of the century, with the suppression of 
some of their rights in French-language education. Men and 
women, parents and educators, students of all ages - all 
spoke of their frustrations with an education system whose 
structures and management methods put them at a disad- 
vantage, systematically trip them up, and paralyze their 
development. Again and again, they urged us to see to it that 
their rights are respected, thereby enabling Franco-Ontarian 
schools to play their role to the fullest in helping the fran- 
cophone community achieve its highest potential. To a large 
extent, they attributed their high drop-out level, lesser acad- 
emic successes and lower economic status of their adult 
population to the system's built-in inequities and restric- 
tions. In a nutshell, they clearly conveyed to us just how crit- 
ical a quality education in French is to the survival of their 
language, their culture, and their community. 

For ow LOM o( iMmmg 

We also learned from other francophones in Ontario - 
new Canadians and citizens from other provinces whose life 
experiences are different from those born here - that their 
perspectives, needs, and expectations do not always mesh 
with Franco-Ontarian objectives when it comes to their chil- 
dren's education. 

Our mandate was very specific with respect to the consti- 
tutional rights of francophones and Catholics. While the 
reader will have observed the extent to which francophones' 
particular interests are reflected throughout this report, this 
section deals primarily with the administrative and political 
aspects of French-language education in Ontario from a 
management and governance perspective. Following a look 
at the historical, socio-demographic, and educational 
dimensions, we will address the issue of Franco-Ontarians' 
constitutional rights and the extent to which they are 
enforced, and conclude with an overview of the equity 
measures needed to ensure the future of this community. 

A glimpse of history 

French-language classes had been taught and courses given 
in isolation throughout Ontario almost a century before the 
end of the Seven- Year War in 1763, when all of New France 
was taken over by England. However, the first true French- 
language school - to be precise a Catholic and private school 
- in what is now known as Ontario did not come into exis- 
tence until 1786, in Windsor, then known as L'Assomption 
du Detroit. The establishment of another French-language 
school then followed in Kingston.' In practice - and this may 
surprise some - French-language education in Ontario had 
been on-going since the arrival of Europeans - that is, from 
the moment the French arrived in the 17th century, which 
means well before Confederation in 1867 and the British 
North America Act, which granted provinces total and exclu- 
sive jurisdiction over education. Until then, French-language 
schools were treated in the same way as English-language 
schools, receiving the same type of funding and enjoying the 
same status. Usually established by the parish priest or a 
local group of parents and parishioners, these schools were 
partially funded by property taxes, even receiving, at the 
turn of the 19th century, government grants. However, as 
most French-Canadian schools were Roman Catholic, they, 
like anglophone Catholic schools, were subject to the same 

AA It is increasingly evident tliat French- 
I language schools will be managed 
effectively only once they are admin- 
istered by francophones. Instances of 
confrontation and conflict such as we 
have seen in recent years prove once 
again that francophones, as a minori- 
ty, particularly in the southern part of 
the province, will always be vulnerah 
ble to the actions of the maionty." 

Association des enseignantes et des enseignants 
franco-ontariens, Essex elementaire oatholique 

At the turn of the 19th century, the francophone popula- 
tion was centred in the southwestern region of Upper Cana- 
da, in both Essex and Kent counties. Around the 1830s, the 
population began to expand into the southeastern region, 
into what is now the Prescott-Russell area. 

It was during the decades immediately preceding Confed- 
eration, following the affirmation of Protestant Anglo-Saxon 
political-economic power with the infamous Family 
Compact in Upper Canada (Ontario) that the political issues 
in education in this province were crystallized, especially 
with respect to the constitutional rights of Roman Catholics. 
From 1846 to 1850, when legislation was passed to establish 
the basis of the current education system, and in the years 
that followed, education in the French language was for all 
practical purposes accepted by Ryerson, education superin- 
tendent for Upper Canada, thus recognizing de facto rights 
of francophones. Towards the end of the 19th century, less 
than 20 years after Confederation, Ontario began to system- 
atically deny these rights. Regardless of their particular inter- 
pretation of the root cause of this injustice, historians agree 
in their identification of a link between the new restrictive 
language policies after 1885 and the increase of francophone 
immigration into Eastern Ontario from Quebec. In this 
regard, on November 24, 1886, the Toronto Mail published 
the following: 

The Prescott and Russell schools are the nurseries not merely of an 
alien tongue but of ahen customs, of aHen sentiments, and, we say it 
without offence, of a wholly alien people." 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 

££ ^^espite rts efforts, the French- 
■^ speaking communrty in this 
region, and elsewhere in the province, 
is losing ground and t>eing assimilated 
at an alarming rate. This trend must 
be stopped, and even reversed, at ail 
costs if we want to preserve this 
cuitural resource." 

and Hjnty ■■ tr. Dsrstt Schi Board, 

According to the historian Chad Gafficld. this same time 
period signalled the birth of the Franco-Ontarian identity.' 
From 1885 to 1927, discrimination against education in the 
French language for Franco-Ontarians was actually being 
legislated, a measure that culminated in the notorious Regu- 
lation 17 of 1912. to this day an open wound in the heart of 
ihe community and a symbol of Franco-Ontarians' fight for 
survival. (This regulation limited the teaching in French to 
Grades 1 and 2, forbidding it at any other le%'el. In effect 
until 1927, Regulation 17 was not abolished until 1944.) 

At the national level, the denominational rights of 
Catholic or Protestant minorities were recognized constitu- 
tionally in 1867, under section 93 of the Confederation Act 
of 1867 (the British North America Act), which were 
confirmed in section 29 of the Canadian Charter of Rights 
and Freedoms of 1982. However, it wasn't until the 1960s 
that the linguistic rights of minorities - francophones 
outside Quebec and anglophones in Quebec - were gradual- 
ly recognized, and until the 1980s that they were enshrined 
in the Constitution. One can see the progression from the 
recommendations of the Bilingualism and Biculturalism 
(x)mmission to the Official languages Act and the federally 
supported programs for linguistic minorities that followed it. 

In Ontario, the creation of French-language elementary 
and secondary Khools within public school boards was 
finally legislated in 1968. French-language high schools 
therefore have only a 25-year history in Ontario. However, as 
there was no funding for Catholic high schools, either anglo- 
phone or francophone, prior to 1986 and Bill 30, Catholic 
francophones often sent their children to public secondary 
Khoob. After Bill 30, most of these students and their 

schools were transferred en bloc to the separate - that is. 
Catholic - school boards. The Ontario Ministry of Educa- 
tion set up minimal francophone structures at the provincial 
level with the establishment in 1972 of the Conseil supericur 
dcs <^coles de langue franvaisc, an advisory committee to the 
Minister on French-Language education. In 1980, this 
committee became the Conseil de I'^ducation franco-ontari- 
enne (CEFO). or the Council for Franco-Ontarian Educa- 
tion, and then Conseil de I'^ducation et de la formation 
franco-ontarienncs (CEFFO).' or the Council for Franco- 
Ontarian Education and Training, in 1993. 

In 1977, the Minister of Education also appointed an 
Assistant Deputy Minister to be an advisor on French- 
language education. Since 1991, this function has changed to 
more direct responsibility for issues in French-language 
education. In 1993, the position was broadened to include 
responsibility for other portfolios of interest to Ontario 
education in general, and therefore no longer officially 
designated as the Assistant Pcputy Minister, French- 
language Education. Reluctant at first to accept this change 
that it perceived as a lessening of its status within the 
Ministry of Education and Training, the Franco-Ontarian 
community now sees that the positive result of this move is 
better representation of its interests. 

Who are the Franco-Ontarians? 

The Franco-Ontarian population is by far the largest thriv- 
ing francophone minority group living outside Quebec and 
in all of Canada, followed by New Brunswick's Acadian 
community, which is half as large. If one refers to the OECD 
definitions, it could be said that the Franco-Ontarian 
community is made up of an "established minority" 
(Ontario-born) and of "new minorities" (new Canadians 
whose mother tongue is French).' 

According to Statistics Canada's 1991 census data, which 
is confirmed in the latest study of the Association canadi- 
enne-frani^aise de I'Ontario (ACFO), the French-Canadian 
Association of Ontario, the Franco-Ontarian community can 
be described as follows: 

The FrancnOnUnan communily conti«t> of 485.390 membert 
whoK mother tongue it the French language - that it, one Onlanan 
out of 20. One quarter of Ontario'i northraitern population it Fran- 
co-Ontarian; in the cast, 15 percent of rcudcnn arc FrancoOntari- 

Fdr ttw Ldm or LMRHm 

French-language Regions of Ontario 

(according to Ontario Office of Francophone Affairs) 

ans. The 102,695 Franco-Ontarians living in central Ontario make 
up only 1 .6 percent of the region's population, and elsewhere in the 
province those whose mother tongue is French are few." 

By adding to those numbers some 36,000 persons who 
declare French and another language as mother tongues, and 
by taking into account all corrective factors, the study points 
to an adjusted total of 503,568 Franco-Ontarians. 

We are therefore looking at half a million people spread 
out in communities that are more or less francophone (with 
younger populations), first in eastern Ontario (Ottawa, 
Cornwall, and Hawkesbury) and then in the northeastern 
regions (Sudbury, North Bay, Timmins, Hearst, Kapuskasing, 
Kirkland Lake, and New Liskeard); or scattered elsewhere, 
throughout the anglophone population, with all the prob- 
lems this entails for the school system. Despite the concen- 
tration of Franco-Ontarians in two of the province's regions 
(according to the Office of Francophone Affairs' own region- 
al divisions; the Ontario Ministry of Education and Training 
divides the province into six regions), they still do not, 
except in northeastern Ontario, form a critical mass in the 
socio-political sense, although they are getting closer.' We 
also note the existence of a number of mixed marriages, a 
natural sociological factor when a minority finds itself scat- 
tered throughout an overwhelmingly anglophone society. 
This marriage of francophones to non-francophones invari- 
ably has a bearing on the language spoken in the home and 
contributes to some children's lack of knowledge of French 
when they begin kindergarten in francophone schools. This 
explains why for some 200,000 people within the Franco- 
Ontarian population, French is not the prinicipal language 
spoken at home. The highest level of linguistic stability is 
currently found in both eastern and northeastern Ontario, 
which have the greatest concentrations of francophones in 
the province. 

In matters of education, a majority of Franco-Ontarian 
parents, i.e., 82.5 percent, favour Catholic schools, a choice 
that generally doubles the problems of non-recognition of 
their rights. 

The problems encountered by Catholics has been referred 
to earlier in this chapter. 

Given the absence of French-language secondary schools 
in Ontario until the 1970s, an often-forgotten fact, it is not 
surprising to learn that many in the current generation of 
adult francophones are under-educated or even illiterate. 


^ \ 

^^^'^[ Kapuskasing \ 


\ "' .JWHtniEASTERN \ 

\ Timmins\ 

' — \,^'-~>, Thuncfe 

\ \ -. Kirkiand LaHe« C 


^^^ . '. V. Hawl<esbury 

\ 'T'^i'^-.'^'^^^^'^T'^^^^ornwall 


^ 7^P==)~\ <^"<\ ' - Teastern 


J?eneta^uis»]eoe\ '-\y 

— regions 
•■-■ census ar 


c- ■ -'■^' ■ ■^-.'I^oronto 

southwesternA : W>.r7? 

Indeed, numerous briefs submitted to the Commission 
convincingly illustrated the root causes of this phenomenon. 
"Nearly 18 percent of francophones have not reached Grade 
9, whereas only 7.4 percent of anglophones have left school 
before Grade 9.* Progress has been made, given that the 
percentage of francophones in this situation a few years ago 
stood at the 21.6 percent mark; however, the disparity 
between these two groups remains. "Under-education is one 
of the primary causes of illiteracy within the Franco-Ontari- 
an community."' 

The drop-out rate is higher among francophones than 
among anglophones, and this rate is thought to be higher yet 
in mixed secondary schools, where students of both 
languages are taught under one roof, and which often have 
anglophone principals, as opposed to homogeneous French- 
language high schools with francophone principals. 

Young Franco-Ontarians, as a whole, also achieve lower 
scores on tests than their anglophone counterparts. In the 
1993-94 provincial Grade 9 French-language reading and 
writing tests, only 66 percent of students achieved or exceed- 
ed provincial standards, compared with 89 percent of anglo- 
phones. In the national mathematics test administered in 
1993 to students aged 13 to 16, following a decision by the 
Council of Ministers of Education, scores obtained by fran- 
cophones compared favourably to those of anglophones 
with respect to material learned, but their scores were 
considerably lower than those of Anglophones in solving 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 


At our school, we only have three 
teachers to cover ten different 
levels (from kindergarten through to 
Grade 8) and teach all subjects, 
Including physical education. For two 
consecutive school years (1990-91 
and 1991-92), we were able to offer 
full-time kindergarten to five-year 
olds, which makes a huge difference 
In the case of a FrendHan^age 
school located in an anglophone area. 
By attending school full^me, children 
•nrlch their vocabulary and can better 
prepare themselves for Grade 1. 
Since then, we haven't been able to 
repeat tt>e experience because we 
don't have ttie 'magic number' which 
requires us to have at least eight 
children ciged five." 

L ^-.i.;. ^^■^^^:.^f^. lgnac« 

complex problems. (It is noteworthy that young Qucbcckcrs 
from the same age group achieved the highest scores in 
Canada in both respects). In 1992, the same trend was 
observed internationally in both science and mathematics 
tests (IAEP-2) administered to nine- and thirtccn-ycar-old 
students: in sciences, thirteen-year-old Franco-Ontarians 
ranked 20 percent lower than Anglo-Ontarians, and in math, 
the nine-year-olds were at the very bottom of the interna- 
tional scale. 

Francophone teenagers, when compared with anglo- 
phones, appear to have difficulty getting over the hurdle of 
Grade 1 1, but of those who do stay in school, the same 
percentage of francophones earn the Ontario Secondary 
School Diploma (OSSD) at the end of Grade 12 as anglo- 
phones. However, of those francophones that do complete 
Grade 1 2 or OAC, proportionately fewer of them, by at least 
half, go on to community college or university." According 
to researcher* at the Centre de Recherches en Education du 
Nouvel-Ontario (CRENO). their participation at the 
secondary and post -secondary levels is linked to the avail- 
ability of French-language programs. 

Average individual earnings are 5 percent lower for 
Onlario'i francophones than for anglophones." With a few 

rare exceptions, the Franco-Ontarian community is notice- 
ably absent in Ontario's political or economic power struc- 
tures, and under- represented at the management level of the 
Ontario public service. " However, as with the educational 
statistics, economic indicators reveal that young Franco- 
Ontarians compare favourably to young anglophones. 
Tomorrow's generation appears to have a promising future, 
and this is undoubtedly linked to education. 

New Canadians who speak French are also making an 
enriching contribution to the traditional Franco-Ontarian 
community. The ethno-cultural francophone community, a 
third of whom were born abroad, numbered 81,375 in the 
1991 census, and all were of an ethnic origin other than 
French or British. At least 10,000 of them have settled in the 
province's northeastern region, with some 30,000 living in 
eastern Ontario, and their greatest recorded concentration is 
in the Metro Toronto area. 

Were Ontario not the most heavily populated anglophone 
province in (Canada, French schools would constitute a 
major component of its school system. "It is equal in size to 
half or more of the provincial education system of four 
provinces (Alberta, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and 
Saskatchewan) and is larger than that of Prince Edward 
island." Within the Ontario French-language education 
system, students currently attending the 398 Francophone 
schools and the 37 mixed schools number 100,000. 

The collective voice of Franco-Ontarian youth was heard 
throughout our public meetings thanks to their provincial 
association, the F<?d^ralion des ^l^ves du secondaire franco- 
ontariennc (FESFO), which represents some 25,000 students 
from the province's 71 French or mixed high schools and 
had undertaken to conduct a survey with some 8,650 
students across Ontario. The Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontaricns (AFFO), the Franco- 
Ontarian leachers' Association, and its local chapters, which 
represent 7,000 teaching professionals in Ontario, also 
submitted briefs. 

The way that the francophone student population is 
divided into French-language instructional units differs from 
the division of the anglophone student population, with 
proportionally more francophone children in elementary 
schools (72 percent as opposed to 65 percent in anglophone 
elementary schools), but a number of factors could account 
for this situation. 

for 0W LoM of LMfMng 

Their constitutional rights 

It is by way of denominational and not linguistic distinctions 
that the Fathers of Confederation decided in 1867 to protect 
Canada's minorities through constitutional rights, thus 
imposing on the provinces the obligation to provide educa- 
tion for Protestants and education for Catholics. The consti- 
tutional and linguistic rights of the francophone minority 
outside Quebec and of the anglophone minority in Quebec 
are still relatively recent. They are also very clear. These 
rights are firmly entrenched in section 23 of the Canadian 
Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which reads as follows: 

Language of instruction 

23(1) Citizens of Canada: 

(a) whose first language learned and still understood is that of the 
English or French linguistic minority population of the province in 
which they reside, or 

(b) who have received their primary school instruction in Canada in 
English or French and reside in a province where the language in 
which they received that instruction is the language of the English 
or French linguistic minority population of the province, 

have the right to have their children receive primary and secondary 
school instruction in that language in that province. 

23(2) Citizens of Canada of whom any child has received or is 
receiving primary or secondary school instruction in English or 
French in Canada, have the right to have all their children receive 
primary and secondary school instruction in the same language. 

According to this definition and based on the 1991 
census, the Federation des associations de parents franco- 
phones de rOntario, a provincial federation of francophone 
parent associations, estimates that 163,695 Ontario children 
between the ages of 5 and 17, compared with the 100,000 
registered for French classes, are the children of "righthold- 
ers," and thus constitutionally entitled to receive an educa- 
tion in French, under section 23 of the Charter.'" 

In subsection 23(3), which can be found in the endnotes 
of this text," the Charter limits these rights by the principle 
of "where numbers warrant." In Ontario, the provincial 
government eliminated this clause from its legislation. 
Under the Education Act (1990), which deals with French- 
language instruction in sections 288-308, the education 

rights of Franco-Ontarians go further than elsewhere. These 
rights read as follows: 

288 The following definitions apply to this section ... 

"French-speaking person" means a child of a person who has the 
right, under subsections 23(1) or (2), without regard to subsection 
23(3), of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, to have him 
or her receive their primary and secondary school instruction in the 
French language in Ontario; ("francophone") 

"French-language instructional unit" means a class, group of classes 
or school in which French is the language of instruction, but does 
not include a class, group of classes or school created under clause 8 
(1) (y) (French-language instruction for English-speaking pupils); 

289( 1 ) Every French-speaking person who is qualified under this Act 
to be a resident pupil of a board has the right to receive elementary 
school instruction in a French-language instructional unit operated 
or provided by the board. 

Subsection 291(1) extends the same right to secondary 

On the other hand, access to education in French for 
ethno-cultural francophones is not entrenched in constitu- 
tional documents, as the Charter provisions are based on the 
citizenship of the parents, and then on whether they fall into 
one of the three categories described in section 23. Conse- 
quently, this right is not automatically conferred. A number 
of immigrants or refugees who settle in Ontario know 
French, either as a mother tongue or as a second language, 
and want their children to maintain this tradition. In this 
case, subject to parental choice and local availability, the 
Education Act (1990) applies, providing a procedure where- 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 

a §k though the Supreme Court of 
r^Canada (Mahe case) has ruled 
that francophone minorities outside 
Quebec have the right to manage 
education, and notwithstanding the 
publication of the Cousineau Report, 
tt>e Ontario government does not 
always respect this right in most 
rations of Ontario." 

by parents submit a request to the French-language admis- 
sion committee o! the appropriate school board. Made up of 
a school superintendent, principal, and teacher, this body 
decides whether to grant admission in accordance with the 
board's own set of estabhshed criteria, which may include 
the newcomer's knowledge of French or the parents' attitude 
with respect to the mandate of Franco-Ontarian education. 
Not surprisingly, ethno-cultural francophones feel insecure 
and often frustrated by their status in the Franco-Ontarian 
school system. "We arc not tenants!" they stated during our 
video- forum. * The lack of information about the rules of 
the game and the apparently arbitrary nature of decisions 
pertaining to the admission of their children could, in our 
view, easily be remedied. 

Recommendation 119 

*We recommend, with reference to the admission of non- 

nghtholders to French-language schools, that: 

a) the Minister of Education and Training give the CEFFO a 
mandate in consultation with school tioards. to propose 
ar)d ensure the adoption of uniform critena for the admis- 
sion of 'norhrightholders ' or their children; 

b) the Ministry of Education and Training require school 
boards to assume responsibility for making information 
about these cntena available to the relevant communities, 
particularly ethno<ultural communities: 

c) the composition of committees to admit non-righthold 
ers or their children irKlude one or more Franco-Ontanan 
parents arnS one or more parents from ethnocultural 

Briefs submitted to our Commission provided, for our 
benefit, lengthy analyses of the limits and delays in imple- 
menting the Charter over the course of more than a decade. 
Ihe following excerpt from a Sudbury presentation summa- 
rizes succinctly the current situation: 

Most francophone minorily groups outside Quebec have had lo 
resort lo the courts to force their provincial governments to comply 
with the spirit and the letter of section 23 of the Canadian Charter 
of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees their right to manage 
their schools. The Acadians of New Brunswick and Quebec's anglo- 
phone minority were the only exceptions to this rule. Although the 
Charter has existed for more than a decade. Ontario is only |usl 
beginning lo timidly address the problem of autonomous Krench- 
language school boards and of communiry colleges.' 

It is therefore understandable that in their briefs to the 
Commission, francophones often felt compelled to refer in 
great detail to historic judgments confirming the educational 
rights of the French-language minorities outside Qut^bec. 
They referred especially to the Supreme Court's two unani- 
mous decisions, in the case of Mah^ (Alberta) in April 1990 
and in the case of Franco-Manitohan parents v. the Public 
Schools Act in March 1993, in which the Supreme Court 
explicitly upheld their educational rights as set out in section 
23 of the Charter. 

The recognition of constitutional rights 

What exactly is the problem in Ontario today? The Report of 
the French -language Education Ciovcrnancc Advisory Group, 
also known as the Cousineau report, and often referred to in 
presentations to the Commission, details Franco-Ontarians' 
constitutional educational rights as follows: 

These rights ... include: 

a) The right to a quality education in the French language equiva- 
lent to that provided in the English language: 

b) The right to educational facilities; 

c) The right to public funds to supftort French -language education 
programs, services and facilities: 

d) The right to manage and control such programs, tervicct and 

NNTiile representatives of the Franco-Ontarian and ethno 
cultural franiDphonc lommunilics also addressed the first 

For Vm Lo«« of Lcamtng 

three rights in their presentations, the fourth one, i.e., 
"governance by and for francophones," was unequivocally 
the subject of pressing recommendations throughout the 
province. Indeed, it was identified as the most crucial step in 
the recognition of the education right of the francophone 

In Ontario, school boards currently number about 170, 
70 of which share the responsibility for the existing 435 
"French-language instructional units" (FLIU), a term used 
by the Ministry of Education and Training to describe the 
province's French-language schools or classes, both small 
and large units. Four of these school boards are designated as 
French-language boards; they are located in Toronto (1), 
Ottawa-Carleton (2) and Prescott-Russell (1) and they are 
responsible for 110 French-language instructional units 
(made up of both classes and schools). One of the Ottawa- 
Carleton boards and the one in Prescott-Russell are Roman 
Catholic Separate school boards. The Prescott-Russell board 
was created in 1992, the other three in 1989. Their creation 
was made possible through the adoption of Bill 75 ( 1986), 
which amended the Education Act to affirm Franco- 
Ontarians' right to govern their own schools, and to Bill 
109 (1988), the Ottawa-Carleton French-Language School 
Board Act. 

Out of the other 66 boards responsible for French- 
language instructional units, 10 are practically French- 
language school boards, and are responsible for 155 such 
units. (One of these boards has neither an English-language 
school nor an English-language trustee.) Among these we 
find four small isolated school boards that manage one 
French-language school each, and, although they are not 
designated as such, these boards are for all practical pur- 
poses French-language boards. Three other small and isolat- 
ed boards have mixed schools. However, 163 French- 
language instructional units are still being managed by 49 
English language boards that include a francophone section 
made up of three trustees who sit on an 18- to 22-member 

In addition to the 70 school boards operating FLIUs, nine 
other English-language school boards have no French- 
language instructional units, but they purchase French- 
language education from other boards. This formula applies 
in areas with fewer than 300 French-language students. It is 
up to these small francophone advisory committees working 
in entirely English-language boards to look after the French- 

AA ■ n southern Ontario, there are still 
I seven French-Language Advisory 
Committees in existence that are 
allowed to intervene solely in an 
advisory capacity in public education 
matters pertaining to francophone 
children and that have no real 
political clout." 

Excerpt of the brief submitted by Metro Toronto's 
French-language Public School Board: 
le Conseli des ecoles frangaises de la communaute 
urbaine de Toronto (CEFCUT) 

language education needs of these communities. These 
committees, called FLACs (French-Language Advisory 
Committees), were heavily criticized before the Commission 
and were accused of being tools of assimilation." These 
"administrative variations on the same theme" make it more 
difficult to deal with the reality of the governance and 
management of French-language education with its hybrid 
and multiple forms. 

The needs of francophone students and teachers could 
conceivably be understood by the anglophone administrative 
and political powers to the extent that these needs are 
perfectly identical to those of anglophone students and 
teachers. However, it would be naive or insensitive to believe 
that a majority could possibly be capable of putting itself in 
the minority's shoes to really understand from within the 
specific issues and challenges related to being a minority, to 
find ways of solving them, and to place the minority's inter- 
ests ahead of its own. The probability of achieving such an 
ideal state of true understanding is further weakened by the 
complexity of issues such as the challenges born out of "the 
dilemma of bilingualism and socio-cultural identity,"^" the 
need to revitalize the spoken and written language, cultural 
isolation, inter-community marriages, and the absence of a 
critical mass of francophones. 

Furthermore, the majority group is not likely to analyze 
its own rules and procedures in order to find out how often 
they are structurally biased against the minority, whose 
interests are either arbitrarily swept aside or relegated to the 
lowest priority, either because of its small numbers or for 
some other "valid" reason. It is not surprising therefore that 
Franco-Ontarians insisted so strongly, in all their presenta- 
tions to the Commission, on governance "by and for fran- 

Vol. iV Making it Happen Constitutional Issues 

^£ f quftable taxation and educational 
^Hfunding are closely linked to the 
issue of ttfe m^vagement of a 
comprehensive education system 
for tt>e Franco-Ontarian communKy. 
Without tax fairness, the Franco- 
Ontarian minority's exercise of its 
constitutional right to manage 
education liecomes illusory." 

cophoncs," defining it as "their full right to make all 
decisions relating to education without being subject to rati- 
fication by the anglophone majority."-' 

The Commission also made passing note of the observa- 
tions shared by the provincial auditor of Ontario in his 19V3 
annual report concerning the shortcomings of French- 
language education and of the criticism aimed at the 
Ministry. The following is an excerpt: 

Ministry revicwi tuggest that the quality of French-language educa- 
tion in Ontario may on average not be equivalent to that provided 
to English schools. The main difficulty is in trying to provide quality 
curriculum, teacheri and facihties to a small, widely dispersed popu- 
lation in a costefTeclive manner. One impediment is that the distri- 
bution of students entitled to receive French-language education 
«lo«s not frequently coincide with the boundaries of the Ministry's 
regional offices and the school boards." 

On this point, the provincial auditor concludes by under- 
Koring the necessity for the Ministry of Education and 
Training to redefine the boundaries of its regional offices to 
meet Ontario's French-language education needs. In addi- 
tion, he sharply criticizes the Ministry for the inadequate 
production of French-language learning materials, especially 
for the specialization years. 

Francophone presenters were quite clear in noting that if 
on the one hand school governance is indeed a constitution- 
al right, governance is not an end in itself. "Governance is a 
means of attaining a goal, that of providing a community 
with a system that favours empiowerment and allows it to 
thrive."" Consequently, presentations and briefs viught not 
only to reaffirm the fundamental principle of governance 

"by and for francophones," but also to underscore the fact 
that a number of governance models arc worthy of consider- 
ation, without necessarily offering the symmetry usually 
favoured by the bureaucracy. 

With respect to governance models, the broad consulta- 
tion on governance of French-language education carried 
out in 1991 by the French-language Education Governance 
Advisory Group cannot be ignored. Our Commission noted 
the general support expressed by the spokesperson of the 
francophone community during our public hearings, for the 
basic principles contained in its report (the Cousineau 
report) and their impatience in the face of government inac- 
tion. (The Cousineau report has yet to be implemented, and 
more than three years later, the government is said to be 
waiting for this Commission's findings before taking further 

The Cousineau report presented 57 recommendations 
relating to governance, supporting both the creation of new 
management structures and their implementation, as well as 
the establishment of conflict-resolution mechanisms. After 
stating that it was up to local communities to determine the 
fate of existing French-language sections, the report then 
went on to suggest the establishment of school boards at 
local, district, or regional levels, based on electoral represen- 
tation in geographic areas defined differently from the 
current ones. More specifically, the report proposes the 
following as models for school governance: 

a) the possibility of establishing up to two regional French- 
language school hoards, one Roman ("atholic separate and the 
other public, in each of the six administrative regions of the 
Ministry of Education and Training, with appropriate fund- 
ing and complete authority; 

b) the possibility of creating, within each of the Ministry 
regions, French -language area school boards each having, 
among other criteria, a resident day school population of 
1,300 or more, all of the geographic area served by the 
participating school boards, and the capacity to offer 
French-language education from kindergarten through to 
the end of secondary school; 

c) the possibility of creating, within the Ministry regions, 
local French-language school hoards each having, among 
other criteria, a resident day school population of l,f>00 or 
more (subject to some adjustment in sparsely populated 

For titt IJMW o( l^armng 



areas or other special circumstances), the same geographical 
boundaries as the existing school board from which it origi- 
nates, and the capacity to offer French-language education 
from kindergarten through to the end of secondary school. 

The report also recommends that French-language school 
trustees must submit, for Ministry approval, a detailed plan 
including an analysis of the impact of the proposed changes 
on their English-language counterparts. 

It is true that reverse situations, i.e., English school 
boards that are too small, could result from the recommen- 
dations of the Cousineau report, or from any other chosen 
model of French-language governance. The government will 
therefore have to ensure that the governance model chosen 
by a given community does not result in a critical deteriora- 
tion of the local English-language board (or of the future 
district or regional French-language school board) that such 
a community might be part of. Administrative creativity and 
flexibility will be required. For English boards in this situa- 
tion, consideration may have to be given to grouping or 
consolidating, while respecting the interests of the local 
communities, even if this should lead to the implementation 
of different structures that do not yet exist in the Ontario 
education system, or to a particular asymmetrical situation 
similar to what would apply to French-language education. 

We also recognize that at first glance some may fear the 
proliferation of French-language school boards of various 
natures, which would not lead to desirable economies of 
scale. However, this fear is dispelled by a more in-depth 
analysis because present-day economic pressures are already 
pushing school boards (and all other funded institutions like 
hospitals, universities, municipalities) to develop consortia 
and other co-operative management ventures.'^ 

A number of francophone groups, both formally and 
informally, have since developed their own innovative school 
governance models. For instance, Ontario's two French - 
language School Board Associations (AFCSO - public 
boards - and AFOCEC - Catholic boards) together reviewed 
the governance issue and developed a number of governance 
models, all of which are on record. A group of francophone 
directors of education have drafted a document that 
describes such a model.'' 

The stakes are very high and the problem can no longer 
be put off; that can never be emphasized enough. The 

ecause of the minority status 
of Ontario's francophone 
community, the levels of proficiency 
in French are very disparate. One 
essential way for francophone 
students to achieve excellence is 
through recovery, actualization and 
perfection of the language, at all 
levels, as well as through cultural 
activities and leadership training." 

Federation des associations de 
parents francophones de I'Ontario 

solutions do exist and models have been designed. There is 
therefore no need to reinvent the wheel; the time has come 
for action. As our Commission had neither the mandate nor 
the resources to tackle this challenge, the responsibility lies 
with the government and compels it to ensure that the 
proposed/chosen model respects the rights of Franco- 
Ontarians and meets their expectations. 

We have discussed Franco-Ontarians' constitutional 
rights and the existing disparity between these rights and 
today's educational reality. We could build a case on the 
issue of equity, as this is also a matter of basic equity. In light 
of this, and conscious of both the relative size of the fran- 
cophone population and its geographic dispersement except 
in two regions, we put forth the following recommenda- 
tions, whose synergy and impetus are essential to assure the 
continued vigor of the Franco-Ontarian community. 

Recommendation 120 

*We recommend that the Ontario Ministry of Education and 
Training give the Conseil de ('education et de la formation 
franco-ontariennes (CEFFO) the mandate to recommend to 
the Ministry, as soon as possible and on the basis of exist- 
ing documents, school governance model(s) by and for 
francophones, encompassing education from preschool to 
the end of secondary school without, however, seeking to 
define structures that are administratively symmetrical to 
those of the English-language system; and that the govern- 
ment, through the Ontario Ministry of Education and Training, 
approve and diligently implement the recommendations 
submitted by the CEFFO with respect to school governance 
by and for francophones. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional issues 

££ ^phe absence of an animateur 

I cutturel (a cultural animator) in all 
Franco-Ontarian high schools deprives 
students of one of their fundamental 
rights - the right to experience ttieir 
culture to ttie fullest. Of course we all 
have the right to live whatever experi- 
ences we choose, but without tt>e 
proper environment and stimulus, this 
becomes impossibto." 

( -fC 


Needless to say, having full governance without the 
appropriate resources currently being provided to the major- 
ity only represents yet another frustration, or one more 
injustice. The Ontario education funding system is not equi- 
table, and as a result, Franco-Ontarians generally suffer in a 
number of ways - as francophones, as Catholics, as residents 
of remote and isolated regions where their numbers are 
proportionately higher, and as residents of communities 
with limited property tax revenue. The stakes are quite high 
for the Franco-Ontarian community, and this subject is dealt 
with in more depth in Chapter 18. 

The future of a community 

Beyond the family structure, school is an ideal milieu for the 
transmission of language and culture. Of course there are 
other agents that play a greater or lesser role, not the least of 
which are television, radio, and popular culture. Without a 
linguistic and cultural identity, a people in a minority situa- 
tion languishes and slowly dies, swallowed up by the domi- 
nant culture. Earlier in this chapter, we underscored the high 
assimilation rate of the Franco-Ontarian community. In 
concrete terms, this means that francophone students often 
find themselves speaking English among themselves, in the 
hallways and at recess, because of the overwhelming appeal 
of the North-American anglophone youth sub-tulturc and 
Its products. Even more troubling: many students in 
Ontario's French -language schools are unable to speak a 
tvord of French. As we have noted, some rightholders may 
not use the language at home. 

We share the point of view of some researchers "that the 
assimilation of young people depends heavily on level of 

concentration of the francophone population."'* Without 
significant geographic concentrations or, better yet, the 
.iddcd protection of a Franco-Ontarian critical mass, it is the 
sthools that bcct)mc the preferred rallying points ior the 
communities. In their briefs, francophones constantly 
referred to the Franco-Ontarian school as having both a 
pedagogical mission and a community mission. 

When francophones spoke to us of the necessity and the 
urgency for ariirnalion culliirfllc in schools, we were at first 
somewhat perplexed and not quite sure what it was all 
about, because this was obviously not an educational 
component of conventional schools. This concept, which 
was new to us, seemed akin to another often-cited and 
almost as mysterious a concept called projei ^ducatif. At the 
conclusion of our public meetings, the concept became clear. 
(Both concepts became clear!) In discussing the matter and 
further reflecting on it, we came to agree with the recent 
findings of a commission on young French-Canadians. In its 
report, this commission concluded that "we must create 
environments where life in French is possible."' 

Contrary to what is often believed, the Commission bchevcs that 
assimilation is not primarily a linguistic issue. Rather, it is a ques- 
tion of culture. Those who wish to maintain a language must also 
support the culture that makes it useful. 

Therefore, it seems to us that Ontario's French-language 
schools must be able to play a pivotal role in "life in French" 
for young francophones from prc-school to the end of 
secondary school, as recognized in the preamble of the 
French -Language Services Act (1986): " ... the Ixgi.slative 
Assembly recognizes the contribution of the cultural 
heritage of the French speaking population and wishes to 
preserve it for future generations ..." 

The ties between language and culture have also been 
defined in the Supreme Court decision in the Mah^ case. 
Chief justice Brian Dickson describes it this way: 

My reference to cultures is significant: it is based on the fact that any 
broad guarantee of language rights, especially in the context of 
education, cannot be separated from a concern for the culture asso- 
ciated with the language language is more that a mere meant of 
communication, it it part and panel nf the identity and culture nf 
the people speaking it. It is the means by which individualt under 
ttand ihemtelvet and the world around them." 

tar 0w LoM or LMmmi 



He also quotes from another decision: 

Language is not merely a means or medium of expression; it colours 
the content and meaning of expression. It is, as the preamble of the 
Charter of the French Language itself indicates, a means by which a 
people may express its cultural identity.'' 

With regard to schools he states, 

... it is worth noting that minority schools themselves provide 
community centres where the promotion and preservation of 
minority language culture can occur; they provide needed locations 
where the minority community can meet and facilities which they 
can use to express their culture." 

These texts could not have better expressed what Franco- 
Ontarians advocate in terms of French-language education. 

Like so many others, including the writers of the 
Cousineau report, the Association franc^aise des conseils 
scolaires de I'Ontario (AFCSO), a provincial association of 
French-language school boards, also embraced the following 
definition of culture, adopted by UNESCO in 1982. It is a 
definition we also adopt: 

In its largest sense, one can say that culture is the whole of spiritual, 
material, intellectual and emotional characteristics that makes any 
society or social group distinct. These include not only the arts, but 
also ways of living, fundamental rights of the human being, value 
systems, traditions and beliefs." 

We underscore here the work of the Centre franco- 
ontarien de ressources pedagogiques, the living embodiment 
of the relationships between language and culture within the 
education world. 

To return to the concept of animation culturelle advocat- 
ed in so many briefs, we were pleased to learn of the Guide 
d' intervention auxpaliers elementaires et secondaires: Investir 
dans I'animation culturelle (1994), a guide for the implemen- 
tation of cultural "animation" at the elementary and 
secondary levels. Published by the Ministry of Education 
and Training, this document is currently being reviewed in 
the Franco-Ontarian schools. It seems clear to us that while 
this concept may include a pedagogical component, its roots 
are nevertheless embedded in the community and conse- 
quently require resources. It is equally clear that the new 
partnerships with society that we see as one of the key 
strategies in reforming the Ontario education system (see 

e ... firmly believe in the 
importance of 'animation 
culturelle' in our school ... Franco- 
phones in Ontario are an endangered 
species, owing to assimilation. 
'Animation culturelle' enables us to 
experience our culture and express 
ourselves in French. 'Animation 
culturelle' can therefore promote the 
French-speaking community among 
Ontario's youth." 

The students of Ecole secondaire Algonquin, North Bay 


Chapter 14), as well as the community school advocated by 
leaders of the Franco-Ontarian community, can converge, 
depending on local choices. 

Ontario's French-language schools must not only nour- 
ish, correct, enrich, and transmit the language but also its 
cultural foundations. They must do this within a delicate 
balance, in classes that include natives of the province as well 
as ethno-cultural francophone immigrant children, who also 
need to embrace their own distinctive identities before 
embracing the culture of their new milieu. 

During the video-forum, a teacher spoke of her difficulty 
in suddenly finding herself in a minority situation on her 
own turf, in a class of newcomers, and accepting the cultural 
differences. Parents, on the other hand, shared their anxiety 
about the culture shock and the two sets of values - the 
family's, and the schools' - which often send contradictory 
messages to their children. In only one year, 1989-90, the 
percentage of the Franco-Ontarian students in the popula- 
tion in one of Ottawa's large French-language high schools 
dropped from 80 to 30 percent. 

The impatience and frustration experienced by newly 
arrived francophones is quite certainly legitimate, but the 
resistance to change or the slow pace of it among certain 
elements of the Franco-Ontarian community are also under- 
standable in the provincial educational context. As a 
Commission, we do not have any qualms about the future; 
the briefs from key groups involved in French-language 
education all underscored the importance of opening up to 
ethno-cultural francophone communities. We endorse the 
recent policy document of the Ministry of Education and 
Training, Vers une nouvelle optique (1993), (the equivalent 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutiorjal Issues 

AA^Phe school must create an all- 
I encompassing cultural enviroo- 
ment that enables students to 
immerse themselves in and identify 
with their own culture. Our mission, 
then, cannot be confined to ttie 
language. It must also extend to the 
cuKure ttiat characterizes us as a 
people. Her>ce the importance of 
sludMits f99 t t ng accefited and good 
alMNit themselves, so that they can 
experience community life at school. 
The school should therefore become a 
community-based educational centre 
wttere interaction between sciK>ol and 
community takes place." 

tcokt cooMTHinMrtatre Hort^on-Jeunesse. Cornwall 

document for English-language schools is Changing Perspec- 
tives, released in the same year), and most especially the 
Guide pour I'Haboration d'une politique d'aminagement 
Unguisiuiue pour les Scales franco-ontariennes ( 1994), a guide- 
line for developing language policies in Ontario's French- 
language schools. 

The other danger that threatens classes in French schools, 
just as it does in English schools, is the ghetfoization by 
ethnic origin and the division into closed groups that ignore 
or are opposed to one another. Franco-Ontarian schools are 
therefore advancing with the twin challenge of having to 
develop both their own future and an educational direction 
that integrates pluralism and heterogeneity. 

We will not repeat here a discussion of the education 
problems that ethno-cultural francophones share with other 
newcomers to Ontario: the assessment and placement of 
their children, parental participation, the equity of services 
offered, and the necessity of a culturally inclusive curricu- 
lum and resources. Besides these problems, the Association 
interculturelle franco-ontarienne (AIFO), a Franco-Ontarian 
inlrrcullural association, also points out in its brief the 
improvements required in the recruitment, training, and 
professional development of instructional staff. This subject 
is dear to us. We arc sensitive to these issues and address 
them in appropriate sections of this report. 

We will also not revisit the requests for education equal 
in quality to that of the province's anglophone majority, or 
other general issues that parallel those found in the various 
briefs submitted to us. A number of requests made by 
Franco-Ontarians overlap, for various reasons, the request of 
other presenters throughout the province - for example, the 
importance of early childhood education, or of a real part- 
nership between the school community and social, cultural, 
and other community services. 

Based on the collective responsibility of Ontario society 
toward its francophone minority community, and to ensure 
that its rights are truly protected and exercised to the fullest, 
we add to our previous recomnicndations the following 
three points. 

Recommendations 121, 122 

•IVe recommend that funding by the Ministry of Education 
and Training automatically include among its calculation of 
grants and weighting factors, for all French-language instruc- 
tional units, the budgetary supplements required to allow 
these units to offer, according to the needs identified by the 

a) accelerated language retrieval programs (designed for 
recovery, actualization and skill and development): and 

b) the necessary animation culturelle in classes and 

*We recommend that for the early childhood education 
programs (children age 3 to 5). one of our key recommenda- 
tions in Chapter 7, the provincial government give priority 
funding to French-language instructional units over every 
other school. 

This section devoted to the issue of full recognition of 
Franco-Ontarians" education rights has sought to highlight 
two fundamental points in our report: without governance 
for and by francophones, the Franco-Ontarian community is 
held back in its development and growth. It is further disad- 
vantaged by inequitable access to funding and other 
resources. We also want to re-emphasi/e the urgenc>' of exer- 
cising basic justice toward a minority community whose 
survival is essential to us all. 


Fof tht LOM of LMmtng 

Aboriginal peoples 

Currently, the federal government has responsibility for the 
education of aboriginal students living on reserves. However, 
a significant portion of the delivery of this education, espe- 
cially at the secondary level, actually takes place in schools 
operated by provincial school boards, through purchase-of- 
service agreements between Native education authorities, 
bands, or councils of bands and various school boards. Even 
when education takes place on the reserve, in schools oper- 
ated by the bands themselves, the provincial curriculum is 

When aboriginal people move off the reserves, their 
education comes under provincial jurisdiction through the 
local school board; therefore, whether aboriginal people live 
on or off a reserve, they have a considerable stake in provin- 
cial education policy. 

Our recommendations here focus on aboriginal issues in 
relation to federal-provincial co-operation, programs, 
decision-making, and aboriginal languages. 

Who are the aboriginal peoples of Ontario? 

Like the rest of Ontario's population, the aboriginal people 
in this province are not a single, homogeneous group; there 
are 13 distinct Native languages spoken in the province, 
although some by only a handful of people. 

The total number of aboriginal people in Ontario, 
approximately 244,000 according to the 1991 census, is 
approximately 2.4 percent of the province's population." 
About 88 percent of the total are North American Indian; 9 
percent are Metis; 1 percent are Inuit; and 2 percent are of 
other multiple origins. 

Ontario's aboriginal population is the largest of any 
Canadian province. At the same time, it should be noted that 
the proportion of children and youth in the aboriginal 
population is higher than in the general population of 
Ontario or of Canada; this has important implications for 
the future. 

According to the Ministry's 1993 September report statis- 
tics, there were almost 3,000 Native elementary students in 
the province's schools, under tuition agreements with the 
Government of Canada or with Native education authori- 
ties; 3,029 Native students receive their secondary education 
under similar arrangements. This is a decline of almost 500 
students since 1992 and reflects the increase in the number 
of secondary students continuing their secondary education 

in the 21 private secondary schools registered with the 
Ministry and controlled by Native education authorities. 
Almost 6,000 students were enrolled in programs that 
teach Native languages as a second language, either in 
schools under provincial jurisdiction or in inspected private 
(secondary) schools. Another 866 students were enrolled in 
these language programs in continuing education provided 
by schools boards - more than twice the number enrolled in 
such programs the previous year. 

History of Native education 

The aboriginal peoples had their own system of education 
long before the first European arrived. Aboriginal education 
was practical, begun almost at birth and continued through- 
out life, and it emphasized the transmitting of traditions and 

From the time Europeans first began to play a major role 
in education here, aboriginal children followed European 
systems and concepts of education; schooling was in either 
French or English, although there was some instruction in 
Native languages. After Confederation, the British North 
America Act, 1867 (now the Constitution Act, 1867) gave the 
federal government jurisdiction over "Indians and lands 
reserved for Indians." The federal government initially 
carried out its responsibility for aboriginal education mainly 
through residential schools. 

Residential schools 

Most of these schools were operated by the churches, with 
financial support from the government. Schools were located 
in or near reserves with sufficient aboriginal populations, or 
in central locations for students from remote and small First 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 

total segregation, many aboriginal people saw it as another 

way of denying the worth ot their people and their cultures. 

Nations communities. As a matter of conscious government 
policy, these residential schools were completely segregated 
from regular schools and from the aboriginal communities, 
if not physically, then culturally and emotionally. Some 
continued to operate well into the 1960s. 

A number of aboriginal people who made presentations 
to the Commission spoke of painful experiences and the 
influence the residential schools have had on their lives and 
on the lives of their parents. They talked about a particularly 
far-reachmg impact of the residential school - the way it 
destroyed the relationship between parents and children and 
denied aboriginal culture and language. 


In about 1930, the federal government, responding to wide- 
spread criticism from aboriginal people, made a major poli- 
cy shift away from segregation toward a policy of integration 
of aboriginal children into the regular provincial school 
systems. By 1970, more than half of Canada's aboriginal chil- 
dren attended provincial and territorial schools, and by 1979 
that had risen to two-thirds. 

Even as that was happening, however, another tendency 
emerged. In 1969, at the height of the integration initiative, 
the federal government produced a White Paper proposing 
that Indian education be completely integrated into the 
provincial and territorial systems. The reaction of aboriginal 
people was vehemently negative. They did not see total inte- 
gration as a desirable goal for educating their children and 
could not fathom how the specific needs of aboriginal 
students could povsibly be met in an integrated provincial 
system. This (Commission was told that while integration 
might have been an improvement over the previous policy of 


In 1972, Native leadership published a response to the White 
Paper, titled "Indian Control of Indian Education." In it they 
outlined two goals for the education of aboriginal children: 
to reinforce their aboriginal identity, and to provide them 
with the education and training necessary to earn a good 
living in modern society. 

They felt that to make this happen, parental responsibility 
and local control of education would be essential. Within 
two months, the federal government accepted the paper as 
the basis for its new policy on aboriginal education, and it 
embarked on a process of turning over control of education 
to the First Nations' education authorities. This has not 
always gone smoothly, and in many places it has been much 
slower than the aboriginal community might have wished. 

In the mid-1980s, recognizing that there were serious 
problems, the federal government funded a study conducted 
by aboriginal people under the leadership of the Assembly of 
First Nations. The result was a four-volume report. Tradition 
and Education: Towards a Vision of Our Future, which was 
published in 1988, and, at the request of the federal govern- 
ment, reviewed by lames MacPherson, dean of Osgoode Hall 
Law School. MacPherson not only reviewed the most recent 
report, he also looked at some earlier events, and he identi- 
fied a number of causes for the slow implementation of the 
1972 federal initiative: 

1 ) There is no definition of. or agrremrni about, ihc nolion of 

2) Indian lonlrol to far hat often mean) nolhing more than Indian 
management (or worte, mere panicipalion in management) of 
federal programs and policiet; 

}) (ireater Indian control of education will not lead to belter educa- 
tion for Indian children if no proviiion it made for enhanced 
support systems and more funding to facilitate the trantition; 

41 dreater Indian control of education will not achieve the goal of 
reinforcing the Indian identity of Indian children if Indian- 
controlled Khoolt simply mirror the curriculum, programs and 
policies of provincial Khools because of a lack of support and fund- 
ing neceuary for promoting the programs which would encourage 
Indian distinctiveness; 

For ttw LOM o( LMrr«int 

5) Experience has shown that equating Indian control with local 
control is not appropriate in all facets of Indian education." 

While Tradition and Education clearly builds on the 1972 
paper "Indian Control of Indian Education," prepared by the 
National Indian Brotherhood, there are some very important 
differences. First, while the major principle of the 1972 
paper is "control," in Tradition and Education the emphasis is 
on "self-government." In the words of the paper: 

Children are the most precious resource of the First Nations. They 
are the link to the past generations, the enjoyment of the present 
generations, and the hope for the future. First Nations intend to 
prepare their children to carry on their cultures and government. 
Because education shapes the minds and values of First Nations' 
young people, it is vitally important that First Nations governments 
have jurisdiction over the education programs which have such a 
lasting impact." 

"Jurisdiction" goes well beyond "control." In subsequent 
pages. Tradition and Education defines "jurisdiction" as "the 
rights of each sovereign First Nation to exercise its authority, 
develop its policies, laws, and control financial and other 
resources for the education of its citizens."" 

The words "each sovereign nation" clearly indicate that 
the authors of the report do not see education to be 
governed by one central national policy for all First Nations. 
Rather, self-government is to be local and community based, 
an important concept for understanding the work that has 
taken place in Ontario in recent years. 

The report also calls for the federal government to recog- 
nize the "inherent" aboriginal right to self-government in 
the Canadian Constitution. This view of inherent right is 
based on the fact that First Nations were self-governing 
nations long before Canada came into being as a nation. 

The Province of Ontario publicly recognized this right 
several years ago, and in January 1994 the federal govern- 
ment announced it was prepared to act on its commitment 
to respect the inherent right of self-government. 

Declaration of political intent (DPI) 
Ontario arrived at the recognition of the right of self- 
government in two stages. In December 1985, the Province 
of Ontario, certain Political Territorial Organizations (PTOs) 
of First Nations, and the Government of Canada signed a 
Declaration of Political Intent to establish a forum for 

tripartite negotiations to resolve issues relating to First 
Nations' self-government in Ontario. A committee for 
education was set up and discussions began on aboriginal 
jurisdiction over education on reserves or Crown lands. 

Early discussions identified a number of important areas. 
As a result, working groups were set up to develop hand- 
books to assist First Nations and school boards in negotiat- 
ing tuition agreements (these are purchase-of-service agree- 
ments previously negotiated by the federal government on 
behalf of the First Nations) to deal with the issue of Native 
representation on school boards and to develop First 
Nations education legislation. 

Currently, Ontario is trying to focus negotiations so that 
self-government agreements can be in place by March 1996. 
In addition, the province agreed to include discussions on 
aboriginal jurisdiction in post-secondary education in the 
Declaration of Political Intent process, and said that when 
self-government agreements are finalized, it will consider 
including early childhood education in the negotiations. 

Over time, the declaration process funded seven pilot 
projects that support different aspects of self-government. As 
James MacPherson said, one major problem with Native 
education was the lack of support services available for 
curriculum development, teacher professional development, 
counselling, and other support services for students in on- 
reserve schools; therefore, several of the projects focus on 
those areas. 

Another project is the development of a local community- 
based First Nations Education Act, and still another is seek- 
ing to promote understanding of and a model for the self- 
government of education in the territory of the Nishnawbe- 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 

tt^^hild care is an important i&sue 
\#for our First Nations, for child 
care provides formalized learning and 
socialization opportunities and is an 
important basis for learning a 
language. In our case, langucige loss 
occurs amongst the very young. This 
can be prevented through property 
managed First Nations child-care 
pro- a ms which are connected with 
•la mo ntary programs.' 

Aski Nation, which consists of many First Nations mostly 
scattered in isolated communities throughout northern 
Ontario. The intent is that these projects should result in the 
development of a number of practical models for achieving 
and supporting self-government in education by aboriginal 
people in ways appropriate to their particular areas and 

Statement of political relationship (SPR) 
The second step in recognizing First Nations' rights to self- 
government was taken on 6 August 1991, when the Govern- 
ment of Ontario and representatives of First Nations of 
Ontario signed the Statement of Political Relationship. In it, 
Ontario explicitly recognized the First Nations' "inherent" 
right to self-government withm the constitutional frame- 
work of Canada and pledged to promote the exercise and 
implementation of this inherent right in Ontario. The fourth 
clause is particularly important to education; it says that 
nothing in the Statement of Political Relationship "shall be 
construed as determining Ontario's juri.sdiction or as dimin- 
ishing Canada's responsibilities towards First Nations." 

What we heard 

We made a special ettort to hear Irom Native people them- 
selves. We established an Aboriginal Working (ir(»up with 
representatives of First Nations and Native service organiz^a- 
lions; It met several times over the life of the (x)mmission to 
help us clarify key issues and offer suggestions for solutions. 
Natl". t inns and individuals made formal written or 

oral in such places as Thunder Bay, Kcnora, 

Sioux Lookout, Saull Sic. Marie, Sudbury, Timmins, 

Moosonee, Moose Factory Island, London, Windsor, 
and Toronto. 

In Sioux Lookout, we visited j secondary school and the 
\S'ahsa Distance F.ducatu)n centre, both operated by the 
Northern Nishnawbe hducaiion Clouncil. We held hearings 
in a number of schools that had a substantial number of 
Native students under tuition agreements; we visited the 
Walpole Island Reserve and made a special trip to Moosonee 
and Moose Factory Island to visit the schools, which have 
very high percentages of Native students. 

Given the diversity of Ontario's aboriginal peoples, there 
was not always agreement on all issues, but there were a 
number of key concerns in common. We learned that like 
the Franco-Ontarian community, First Nations are very 
worried about the survival of their cultures and languages. 
They also feel that appropriately recognizing and teaching 
their languages and culture will help their children develop 
a better sense of identity and enable them to participate 
more productively in their own and in the broader (Canadian 

A sense of urgency and even desperation pervaded many 
requests for help in rescuing languages and cultures before it 
is too late. 

Cultural values and traditions 

Aboriginal people also point out that recognition and teach- 
ing of the culture and contribution of aboriginal people 
should not be limited to aboriginal students and teachers: all 
students and teachers must be more knowledgeable about 
and sensitive to Native culture and history. Not only will this 
help all schools become more hospitable places for aborigi- 
nal students, but it will ensure also that Ontario society as a 
whole has a better understanding of aboriginal peoples. 

Native people feel that as long as we teach and believe 
that Canadian history began with the arrival of the first 
Furopeans on its shores, and that the aboriginal people 
living here had no languages, cultures, or traditions worth 
preserving, neither Native nor non- Native students will 
respect aboriginal people as important members of their 
own nations or of Canadian society. 

Aboriginal parents and educators also feel that their 
students will be more successful if teaching and evaluation 
methods used in schools are more sensitive to their cultures 
and learning styles. They are concerned that aboriginal 

For ttw IjOM of LMmtng 

students are being suspended and expelled out of all propor- 
tion to their numbers. They feel that teachers and other 
students do not understand the problems and expectations 
of Native students. They also worry about outright racism 
that sometimes reveals itself in a school's lack of willingness 
to work with aboriginal students and help them gain dignity 
and a more positive sense of themselves. 

Support for students 

Representatives of the First Nations communities are 
convinced of the value of education for their children, but 
schools by and large are still not comfortable places for 
aboriginal students; their drop-out rate is extremely high, 
especially in northern Ontario. Many find it difficult to 
make the transition to off-reserve schools, especially when, 
at age 14 or 15, they have to move hundreds of kilometres 
away from their communities to board with people who are 
usually strangers. There were many requests for more coun- 
selling and support services for Native students. 

It was suggested that more student residences such as 
those at Pelican Falls Centre, the First Nation-operated 
secondary school outside Sioux Lookout, would help. 
Aboriginal students live together in these residences and, 
with the help of house parents (often themselves aboriginal), 
support each other. It is also easier to provide special 
programs and services to students when they are together in 


More and more aboriginal students on reserves are being 
taught in schools operated by bands, councils of bands, or 
Native education authorities. First Nations communities 
were pleased with the introduction of destreaming and The 
Common Curriculum in Grade 9, which has made it easier 
for them to provide schooling for students in that initial 
secondary-level year, and delayed the need to send young 
teenagers off-reserve for their schooling. However, the added 
grade brings with it an increased need for already scarce 
aboriginal teachers, and teachers who understand aboriginal 
learners and who will commit themselves to First Nations 
communities for some time. Parents and leaders are 
concerned about the very high turnover of teachers in First 
Nations communities; they believe that if more teachers 
were members of those communities, they would remain 

AA ^% chool texts present Canadian 
^9history from the perspective of 
British imperialism, not the point of 
view of the real Canadians, the First 
Nations. Where are the First Nations 
heroes in Canadian history; the men 
and women who fought to defend 
their homes, families and way of life 
from the invaders? ... From the point 
of view of the Hrst Nations, Canada 
has been an occupied country for four, 
hundred years." 

Margaret Kenequanash, 

Northern Nishnawbe Education Council, 

and provide the continuity and understanding that are so 
important to any successful education program. 

Shared decision-making 

Although post-secondary education was not part of our 
mandate, representatives of First Nations communities 
frequently commented on the need for better post-secondary 
and training opportunities for their people. As part of their 
traditional view of education as a lifelong process. First 
Nations' aspirations for self-governance in education also 
encompass that part of the process. 

Recently, Native people have made significant advances 
working together on plans to establish their own post- 
secondary institutions. We would expect that the provincial 
and federal levels of government would want to support 
such efforts and take them into consideration in their poli- 
cies on funding and recognition of credentials. 

Native people also identify a lack of constructive working 
relationships between their communities and schools and 
provincial school boards and teacher federations, as well as a 
lack of recognition by the Ministry of the authority of band 
councils and Native education authorities. They are asking 
for legislation that would permit more co-operative and 
reciprocal arrangements between provincial school boards 
and Native education authorities. 

Aboriginal people feel that part of the problem may be 
that the Ministry designates band-operated secondary 
schools as private schools. At the moment, that is the only 
legislated mechanism available to the Ministry to allow it to 
inspect the school so that their principals can grant the 
Ontario Secondary School Diploma to graduating students. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 

a ■ am a parent of two schoof-aged 
I children. I will soon have to support 
them in making ttie decision whettier 
to end ttieir formal education, take 
full-time distance education through 
Wahsa - a wonderful option but a 
tremendous challenge for an adoles- 
cent - or whether tt>ey will have to 
leave home as I dkl at the age of 14 
to contkMM thek schooling.'' 

Under the current Icjii^lation, Ontario slHooI boards arc 
allowed to enter into purchase agreements only with other 
Ontario school boards, not with private schools. Under 
legislation and policies related to private schools, the 
Ministry deals directly with the principals of those institu- 
tions; in the case of the band-operated private schools, this 
means that it bypasses the Native Education Authority. 

But as aboriginal educators point out, their schools are 
not privately funded; they receive public money from the 
federal government and from bands. They are, therefore, also 
subject to public scrutiny from two levels of government. 

Native people believe that band-operated secondary 
schools should be designated something other than private 
schools; this would allow the government to amend legisla- 
tion to permit co-operative and reciprocal arrangements 
between aboriginal and other publicly funded schools in 
Ontario, without reference to private schools. They also 
want the legislation to properly recognize the role of the 
Native Education Authority in governing their schools. 

In general, aboriginal parents also want to have more 
input into the schools their children attend. Some Native 
people feel this might be achieved by having more Native 
trustees on provincial Khool boards, or by being able to vote 
in Khool board elections, and others are looking for more 
direct involvement with their local school. Still others are 
more concerned about achieving full self-government and 
controlling their own education system from early child- 
hood to post -secondary and adult education and training. 

Issues and recommendations 

Iciicral- provituuil lO-operalion 

While our mandate did not include education of aboriginal 
children on reserves, the educational experiences of students 
on and otf reserves overlap a good deal, especially when 
students on reseo'es receive part of their education (usually 
elementary) on reserves, and part (usually secondary) in 
schools operated by provincial school boards. 

Ciiven the role of the federal government in aboriginal 
education, our recommendations for improving education 
for Ontario's Native children necessarily include some 
directed to the federal government. We see no reason why we 
should not remind the federal government of its obligations 
so that aboriginal students get excellent elementary and 
secondary education, regardless of where they receive it. 

We have also directed some recommendations jointly to 
both levels of government; this is in order to promote co- 
operation rather than duplication of efforts. With more than 
half of Ontario's aboriginal students living off-reserve or 
attending schools under provincial jurisdiction off-reserve, 
this is an opportunity for greater co-operation between the 
federal and provincial governments. 

Recommendations 123. 124 
*We recommend that rather than having the two levels of 
government work independently of each other, and in order to 
avoid duplication, the Government of Canada and the Govern- 
ment of Ontario jointly fund, for use in both on-reserve 
schools and schools under provincial junsdiction, the devel 
opment of curriculum guidelines and resource matenals that 
more accurately reflect the history of Canada's atxynginal 
people and their contribution to Canada s literature, culture, 
history, and values, and in other areas to be incorporated 
throughout the curriculum. 

• We recommend the development of assessment and teach 
ing strategies that are more sensitive to the learning styles 
identified by aboriginal educators. 

We also suggest that the federal government work with 
hirst Nations communities on reserves to provide additional 
support for students who have to live away from home in 
order to receive their elementary or secondary education. 

We hesitate to recommend specific models or a great 
increase in off-reserve accommodation for students when, m 

For ttw LOM of l<Mm«n( 


future, more of their communities may well be able to 
provide better educational opportunities for them on- 

Recommendation 125 

*We recommend that the federal and provincial governments 
work with Native education authorities and the First Nations 
to provide better support to students who must live away 
from their communities to obtain elementary and/or 
secondary education. 


oivaboriginal teachers who teach 
First Nations students must be 
trained in cross-cultural awareness, 
e.g., an awareness of the difference 
in values between Native and non- 
Native people; the history of treaties; 
what treaty rights are; etc." 

Windigo Education Authority 



One of the complaints we heard frequently is that the variety 
of services to support students and teachers that are 
available in the province's publicly funded schools are not 
readily available in on-reserve schools. Aboriginal educators 
told us that the federal funding formula for on-reserve 
education does not recognize the additional expenditures for 
support services to the same extent as the provincial funding 
formula does. 

When provincial school boards calculate charges to the 
Native education authority, First Nation, or federal govern- 
ment for the students educated in their schools, they use the 
provincial formula, which includes provision for support 
services. The Native education authority. First Nation, or the 
federal government may negotiate such additional services 
for aboriginal students as Native counsellors or an animator 
for Native culture in the school, which will increase the cost 
of the tuition agreement. 

We were told that the federal government usually 
provides the full amount to the Native education authority 
to cover the cost of the tuition agreement, and that this 
amount is often higher than what it would give the authority 
if the students were educated on-reserve. It would therefore 
appear that less money is provided for on-reserve than for 
off-reserve education, and as a result the learning experi- 
ences for children in on-reserve schools are less effective 
than they could be. 

Recommendation 126 

*We recommend that the federal government review its 
method of funding education for Native students in on- 
reserve schools to ensure there are adequate funds to 
provide any necessary special programs to support aboriginal 
education and for professional support of teachers. 

Teacher education 

Clearly, it is the responsibility of the province to ensure that 
teachers in Ontario's publicly funded schools receive the 
training they need to gain a better understanding of aborigi- 
nal students; to implement new curriculum, assessment, and 
teaching strategies; and to adapt existing programs. In the 
past few years, the province has funded a number of 
community-based demonstration pilot projects that address 
some of these needs. Such projects could offer useful models 
and strategies that should be shared with teachers and 
education administrators, and that should help the province 
in implementing our following recommendation. 

Recommendation 127 

*We recommend that the province include in its requirements 
for pre-service and in-service teacher education a component 
related to teaching aboriginal students and teaching about 
aboriginal issues to both Native and non-Native students. 


There is another group of program-related concerns that 
First Nations communities share with other small schools 
and boards. They often find that limited resources restrict 
their ability to offer a full range of programs to their 
students; this problem is particularly acute at the secondary 
school level. Frequently, there are not enough students in 
any one school to warrant setting up a class in a particular 
subject; even when there are sufficient students, there may 
not be enough teachers available for highly specialized 

With its Wahsa Distance Education School, the Northern 
Nishnawbe Education Council in Sioux Lookout has made a 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 

4^ Hn conjunction with Lakehead 
■ University, a Teacher Training 
Program has been established where 
the university sends professors to 
our community and, in turn, the 
students attend university in Thunder 
Bay. Currently 17 students are taking 
this course and will receive their 
OTCs in May of 1994. After one year 
ttMr« hav» Immi no drop-oiits." 

<ty Lif- Eouc tKX' Autt ionty and 
i School 

good Start at addressing this problem; the program uses the 
Ministry's Independent Lcarnmg C^entrc materials as well as 
those specifically developed by the school. Teachers in a 
transmitting studio in Sioux Lookout connect with students 
in various remote communities via radio, telephone, and 

In many ways, the program works well and has signifi- 
cantly expanded available education opportunities not only 
to learners of compulsory school age but to adult learners. A 
number of learners who might otherwise not have been able 
to do so have earned their Ontario Secondary School Diplo- 
mas through the Wahsa program. 

However, transmission problems are frequent. Further- 
more, learning only through textbook and audio contact 
requires a lot of self-discipline by students, and it is not the 
most exciting way to learn. To overcome these drawbacks, at 
least to some extent, each community has an education co- 
ordinator to encourage and assist learners. Nonetheless, the 
program has its limitations. 

A way to improve this kind of learning has been part of 
one of the previously mentioned community-based demon- 
stration pilot projects: a technological studies course (that 
uses video) on small-motor theory, maintenance, and repair. 
The course was jointly developed by the Northern Nish- 
nawbe Education Council, the Wahsa Distance Education 
Centre, the Northern District School Area Board, WaWaTay 
Native Cx>mmunications Society, TV'Ontario, and the 
Ministry's Independent Learning Centre. The visual dimen- 
sion helps students to understand the content of the course 
and to relate to a person they can see as well as hear on 

While it does not have the quality of interactivity that the 
live audio programs from Wahsa offer, the technology to do 
that is already in limited use in Canada. Even though current 
cable wiring does not support interactive video, there is 
technology that, when in wide use, will. 

The use of CD-ROMs on computers will also increase the 
range of good learning opportunities available to students; 
this technology can also be greatly enhanced by computer 
networking, but here, too, there are barriers to its use in 
northern Ontario. 

Recommendation 128 

• We recommend that the federal government, which has 
responsibility in this field, give top priority to ensuring the 
availability of good telecommunications throughout Ontario in 
order to support education through the use of interactive 
video and computer networking. 

Video would not only help make more courses available 
to senior secondary students throughout Ontario, including 
those in remote northern communities, but it could also be 
very useful in bringing together scarce resources to support 
the teaching of Native languages, especially those on the 
verge of extinction. 

While developing most secondary school courses is clear- 
ly a provincial obligation, developing Native language 
courses that use videos and CD-ROMs, including story- 
telling and Native culture units, some of which could be 
incorporated into the common curriculum for all learners, 
would also fall within the responsibility of the federal 
government. Although fairly costly to develop, such courses 
might mean long-term savings and, in any event, would be 
well worth the investment. 

Recommendation 129 

•We recommend that tx>th the federal and provincial govern- 
ments provide resources to support the development of 
courses, initially video- and COROM-based. that would use 
interactive technology when an adequate telecommunication 
infrastructure is in place. 

Ahonginal languago 

Members of aboriginal communities across Ontario 
expressed the need for more flexibility and assistance in 
teaching and using aboriginal languages in on-reserve and 
off-reserve schools. First Nations that operate their own 

Forth* Lo«*o( l««m<n( 

schools do not really need provincial approval to introduce 
more Native language classes, and they can decide to have 
Native language immersion schools or classes. In fact, there 
are two immersion schools on the Six Nations Reserve near 
Brantford, as well as immersion classes in some of northern 
Ontario's Native communities. 

However, the issue is more complex. Many aboriginal 
students are still being educated off-reserve in schools oper- 
ated by provincial school boards. Native education authori- 
ties want to continue offering the Ontario Secondary School 
Diploma, which means they must adhere to related provin- 
cial legislation and guidelines. At this point, however, that 
does not give them the flexibility they want in the use of 
Native languages. 

There are other complicating factors. In Ontario, there 
are 13 languages traditionally spoken by aboriginal people, 
belonging to two linguistic families: Algonkian and 
Iroquoian. Of the Algonkian languages, three - Ojibwe, 
Cree, and Ojibwe-Cree - are stUl spoken extensively across 
northern Ontario. In "You Took My Talk," a report of the 
federal Standing Committee on Aboriginal Issues, these 
three were identified as being healthy enough to survive. 
However, they are not equally well preserved in all areas of 
the province, and the report describes the other ten 
languages as being on the verge of extinction."" 

Because for the most part aboriginal languages have been 
transmitted orally, attempts are now being made to preserve 
them in written form, but much stronger efforts are needed 
while there is still time. Aboriginal people do not have the 
necessary resources for this task. Since most of the Native 
languages are also spoken in other parts of Canada and the 
United States, the federal government also has a role to play 
in this area. 

Recommendation 130 

*We recommend that the federal government provide assis- 
tance to aboriginal peoples to develop language teaching 
resources co-operatively with communities that use the same 
languages, in other provinces and in the United States. 

Just as, in the Mahe case, the Supreme Court of Canada 
identified the French language as an essential tool for main- 
taining and nurturing French-Canadian culture, so aborigi- 
nal people see the preservation of their languages as essential 
to preserving their cultures and identity. It is understandable 

then that Ontario's aboriginal people look to the schools to 
help some of the First Nations reclaim already threatened 
languages and to prevent current languages from becoming 

This is the reason that a number of presenters asked us to 
recommend that Native languages be eligible for use as 
languages of instruction, rather than just being subjects. 
While there are some classes of this type available in schools 
run by First Nations Education Authorities, it will not be 
easy to expand these programs, because of the lack of teach- 
ers and resource materials. 

However, there are areas of the province where resource 
materials for some subjects already exist, especially at the 
early-education and primary level. 

Secondary school students might gain stronger language 
experience if, for example, the schools were permitted to use 
the Native language in such optional courses as Native stud- 
ies and outdoor education. If schools could group these with 
a course in a Native language, they could provide a one- 
semester immersion experience. 

There are other provinces and countries where Native 
languages are being used as languages of instruction. These 
programs can be used to guide Ontario in implementing the 
following recommendation. 

Recommendation 131 

*We recommend that the province, in co-operation with First 

Nations communities and school boards, develop guidelines 

for permitting the use of Native languages as languages of 

instruction, where teachers and teaching resources are 


Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 

The province will have to continue and, if possible, 
increase efforts to train teachers of Native languages and 
Native studies. This is not simply a matter of making more 
places available at faculties of education, but also of assisting 
efforts to obtain qualified staff to teach such programs, and 
helping aboriginal students become qualified to enter them. 
There arc successful programs at Lakehead, Nipissing. and 
Queen's universities. Where it is appropriate, the federal 
government should also support efforts to increase the 
number of teachers able to teach Native languages and 
Native studies. 

The federal and provincial governments have helped fund 
various programs for development of teacher in-service and 
classroom materials that improve the teaching of Native 
languages and Native culture throughout Ontario. It is 
important that resources be widely shared by boards and 
band-operated schools across the province, to avoid duplica- 
tion of effort and to make best use of scarce resources. 

Recommendation 132 

*We recommend that the provincial and federal governments 
continue their programs to develop resource matenals that 
support the teaching of Native languages and culture for 
teacher irhservice and for classroom use m on and off- 
reserve schools, providing such materials are made available 
to other tioards and schools. 

Decision making 

Other concerns cxprcs.scd to the Commission centred on 
Native people's input into the policies of schools that aborig- 
inal students attend and that are under provincial jurisdic- 

tion. Some First Nation representatives suggested that this 
can best be done by appointing additional trustees to repre- 
sent the concerns of aboriginal students, and by permitting 
aboriginal people on reserves to vote in school board 

There are other hirst Nations that do not sec ihc need for 
additional trustee representation: rather than negotiating 
educational issues with a school board, they are more 
concerned about pursuing self-governance and negotiating 
educational issues on a government-to-government basis. 

We believe that as long there are school boards, the inter- 
ests of aboriginal students should probably be represented at 
that level in a more on-going way than is possible through 
the annual negotiation of tuition agreements. Such represen- 
tation should be equal to the representation of electors of 
the board; however, some adjustments could be made where 
the number of aboriginal students is relatively small, even if 
that means a lower trustee-to-sludent ratio for aboriginal 
students than for other students. 

Some agreements in this area were reached as part of the 
negotiation process for the Declaration of Political Intent 
mentioned, but the Ministry appears to be reluctant to 
implement these agreements, pending the publication of this 
report. We acknowledge that the DPI proposal may need to 
be revised, given our discussion on the number of school 
board trustees. (See Chapter 17.) 

Recommendation 133 

*We recommend that the Ministry and the representatives of 
the First Nations review the Declaration of Political Intent 
proposal on Native trustee representation, taking into 
account possible changes in overall board structures that 
could follow the issue of this report, and that at the earliest 
opportunity the parties implement the agreement that 

We believe, however, that the really significant input into 
the education of the aborigindl learners can occur only at 
the local school level. As with other students, parental activi- 
ty that makes a difference to the level of achievement of 
aboriginal children depends on good communication and 
interaction between the school and the parent. We feel, 
therefore, that the recommendations wc make in the next 
chapter, lonicrning the interaction between teachers and 

For ««• tOM of LMmtng 

parents, and between the school and its community, will 
have a more significant impact on the success of aboriginal 
learners than will any adjustments made at the board level. 
The community alliances we identify as one of the four 
levers for education reform are as important for improving 
education for aboriginal learners as for any other learners in 


We also support the wishes of Ontario's aboriginal people to 
govern their own education. We recognize that there are 
many ways in which the First Nations are now limited in 
their ability to set a course for their own education system. 
Ultimately, there is no reason why First Nations could not 
decide to have their own secondary school graduation diplo- 
ma requirements. It may be that for practical reasons, they 
will choose to stay close to provincial requirements; but if 
self-government is to mean anything, Native peoples should 
be able to make that choice for themselves. 

Recommendation 134 

*We recommend that the federal and provincial governments 
continue negotiations that lead to full self-governance of 
education by the First Nations. 

Recognition of band-operated schools 

Band-operated schools should be permitted more flexibility 
to interact with other publicly funded schools in reciprocal 
arrangements, rather than under the one-way arrangement 
that is now the only possibility. 

Recommendation 135 

*We recommend that the province develop a different way of 
dealing with band-operated elementary and secondary 
schools than it now has. Such a method would: 

a) recognize that they are publicly funded schools of a 
First Nation, governed by a duly constituted education 
authority, and 

b) permit more reciprocity and co-operation with provincial 
school boards. 


We believe that in addition to our recommendations for 
improving the learning experience of all Ontario learners, 
the issues we address in this chapter and the recommenda- 
tions we make will, when implemented, ensure that the 
educational opportunities for Roman Catholic, Franco- 
Ontarian, and aboriginal children are more equitable than 
they are now. Not only do our recommendations address 
some specific program concerns, but they also focus on 
giving these communities a greater voice in the governance 
and management of the education of their children. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 


1 Robert Choqu«tte, 'L'tcote des franco-onuricns: Une r^ro- 
sp«ctivv hiftoriquc* (Ottawa, 1991, mimeographrd), p. 48. 

2 Chad Ciattlcid, Lingiuige. Si/ioo/injj, and Cultural Confhit: The 
Origins of French -Lingutige Controtrrsy in Ontario (Kingston: 
McGill -Queen's University Press, 1987), prologue. 

3 Chad Gaffield, Aux origirui de Videntitt franco-ontatienne: 
tducation, culture, ^onomie (Ottawa; University of Ottawa 
Press, 1993), p. 284. 

4 The Council's nundaie has remained more or less unchanged 
since 1980, except for the addition of the skills development 
component in 1993. The chairmanship is now a full-time 
position held by a well-known figure in the Franco-Ontarian 
education world, the sociologist Rolande Faucher. 

5 This categorization provides little help when it comes to 
including "Canadian-born" francophones from other 
provinces, especially from Quebec, j province with a fran- 
cophone majority and where the status of minority at the 
national level is viewed quite differeniiy than in other Canadi- 
an provinces. 

6 Anne Gilbert and Andr^ Langlois, Les rialitts franco-ontan- 
ennes: Lei francophonei tels qu'ils iont. 3rd edition (Vanier, ON: 
Assocution canadienne-fran(;aise dc I'Ontario, 1994), p. 6-7. 

7 Political analysts who studied women in Scandinavian politics 
believe that a minority group constitutes a critical mass and 
can, subsequently, form a balance of power and influence the 
agenda of the majority when it consists of 30 to 33 percent of 
the total number of people in question. Among other works, 
refer to: 

Drude l>ahlerup, "From a Small to a Large Minority: Women 
in Scandinavian Politics," Sc<>n</in<>vt<in Political Studies 1 1 , no. 

In his own work on language minorities, sociologist lacques 
Leclerc speaks of 20 percent m being a critical mass. Sec 
Lederc, "Language and Society." Mondia. p. 171. 

8 Gilbert and Langlois, Les rtaltlts franco -ontariennn, p. 20. 

9 Gilbert and [.anglois, Les rtalitts franco-ontariennes, p. 20. 

10 Nonnand Frcnette and Saeed Quazi, Ontano Francophone and 
hnt-tecontlary AccetsiMity (Toronto: Ontario Ministry of 
CoUcgesand Unn^ersities. 1990). 

1 1 Gilbert and Langlois. La rtalitts franco-onlariennes, p. 50. 

12 For insiarKe, there have been only two francophone deputy 
minislert in Ontario'* history: G^ard Raymond and [)onald 

1 3 Stacy Churchill. Normand Frenette, and Saeed Quazi, Educa- 
tion and Franco-Ontanan Needs: The Diagnosis of an Educa- 
tional System (Highlights) (Toronto: Conseil dc I'^ucation 
francoontaricnnc, 1986). p. 2. This two-volume report is a 
remarkable study of the Franco-Ontarian community and its 
educational needs. 

N F^ddration des associations dc parents francophones dc I'On- 
tario, A Prion 6, no. I (1993 ). 

15 Section 23(3) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Free- 
doms reads: 

The right of citizens of Canada under subsections (1) and (2) 
to have their children receive primary and secondary school 
instruction in the language of the English or French linguistic 
minority population of a province 

(a) applies wherever in the province the number of children of 
citizens who have such a right is sufficient to warrant the 
provision to them out of public fund.s of minority language 
instruction; and 

(b) includes, where the number of those children so warrants, 
the right to have them receive that instruction in minority 
language educational facilities provided out of public funds. 

16 Video-forum for francophone cthno-cuitural minorities. 
Sponsored by RCOL, (Chaired by M. B^in. Toronto and 
Ottawa, April 6, 1994. 

17 Denis Mach^ and lulic Boi.ssonneault, Ontre de Recherches en 
education du Nouvcl-Ontario, brief to the Ontario Royal 
Commission on Learning, 1991, p. I. 

18 Ontario, Ministry of Education, Report of the French-language 
Education Governance Advisory Group (Toronto, 1991 ), p. 5-6. 

19 Sec in particular a report presented to the Cx)mmission enti- 
tled "Aper^u de la probltmatiquc des C^imit^s consultatifs de 
langue fran^aisc dans les conseils scolaires de la province," a 
survey of the problems of French-language advisory commit- 
tees in the province's school boards (Ottawa: Association 
fran^aise des conseils scolaires de I'Ontario, 1993. p. 15). 

20 Hach^ and Boi.ssonneault, brief, p. 9, 

2 1 Conseil de I'^ucation catholique pour les francophones de 
I'Ontario, brief to the Ontario Royal Commission on 
Ixarning, 1993, p. 7. 

22 Ontario, OfTice of the Provincial Auditor, /993 Annual Report: 
Accounting. Accountability, Value for Money [Toronto, 1994), 
p. 71. 

lior 0w LoM o( LMmmg 

23 R. Bisson and G. Gratton, "£tude de faisabilite: La gestion 
dans le cadre de TArticle 23," p. 4. Prepared for the French- 
language section of the Simcoe County Roman Catholic Sepa- 
rate Board, and presented to Ontario Royal Commission on 
Learning, 1993. 

24 See, as an example, the study entitled, "Consortium des 
conseUs du Nord," prepared by J. Raymond Chenier and 
others for five school boards, Timmins, 1994. 

25 One of the most recent is the work of four francophone direc- 
tors of education and has since been adopted by all of the 
province's francophone directors of education, although the 
document is only at the first-draft stage. Andre Lalonde, Roger 
Brille, Paul St-Cyr, and Pierre MarcU for the Forum of Direc- 
tors of Education, French Section, Toronto, 1994. 

Donald Dennie and Simon Laflamme, research report present- 
ed to the Ontario Royal Commission on Learning, 1994, p. 5. 

Federation des jeunes Canadiens-fran(;ais, L'avenir devant 
nous: La jeunesse, le probleme de rassimilation et le developpe- 
ment des communautes canadiennes-frarifaises, vol. 4 (Ottawa, 
1990), p. 143. 

Make et al. v. Province of Alberta (1990), 68 D.L.R. (4th) 82. 

Ford V. Quebec (Solicitor General) (1988), 54 D.L.R. (4th) 604. 

Make V. Alberta, p. 83. 

Quoted in La Vision: L'ecole franfaise en Ontario pour I'actuali- 
sation de la culture (Ottawa: Association fran(;aise des conseils 
scolaires de I'Ontario, 1991), p. 16, and quoted in Ontario, 
Ministry of Education, Report of the French-language Educa- 
tion Governance Advisory Group, p. 4. 

It is difficult to get completely accurate statistical information 
on aboriginal populations. Statistics Canada data do not 
include those who live on reserves and refuse to be enumerat- 
ed, or those who resided in institutions at the time of the 
census. Data from the Indian Registration Program, Indian 
and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC), tend to be more accu- 
rate as far as aboriginal people living on reserves is concerned. 
Data given here on the general population comes from the 
1991 Canadian census, while the information on First Nations 
and bands comes from INAC 1991 data. 

33 Canada, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Develop- 
ment, MacPherson Report on Tradition and Education: 
Towards a Vision of Our Future (Ottawa, 1991), p. 3. 

34 Assembly of First Nations, Tradition and Education, 
vol. 1 (1988), p. 1, as quoted in Macpherson Report, p. 4. 




35 Assembly of First Nations, Tradition and Education, p. 82. 

36 Canada, Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs, "You Took 
My Talk": Aboriginal Literacy and Empowerment: Fourth Report 
(Ottawa, 1990). 

37 Under current legislation, where aboriginal students taught 
under tuition agreements number 100 or more, or make up 10 
percent or more of the total enrolment in a school board's 
jurisdiction, the board must appoint a Native trustee named 
by the council of the band or bands. A second trustee must be 
appointed if the number is more than 25 percent of the total 
enrolment of the board's jurisdiction. If the number is fewer 
than 100 (or 10 percent of the total enrolment), then the 
appointment is at the discretion of the board. This is the main 
area of contention. Another problem arises when there are 
several bands involved who each want their own trustee to 
represent them. Except for the lack of representation when 
there are fewer than 100 aboriginal students enrolled, and a 
few situations where the majority of students enrolled are 
Native, the proportion of Native trustees on school boards in 
Ontario tends to reflect fairly closely the proportion of 
aboriginal students enrolled in the board. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Constitutional Issues 

^n'n.fx •"> ■ f jf ■ 


In Chapter 15 we dealt with the concerns of ' 
comnnunities that have special constitutional 
status; however, there are some minority 
communities without special constitutional or 
historic status who also raised issues concerning 
governance, funding, and special programs to 
support academic achievement. Therefore, in this 
chapter we address certain concerns of religious, 
racial, and language minorities, and make a variety 
of recommendations. 

Ontario's rich diversity is not limited to Toronto: 
people from many backgrounds have settled in 
communities large and small. Whether born here or 
elsewhere, Ontarians share one home but have different reli- 
gions and languages, ethno-cultural and racial back- 

We can expect this diversity to increase, as we continue to 
have relatively high rates of immigration from parts of the 
world that, in the Canadian context, produce religious, 
hnguistic, ethno-cultural, and racial minorities. For example. 
Statistics Canada estimated that, in Ontario in 1992, there 
were 1,297,605 "visible minorities"- 13 percent of the 
provincial population.' Although it is always dangerous to 
make population projections, we think it safe to say that the 
proportion and number of racial minorities are, at the very 
least, likely to rise, at least for the next decade.' 

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides 
all Canadians with basic protection from discrimination 
"based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, 
sex, age, or mental or physical disability," while also allowing 
for "affirmative action programs." The Charter requires that 
it be "interpreted in a manner consistent with the preserva- 
tion and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of 
Canadians"; this is an extension of the federal government's 
announcement in 1971 of a policy of multiculturalism with- 

*FroiTi a scientific perspective, there is only one "race." However, socially, people 
categorize themselves and others on the basis of race. This social construct means 
that some people may be treated differently, purely on the basis of the perception 
of one's race. 

in a bilingual framework; later, a Canadian Multiculturalism 
Act was passed into law. 

The Commission takes with utmost seriousness the 
school system's mandate to serve all students. It means that 
the system needs to ensure that every school is welcoming to 
students of every faith, first language, ethnocultural back- 
ground, or colour. Ontario must not only build inclusive 
schools and curricula but, because a student can be formally 
included but still marginalized, the province must also create 
schools and curricula that place the views, concerns, and 
needs of all students and communities at the very centre of 
the teacher's work. 

We believe the Commission has done this throughout our 
report when dealing with issues such as those related to 
curriculum, teacher staffing, training, and parental and 
community involvement. 

At the same time, we recognize that it may be necessary 
to include a section dealing with matters related to specific 
communities, based on data that indicate the children of 
those communities are collectively performing "below the 
norm," at least as compared to students from other commu- 
nities or to the board average. 

A small number of school boards have compiled data that 
allows these types of comparisons; for example, they have 
analyzed the proportions of students found in the advanced, 
general, and basic streams in secondary school. They have 
also looked at drop-out rates and various indicators of 
"risk": we know, for instance, that if students fall significant- 
ly behind in the number of credits they earn, they are more 
"at risk" of dropping out. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Equity Considerations 


Immigration Trends In Ontario - 1962-1992 






No<th & Caolral Am«rica 
South America 
•Mtddle East 
Other/not statad 

'Figures are available (or 1992 only. 
Source: Cmploynwnt and lnvni(rallon Cviada 
ComplM t>r Onlafto Mmwtry 01 ClUnnthlp 





These data arc broken down according to gender, class, 
ethnic, and racial categories, so that it is possible to see 
which groups are better represented in, for example, the 
advanced level that leads to university, and which groups 
have higher drop-out rates. It is clear from the data that 
there are substantial differences identifiable for somc 

In a paper prepared for this Commission, University of 
Western Ontario Professor Jerry Paquette makes a very 
strong case for monitoring the educational benefits derived 
by various sub-populations.' As he points out. it is not possi- 
ble to assume that all individual students arc equal and thai 
all will achieve at the same high degree. Rather, "the equality 
dimension of public education should take aim ... at an 
equitable distribution of educational excellence across lines 
of demographic difference. That is the real and singular 
challenge of equality of educational opportunity..." In other 
words, we can expect that, in a truly equitable system, 
roughly the same proportions of each community will excel, 
do satisfactorily, or do poorly, as in the total student popula- 
tion. If, as IS currently true, they do not, the system needs to 
be fixed. 

Wc believe that the benefits of learning from and about 
each other more than justify meeting the challenges of 
providing an educational system that is sensitive to diversity. 

We heard from minority groups who feel their religious 
beliefs are not sufficiently accommodated in the publicly 
funded school system. Some of them asked for more consid- 
eration and support for their differences so that their chil- 

dren can be educated in the public school system in a 
manner that recogni/.es and respects their needs. 

Others do not feel that they can expect the public system 
to provide an education that is consistent with their values 
and beliefs, and have therefore established their own private 
education systems. They asked for various degrees of finan- 
cial support to alleviate the financial burden of maintaining 
their own schools, and want the government to recognize 
their different needs when it develops and implements 
education policies. 

Religious minorities 

Members ul itli^ious inmorities expressed two major 
concerns. First, they argued they should be in the same posi- 
tion as Roman (Catholics, whose children are educated with 
in a Roman (Catholic framework through the publicly fund- 
ed system. Sikhs, Jews, Christians, Muslims, and members of 
other groups asked for public financial support for separate 
schools or school systems based on their religions. 

Second, they said that religious minorities are not under- 
stood and respected, either because of negative or inade- 
quate representation in the curriculum or even because of 
curriculum content; they believe that all students should 
receive more information about a range of religions. 

Public funding for religious schools is a thorny issue in 
Ontario. There is no consensus and there are rather convinc- 
ing arguments on both sides. Although, in 1986, the Shapiro 
(Commission looked at public funding for Ontario's private 
schools in Ontario, including those that arc religion based, 
and proposed funding them through a public board with 

For ttte Lo«« of L»amir>g 

which the school would be associated. The model was not 
accepted by government; moreover, support for it by 
members of religious minorities has been mixed, on the 
grounds that it does not create autonomous systems, with 
taxation powers and control over their own schools. 

In 1990, the ruling of the Ontario Court of Appeal in the 
Elgin case prohibiting the teaching of a single religious tradi- 
tion as if it were the exclusive means through which to devel- 
op moral thinking and behaviour- left some doubt about the 
possible legality of the Shapiro model. A court challenge is 
outstanding on this issue. 

Early in 1994, as we were in the midst of our delibera- 
tions, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled unanimously 
against a coalition of Jewish and Christian schools requesting 
provincial funding. The judgment held that, because public 
funding of Ontario's Roman Catholic school system (as of 
Quebec's Protestant school system) was agreed to at the time 
of Confederation and was part of the Constitution Act, 1867, 
non-funding of other denominational schools does not 
constitute discrimination against them. Because the issue is 
not one of contravening the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 
funding of other schools was a matter for political decision. 

After considerable discussion and debate, the Commission 
decided to leave the question there. We are conscious that 
our report argues forcefully in several places, either explicitly 
or implicitly, in favour of schools that respect the diversity of 
learners in Ontario's pluralistic society. We insist elsewhere 
that ethnic heritage and traditions must be explicitly includ- 
ed in the school curriculum. We argue for schools that are 

We realize as well - and several times mention this in our 
report - that curriculum includes both what is said and what 
is unsaid, what is supported and what is not supported, what 
is dealt with and what is ignored in school programs. It has 
been argued that the silence of the public school curriculum 
on matters of religion runs the risk of devaluing students' 
beliefs and of conveying the idea that religion is alien to the 
wonder and the task of learning. 

But, whatever our personal opinions, and despite presen- 
tations from individuals and representatives of minority 
groups at our public hearings, we do not find ourselves able 
to recommend changes we consider beyond our terms of 
reference. In keeping with our mandate, our analysis and 
recommendations are based on the existing collective minor- 

A^iVhe main issue is not whether the 
I curriculum will include information 
about different religions, although 
that is an important question, but 
how we will develop ways of defining 
and sharing the values and principles 
that should guide education in a 
multicultural, multlfaith society. A 
multifaith program of education about 
religion will contribute to the more 
basic goal of a school system that 
equips students for life in an increas- 
ingly pluralistic society." 

Ecumenical Study Commission 

ity rights and privileges enshrined in the Constitution: the 
right of Roman Catholics (and of the Franco-Ontarians) to 
management and public funding of their education systems. 

While the Elgin decision prohibits religious instruction of 
a doctrinal nature, it permits teaching about religion. We 
believe it makes sense for all schools, including Roman 
Catholic schools, to include more about religion, using a 
multifaith approach: a program that educates students about 
a range of religions and faiths, their basic tenets, and the way 
they organize themselves is quite appropriate. 

The Ministry has recently released a curriculum resource 
guide for school boards to use in developing courses about 
religion for the elementary level." Some schools might 
include education about religion in the 10 percent of the 
curriculum which is to be determined locally in our propos- 
al for curriculum in Grades 1 to 9. 

Although not mandatory, education about religion might 
be offered at the secondary level through the world religions 
course already available. We note, however, that the recent 
curriculum resource guide for elementary public schools 
provides a stronger multifaith focus that could be used as a 
model for revising the world religions course. 

We recognize that a course about religions must be deliv- 
ered sensitively, with respect and generosity in discussions 
and descriptions of diverse religious traditions. We do not 
minimize the challenge in doing so; there are, after all, 
people in other parts of the world killing each other over 
matters of religious belief. Nonetheless, we feel that courses 
on religion, taught at some depth, rather than treating the 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Equity Considerations 

Members of several Unguage, cthno-culiural, and 
racul mirtority communilies came lo the Commission 
concerned about lost opportunities: too many of their 
children are failing, are in special education or 
non-university streams, or are dropping out of school. 

subject superficially in the hope of avoiding school or 
community clashes, arc important. 

Finally, wc take seriously the concerns of members of 
religious and other minorities who believe they are 
portrayed inaccurately or who have concerns about curricu- 
lum content; the latter may come from a difference between 
values held by the newcomers and by members of the society 
they have come to - for example, in relation to the role and 
status of females in Canadian society. 

The Commission feels that taking the time to explain 
different views is the best way to bridge gaps in cultural 
understanding, including religious differences. Strategies 
designed for better understanding and acceptance would 
include pre-service and in-service education of teachers, to 
ensure they are better informed about the differences within 
and among religions, as well as improved partnerships with 
the community and more sensitive leadership at all levels. 

Lan^ua^a, athno-cuKural, and racial minorftias 

Mtiiil'tr^ III laii^iii.i^i.-. ittun' .ind 
minority communities came to the Commission concerned 
about lost opportunities: loo many of their children are fail- 
ing, are in special education or non- university streams, or 
are dropping out of school. 

Schools can and must serve all students. As we have 
already said, while some of our recommendations will bene- 
fit all students directly, some groups of students have special 
needs that deserve attention. We have proposed improve- 
ments in language acquisition support for members of 
linguutic or ethno-cullural minorities. 

We have argued that, in serving the needs of students 
from ethno-cultural and racial minorities, there must be 
significant changes in curriculum, initial teacher education, 
and on-going professional development; there must also be 
fair testing and strengthened partnerships with the commu- 
nity. However, we are concerned that even this may not be 
sufficient, and wc are suggesting interventions that, we 
believe, would more fully respond to the needs we heard. 

Because it is important to keep track of the educational 
attainment of different groups in society, we have already 
recommended that this be done. Given that we know that 
children of single parents, children whose parents are poor, 
or children from some minority groups do not do as well as 
others, the school system has a responsibility to identify 
barriers to success and, where it can, take action to remove 
those barriers.' This means conducting studies and audits, in 
partnership with communities, to identify' problems that 
exist. Then, schools and school boards (and the Ministry) 
must develop action plans and implement them - once 
more, of course, in partnership with parents and the 
communities concerned. 

Finally, the circle would be closed by monitoring achieve- 
ment levels for improvement, and by taking further remedial 
action if necessary. 

In his report on race relations, Stephen Lewis was moved 
by what he heard concerning education. As he said, 

... it's as if virtually nothing has changed for visible minority kids in 
the school system over the last ten years ... The lack of real progress 
is shocking. And I believe it signals the most inlraclabie dilemma, 
around race relations, in contemporary education: hlow do you gel 
the best of policies and programs mto the individual classrooms? h 
raises searching questions of communications and accountability.' 

The Lewis report recommended that the Ministry moni- 
tor the implementation of employment equity in schools 
and in the Ministry, and that faculties of education review 
their admissions criteria to attract and enrol more qualified 
members of minority groups. In our discussion of teacher 
professionalism and development in Chapter 12, we discuss 
the need for faculties of education and other partners to 
ensure the existence of a pool of qualified teachers from a 
variety of backgrounds. 

Less than two years ago, an Anti-Racism, Equity and 
Access Division was created in the newly restructured 

For Uw Um* of LMmmg 


Ministry of Education and Training; representatives of many 
groups told us they have high expectations for this initiative. 
The division, led by an Assistant Deputy Minister, has 
responsibility for responding to the recommendations of 
Stephen Lewis's report, and for implementing the anti- 
racism and ethno-cultural equity provisions of Bill 21.* 

In Chapter 17, we return to the issue of the best way to 
represent the interests of particular communities in the 

Recommendation 136 

*\Ne strongly recommend that the Ministry of Education and 
Training always have an Assistant Deputy Minister responsi- 
ble, in addition to other duties, for advocacy on behalf of 
anglophones, francophones, and ethno-cultural and racial 

Other government initiatives, such as the recent procla- 
mation of Bill 79, the Employment Equity Act, should also 
have an impact on the education of children of minority 
groups. It is expected that, as a result of this legislation, 
boards will employ a more representative workforce at all 
levels, and that, therefore, more children will be able to find 
role models from their own background in the adults who 
are part of their school communities, and interact with more 
adults who have an in-depth understanding of their cultural 

We want to ensure that all these local people have the 
capacity to implement the anti-racism education agenda. 

Recommendation 137 

*We recommend that trustees, educators, and support staff 

be provided with professional development In anti-racism 


We also believe it is imperative that performance evalua- 
tion for supervisory officers, principals, and teachers should 
explicitly make implementation of anti-racism policies an 
important criterion. This would ensure that professionals at 
all levels are involved in the implementation of anti-racism 
initiatives; it would also ensure that all students in the 
province receive the education they deserve. 

"Everywhere the refrain of the 

Toronto students, however 

starkly amended by different 

schools and different 

locations, was essentially the 

refrain of all students. Where 

are the courses in black 

history? Where are the visible 

minority teachers? Why are 

there so few role models? Why 

do our white guidance 

counsellors know so little of 

different cultural 

backgrounds? Why are racist 

incidents and epithets 

tolerated? Why are there 

double standards of 

discipline? Why are minority 

students streamed? Why do 

they discourage us from 

university? ... How long does it 

take to change the 

curriculum so that we're 

part of it?" 

Stephen Lewis, "Report on Race Relations " 

* Bill 2 1 , an amendment to the Education Act, required Boards of Education to 
develop and implement anti-racism and ethno-cultural equity plans, subject to 
Ministerial approval. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Equity Considerations 


Ai Vhe Black Educators' Working 
I Group (BEWG) is experiencing 
frustration in ensuring that the 
needs of black students are deatt 
with province-wide. Too often prob- 
lems specifically related to black 
students remain unaddressed, or 
they are left to the good will of 
Indtvidual teachers, schodft, or 
local boards of education." 

Recommendation 138 

'We recommend that the performance management process 
for supervisory officers. pnrKipals, and teachers specifically 
include measurable outcomes related directly to anti-racism 
policies and plans of the Ministry and the school t>oards. 

In our view, part of the solution to ensuring that poHcy 
becomes classroom reality is to involve the community in 
the implementation and monitoring process: schools and 
boards should seek input from the community to decide on 
the measurable outcomes of anti-racism policies and plans. 

As part of the monitoring process, schools and boards 
should receive feedback on whether these outcomes had 
been achieved, and should make the report public and easily 
accessible to parents and other members of the community. 

In Chapter 17, we deal with the improvement plans 
schools should be required to develop, and in (Chapter 19, we 
describe the kind of public report the Ministry should 
require Khool boards to make annually. These accountabili- 
ty measures should include a full report, not only on imple- 
mentation of the anti-racism policies and plans, but also on 
the way parents and the community were involved in the 

Recommendation 139 

*We recommend that, for the purposes of the anti-racism 
and ethrnxultural equity provisions of Bill 21, the Ministry of 
Education arnJ Training require tMards and schools to seek 
input from parents and community memt>ers in implementing 
and monitonng the plans. This process should be linked to 
the overall school and board accountability mechanisms. 

Farlier in this report, we discussed the need for teachers 
to have curriculum and assessment tools, including texts, 
tests, software, and audio-visual materials that arc unbiased 
- not just in terms of race and ethnicity, but also on the 
basis of class, gender, sexual orientation, and religion. 

Recommendation 140 

'We further recommend that the Ministry and school boards 
systematically review and monitor teaching matenals of all 
types (texts, reading matenals. videos, software, etc.). as 
well as teaching practices, educational programs (curricu- 
lum), and assessment tools to ensure that they are free of 
racism and meet the spirit and letter of anti-racism policies. 

Our hearings also alerted us to educational issues related 
to particular communities - especially the black and the 
Spanish- and Portuguese-language communities. Of course, 
the previous recommendations apply to all groups, and 
should lead to great improvement in the learning experi- 
ences of their children; but we want to examine the particu- 
lar needs of the three groups, and make recommendations 
designed to ensure that children from all minority groups 
are able to achieve as successfully as other students. 

Black students, teachers, parents, and community leaders 
came to the Commission and expressed serious concerns 
about the achievement levels of their young people. They 
expressed frustration over a lack of improvement over the 
years, during which time they have voiced their concerns to 
school boards and to the Ministry. They are concerned about 
the future of young blacks who, without a secondary school 
diploma (let alone a college diploma or university degree), 
face limited job prospects, social marginalization, and 
personal defeat. These presenters argued forcefully that the 
education system is failing black students, and that there is 
an education crisis in their community. 

While the Ministry of Education and Training does not 
have province-wide data on the achievement patterns of 
students according to sub-population, there are a variety of 
good, reliable data from individual boards. Provincial analy- 
ses, such as that conducted by the Child, Youth and Family 
Policy Research Centre for the Ministry of Citizenship in 
1989,' use reports from individual school boards. 

Probably the most comprehensive data arc those available 
from the Toronto Board of Education. These indicate that 9 
percent of its secondary school students in 1991-92 were 

For lh« Lovi of LMmtng 

black; in that year, they made up only seven percent of 
students in the advanced level, but 16 and 18 percent of the 
general and basic levels respectively. Between 1987 and 1991, 
there was a slight increase in the proportion of black 
students studying at the advanced level. 

Data showed that 36 percent of black secondary school 
students were "at risk," based on their grades in English and 
math courses; this pattern was repeated when only students 
in the advanced level were considered and when the black 
student category was broken down into those born in Cana- 
da, in Caribbean countries, and in Africa. Even black 
students who have university-educated parents, or parents in 
professional occupations, or who live with both parents, 
continue to do disappointingly, according to the Toronto 
data. On the other hand, compared to 1987 data, there has 
been a statistically important improvement, mostly by Cana- 
dian-born and African-born black students, although black 
students still remain significantly behind their peers.'" 

In a separate analysis, the Toronto board tracked students 
who were in Grade 9 in 1987 and analyzed their record of 
achievement, based on results at the end of 1992. It found 
that 42 percent of the black, 1987, Grade 9 students had left 
the system by the end of 1992 without graduating. Even 
among those whose parents were in semi-professional occu- 
pations, black students were more likely to drop out." 

Black parents are concerned that the large proportion of 
black students in the general- and basic-level courses (as 
opposed to advanced-level courses) not only limits their 
opportunities to enter post-secondary education programs, 
it also increases the risk that they will drop out. This is 
confirmed, by the Toronto board data, which indicate that 
the non-completion (or drop-out) rate of all students is: 21 
percent from the advanced level, 48 percent from the gener- 
al, and 64 percent from the basic. 

The Board of Education for the City of York has also 
compiled comprehensive data on the achievement levels of 
various sub-populations.'- Their data also found that black 
students are less likely to be taking advanced-level English 
and, in particular, are less likely to take math courses. Only 
44 percent of black students were in the advanced math 
course, compared to a significantly greater percentage of 
other students. 

When the place of birth is considered for racial groups 
(where numbers are large enough to permit analyses). 

Each One, Teach One 

Another example of a 
community partnership that 
is focusing on assisting 
black youth is the Each 
One, Teach One mentor 
program. It matches young 
blacks, one on one, with 
successful black adults 
who provide career advice, 
support, and motivation. 
Each One, Teach One, 

established in February 
1992, also promotes litera- 
cy and cultural awareness 
by providing free, black- 
focused books to youth, 
and by hosting an annual 
career-oriented Youth Day. 
With more than 200 
mentors, it still cannot 
meet the demand, a sign 
that the program is popular 
and effective. 

Canadian-born black students of Caribbean descent are 
over-represented in basic- and general-level math courses, 
but equitably represented in the various English course 
levels. Foreign-born black students of Caribbean descent are 
over-represented in basic- and general-level English and 
math programs. On the other hand, foreign-born black 
students of African descent are more equitably represented 
at each level. 

The North York Board of Education collected data on the 
basis of country of origin, and is now planning to do so 
based on racial backgrounds. Thus the information base to 
help identify the needs of students from different communi- 
ties is widening. 

Although we know that a good number of black students 
do very well indeed - and we heard from and worked with 
some of them - the overall situation is hardly in dispute. 

Based on the strong, even passionate, presentations from 
the black community, and on the available data, we agree 
that "there is a crisis among black youth with respect to 
education and achievement."" Our sense is that this problem 
is not limited to the Greater Toronto Area, but that the data 
could likely be extrapolated to other communities in 
Ontario, perhaps more so in such urban areas as Hamilton 
and Ottawa than elsewhere. 

[Black] parents see the "drop-out" problem as a major issue for the 
black/ African-Canadian community. They are concerned about their 
kids making the grade, and particularly about the youth who no 
longer see education as a tool to achieve their life ambitions and 

George Dei 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Equity Considerations 

ii ^%ur belief is that children of 
^^ African herttage can learn and 
achieve excellence in all <icademic 
areas where appropriate attitudes, 

^HjHU^F** ^ support, and educational prof 
^^^^H[ aro est^MiahML" 

Others have been similarly convinced. We have already 
mentioned Stephen Lewis's "Report on Race Relations." 
In Towards a New Beginning, the report of the African- 
Canadian/Four Levels of Government Committee, the 
authors found that "virtually every facet of Ontario's educa- 
tion system needs to be examined critically, if it is to be 
made more responsive to the needs of those who fall outside 
the mainstream. Teacher training and recruitment, curricu- 
lum revision, employment equity, anti-racism education: all 
these must be the subject of closest scrutiny.'* 

Though almost every submission and presentation to the 
Commission from the black community included recom- 
mendations directed to existing schools and school boards, a 
number also called for the establishment of what have been 
called Black Focused Schools (BFS), or more recently, 
African-Centred Schools (ACS), and Inclusive Schools. (We 
use BFS to refer to all three.)'* 

Smce 1992, when Black Focused Schools (the terminology 
used) were publicly recommended in the Towards a New 
Beginning report, there has been considerable debate on the 
subject, both within the black community and outside it. 
Our public hearings and submissions became yet another 
forum for that discussion. 

Lennox Farrell. one of our presenters, speaking on behalf 
of the Black Action Defence Committee, described Black 
Focused Schools as not necessarily black schools - any 
student could attend. Nor would all the staff have to be 
black, but they would have to have an interest in or be expe- 
rienced in leaching black students, and be willing to ensure 
they succeed. He went on to say that BFSs are "defined by 
the staff who will be empowered themselves to empower 

black students. |They are| not to teach black history, but to 
teach realistic history ... in essence, to do what education 
should already be doing: to be realistic, not huro-centric or 
Afro-centric in that sense."' 

The arguments in favour of BFSs are centred on building 
the prerequisites for academic achievement. Parents and 
teachers argue that, despite their attempts to bring about 
systemic change, not enough has been done or accom- 
plished, and there is a need tor more draiiutic, potentially 
faster, action. 

However, we recognize that wc arc in the middle of an 
on-going debate that raises fundamental issues about our 
values as a society. To some, the notion of Black Focused 
Schools smacks of a return to segregation, to a time when, 
unbelievably even in Ontario," black students were not 
allowed to attend "regular" schools. 

Others are not only concerned about the divisivencss 
such a proposal creates between groups, they arc of the 
opinion that a policy based on race, whatever its intent, can 
become a racist policy. They believe as well that, in practical 
terms, because blacks in Canada must operate in a mixed 
society, moving from mixed schools would be a mistake. 
Don't separate the black students, they argue: fix the schools. 

Opponents also accuse supporters of BFSs of seeking a 
segregated school system. This is a very difficult issue for 
members of this Commission, each of whom has spent a 
lifetime working towards a genuinely multiracial (.anada. 

There must not be the slightest doubt that this (ximmis- 
sion shares the great concern, the desperation even, of the 
black community, about the under-achievement of black 
students as a group. We can hardly stress too strongly our 
conviction that the school system must better accommodate 
the needs of black children and young black men and 
women. Schools must become more inclusive, staff must 
become more representative of our society as a whole, cours- 
es must reflect the perspectives and contributions of minori- 
ty groups. 

But even that is n<it enough. We must, as a matter of 
great urgency, mobilize the best talent available throughout 
Ontario to develop innovative strategies for improving the 
academic performance of black students, * 

The idea of a "demonstration sch<»or' is one that we see 
as having great promise. In this context, a demonstration 
Khool is a Khool in which particular interventions are 

Fo( ttM IjOwi of l«arntng 


planned and carried out to boost the achievement of 
students. The hope is that lessons from successful models 
would then be replicated in other schools: challenging and 
relevant curriculum, innovative and engaging teaching 
methods, and stronger and mutually sustaining links 
between the school and its parents and community. 

Recommendation 141 

*We recommend that in jurisdictions witli large numbers of 
black students, school boards, academic authorities, facul- 
ties of education and representatives of the black community 
collaborate to establish demonstration schools and innova- 
tive programs based on best practices in bringing about acad- 
emic success for black students. 

Finally, as we noted earlier, concerns were expressed 
about the success levels of children, particularly those from 
Portuguese and Hispanic/Latin American communities. And, 
as we noted, the most important measure of educational 
equity is the level of academic success being earned (and 
enjoyed) by students from various communities. 

When data indicate a collective problem of underachieve- 
ment among the children of a particular group, it behooves 
schools and boards to pay attention and take steps to 
improve the situation. 

Analyzing the data on Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking 
students requires care. In the former case, current reports do 
not distinguish adequately or at all between Central Ameri- 
can and South American students; there is a similar lack of 
specificity between Portuguese-speaking students from the 
mainland and those from the Azores. 

We do know, however, that, as the result of changing 
immigration and refugee patterns, more recent Spanish- 
speaking immigrants have been predominantly from Central 
America; we believe, as well, that most Portuguese immi- 
grants to Ontario come from the Azores. 

Clearly, the data on Hispanic/Latin American students 
and on Portuguese students should be interpreted to reflect 
diverse and continuously changing immigration sources, 
including changes in the original socio-economic levels of 
the immigrants and refugees. 

We turn once again to data on the academic achievement 
of students in Ontario schools. The Toronto Board's reports 
are the only data we have that clearly identify Portuguese 
and Hispanic/Latin American students.™ They show that, in 

"If we really believe in ideas 

like equality of opportunity 

and helping children reach 

their full potential, then we 

must ask serious questions 

about a system that puts 

students into narrow streams 

from which they have little 

chance of escaping." 

streaming in our Schools. 
a kit prepared by the Portuguese Parent Association, 
in liaison witli the Toronto Board of Education, page 3 

1991, while 74 percent of all Grade 9 students were taking 
courses at the advanced level, only 53 percent of Portuguese 
students and 61 percent of Hispanic students were doing so. 

Like aboriginal students, Portuguese students had the 
second highest proportion of learners in the basic level. The 
Toronto Board data also identifies students "at risk" of fail- 
ing, as indicated by low marks, and the slow pace at which 
they are accumulating secondary school credits: Hispanic 
students, at 38 percent, and Portuguese, at 33 percent, were 
among the most at risk. 

Based on "home language," it was also found that 
Portuguese-speaking students have a high drop-out rate: in 

1992, using the same study described earlier, 48 percent of 
Portuguese-speaking students who had been in Grade 9 in 
1987 had graduated, and another 1 1 percent were still in 
Toronto schools. In other words, 41 percent of Portuguese- 
speaking students had left school without graduating 
(compared to a third of the overall population), among the 
highest of any group the board analyzed. 

When the family's socio-economic status was factored in, 
the pattern remained the same: in comparisons of children 
of semi-professional parents, Portuguese students were still 
more likely than others to drop out. Comparing Portuguese- 
speaking students born in Canada with those born outside 
this country, those who are Canadian-born had slightly 
higher levels of achievement but, in the measures we have 
discussed, even they were below the average for the system. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Equity Considerations 



nfoftunatety this faith has been 
betrayed. Our young people are 
feeling marginalized by the same 
educational system that we have 
entrusted our futures to. The educa- 
tional system has judged us before 
we as young people have had a 
chance to develop our true potential. 
Some teachers are failing to encour- 

our youth to stay in school ... 
Portuguese young people are stereo- 
typed as having low levels of 
j«xpectatk>n and therefore have 
been streamed into low levels of 
achievement." '^m^^ 

Hju ,1 ^' frs HoftugjvseCanadian National Congress 

Alerted by the student achievement data, we attended a 
Portuguese community meeting, in addition, of course, to 
welcoming representation from that community at the 
public hearings. Speakers expressed frustration with the 
percentage of their students being streamed into non- 
university courses and/or droppmg out, the perceived status 
of Portuguese as a "heritage," rather than a useful interna- 
tional language, and the low expectations teachers have of 
their children and young adults. 

They called for more Portuguese-speaking teachers, a 
curriculum that better reflects the presence of Portuguese- 
speaking people in the classroom and in the world, support 
for students in need of assistance, and active attempts to 
reach out to parents. 

Presenters argued that some students need support in 
English land Portuguese) language development, but that 
withdrawing them from the regular class to attend special 
classes in these areas is not necessarily the best solution. 
Some also asked for more analysis of the situation of 
Portuguese students, so that the community has information 
on which It can monitor improvement and interact with 
Khool boards and the Ministry.'' 

We will indicate ways of meeting these issues as well as 
those of all other concerned communities in our conclusion. 


As IS clear troni the discusMon s«) lar, it is important that 
boards collect data thai will indicate when children of a 
particular group are not achieving at the same rate as other 
students. Equally, it is clearly unacceptable to allow such a 
situation to continue; therefore, information needs to result 
in action. 

There are various strategies that teachers can use to help 
students improve, just as there arc ways the school commu- 
nity can assist the teachers, and the teachers can aid parents 
in helping and encouraging their children to learn. 

Elsewhere in this report, we have described some strate- 
gies, such as the transitional use of the student's first 
language or peer tutoring, and there may well be other 
methods for helping these students, which are being used 
successfully by teachers and principals. 

There arc, as well, strategics that involve the entire school, 
such as the Accelerated Schools Project developed by Henry 
M. Levin, professor of education and of economics at Stan- 
ford University. The program was established there in 1986 
after an exhaustive five-year study on the status of at-risk 
students in the United States. The study found that these 
students are academically behind from the day they start 
school, and fall further and further behind the longer they 
are in school. Therefore, the basic premise of the Accelerated 
Schools Project is that "at-risk students must learn at a faster 
rate - not a slower rate that drags them further and further 
behind. An enrichment strategy is called for rather than a 
remedial one."" Dr. Levin contends that, typically, schools 
have had low expectations of at-risk students. 

To counteract that, the accelerated schools are built on 
three central principles: unity of purpose, empowerment 
coupled with responsibility, and building on strengths. Unity 
of purpose refers to an active collaboration among members 
of the entire school community, including parents, in setting 
and achieving a common set of goals for the school. 
Empowerment coupled with responsibility refers to the abil- 
ity of the participants in the school community to make 
important educational decisions and take responsibility for 
implementing them, and for the outcome of those decisions. 
Finally, accelerated schools look for the strengths that all 
members of the school community can bring to the school, 
rather than trying to identify weaknesses in some partici- 
pants that others have to help them overcome. 

foi t^• Low* of Learning 


These school communities wori< together to create 
powerful learning experiences actively involving children in 
higher-order thinking and complex reasoning in the context 
of a relevant curriculum. Working together and using all 
available human and other resources - for example, the 
active participation of parents and the use of information 
technology - they integrate the curriculum content, teaching 
strategies, and supports. 

Dr. Levin does not believe that the concept involves a 
large infusion of additional funds or new instructional pack- 
ages. Instead, he concludes that 

the ability to energize a school and to get it to focus productively on 
a common set of objectives, using the talents of staff, parents, and 
students, is far more important than any particular curriculum 
package or teaching method. 

We strongly believe that implementing the recommenda- 
tions of our report will move every school to becoming an 
accelerated school. We would expect that, over time, fewer 
and fewer groups of children would be identified as being at 
risk of having significantly lower levels of achievement. 
However, there are such groups at present, and there may 
continue to be as a result of future demographic changes. 

We believe that school boards are responsible for identi- 
fying successful methods of helping at-risk children learn, 
and ensuring that their teachers and principals get needed 
professional development to acquire the skills and informa- 
tion to use these methods. Having done that, boards are in a 
position to insist that teachers and principals apply these 
methode to help all children achieve excellence. 

Recommendation 142 

*We therefore recommend that whenever there are indica- 
tions of collective underachievement in any particular group 
of students, school boards ensure that teachers and princi- 
pals have the necessary strategies and human and financial 
resources to help these students improve. 

Our recommendations in this chapter are intended to 
remove barriers that prevent some students from being as 
successful as they could be, and to create conditions that will 
have a positive impact on them. We repeat what wc have said 
elsewhere: people have to set high expectations for all 
students, and mobilize the strengths of all our communities 
to build the kinds of learning environments in which all 
students can attain higher levels of achievement. 

panish-speaking students face a 
system of education that all too 
frequently does not comprehend their 
values and needs. As a result, racist 
attitudes and discrimination constrain 
their learning and growth ... the 
educational system needs to address 
the systemic barriers to equity which 
exist in our schools." 

Organization of Spanish Speaking Educators of Ontario, the 
Spanish-Speaking Parents' Liaison Committee, and the 
Education Committee of the Hispanic Council 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Equity Considerations 


1991 census cUu, quoted in Association of Colleges of Applied 
Arts and Technology. "Environmental Scan* (Toronto, 1994). 

Using a medium population growth scenario, another Statis- 
lia Canada report protected the visible minority population to 
increase to 2Ji5.400 by the year 2001, and to 3.773.100 by 
2016. See Statistics Canada, ft>/>uJ<in(7n Profttnons of Vistble 
Mtnonty Group*. Canada, Provmcn and Regions. I99I-20I&, 
no. 4.17 ( 1993). appendix table. Prepared by Warren E. 
Kalbach and others. 

Part 3 of the /99/ Evrry Secondary Student Survey, when disag- 
gregating data by race and parental occupation or parent level 
of education or parental presence still found significant under- 
achievement of black student!> compared to white and Asian 
students (Toronto Board of Education Research Services, 
report 205 1 1993), p. 30). However, an "unapproved final 
copy" of the "Teenage School Dropout and Young Adult 
Unemployment Report." based on findings of the Ontario 
Health Supplement, found that neither immigrant nor cultural 
minority status distinguished dropouts from non-dropouts (p. 
24). Howrver. as Patricia Daenzer and George Dei note, "many 
of these studies arc methodologically limited for our purposes 
since the sample categories are 'visible minorities' or 'racial 
minorities.' This conflating of the exf>eriences of students from 
a MTule range of cultures and ethno-sp>ecific groupings 
obKures scientific specificity" See Daenzer and Dei, "Issues of 
School Completion/ Dropout: A Focus on Black Youth in 
Ontario Schools and Other Relevant Studies," p. 1. Paper 
commissioned by the Ontario Royal Commission on Learning, 

lerry Paquette,"Maior Trends in Recent Educational Policy- 
making in Canada: Refocusing and Renewing in Challenging 
Times," p. 22, 23, 28, 3 1 , and 32. Paper commissioned by the 
Ontario Rxiyal Commission on Learning, 1993. 

Ontario, Ministry of Education and Training, Education about 
Religion in Ontarw Public Elementary Schools: Resource Guule 
(Toronto, 1994), p. 7. 

Ontario, Ministry of Education and Training. Education about 

7 For one school board's analyses of these phenomena, see 
Maisy Cheng, Maria Yau, and Suzanne Zieglcr, The 1991 Every 
Secondary Student Survey, part 2, lietailed Profilei of Toronto's 
Secondary School Students, and part 3, h^ogram Level and 
Student Achievement, reports 204 and 205 (Toronto Board of 
Education Research Services, 1993); and Robert S. Brown, A 
Follow- up of the Grade 9 Cohort of 1 987 Every Secondary 
Student Survey Participants, report 207 (Toronto Board of 
Education Research Services, 1993). 

8 Stephen Lewis, "Report on Race Relations" (1992). p. 20. 

9 Child, Youth and Family Policy Research Centre, Visible 
Minority Youth Project (Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Citizen- 
ship, 1989). See "Education and Visible Minority Youth" in 
this report, p. 33-34. 

10 Cheng, Yau, and Zieglcr, /99; Every Secondary Student Survey, 
part 3. 

1 1 Brown, Follow-up of the Grade 9 Cohort. 

1 2 Board of Education for the City of York, Planning and 
Research Department, Report to the Standing Committee on 
Race Relations (Newmarket, ON, 1994). 

13 Scarborough Board of FUlucation, Report on the Consultation 
with the Black and Caribbean Community (Scarborough, ON, 
1991). p. 23. 

1 4 Ontario, Ministry of Education and Training, Learning or 
Leaving? The "Dropout" Dilemma among Black Students in 
Ontario Public Sc/iooii (Toronto, 1994), p. 5. Prepared by 
George Dei. 

1 5 The Four- Level Working Group on Metropolitan Toronto 
Black Canadian Cximmunity Concerns, Towards a Nrw Begin- 
ning {Toronto, 1992). 

16 See George Dei. "Beware of False Dichotomies: Examining the 
Case for 'Black Focused' Schools in Canada." no date. 

17 Lennox Farrcll. for the Black Action Defence (ximmittec. 
Presentation to the Ontario Royal Q)mmission on Learning, 

the I ov« of LCWntnC 

18 In Ontario, separate schools were established for black 
students under provincial legislation (The Common Schools 
Act, 1850). Separate publicly funded schools for black children 
were located in Amherstburg, Brantford, Chatham, London, 
Niagara-on-the-Lake, and St. Catharines in the 19th century, 
although the legislation was not repealed until 1964. 

For more on the history of black education, see: 

Keren Brathwaite, "The Black Student and the School: A Cana- 
dian Dilemma," in African Continuities/L'Heritage africain, ed. 
Simeon W. ChUunga and Saida Niang (Toronto: Terebi, 1989). 

Daniel G. Hill, The Freedom Seekers: Blacks in Early Canada 
(Toronto: Stoddart, 1981). 

19 For a discussion on this issue, see Dei, "Beware of False 
Dichotomies," p. 21. 

20 For an analysis of student performance on the basis of ethnici- 
ty, language background, race, class, and parental presence, 
see, for example, Cheng, Yau, and Ziegler, 1991 Every 
Secondary Student Survey. 

21 For further discussion of issues facing Portuguese students, see 
Ilda Januario, "A Happy Little Guy? Case Study of a 
Portuguese-Canadian Child in the Primary Grades," Orbit 25, 
no. 2 (1994): 44-45. 

22 Henry M. Levin, "Learning from Accelerated Schools" (1993), 
p. 2, a paper adapted from his chapter in Selecting and Inte- 
grating School Improvement Programs, ed. James H. Block, 
Susan T. Everson, and Thomas R. Guskey (New York: Scholas- 
tic, forthcoming). 

Vol. IV Making It Happen equity Considerations 



Organizing Education 
Power and 

In earlier chapters we articulated the basis of our 
vision of the school system and described the kind 
of schools we want for Ontario's young people. We 
now address the question of how the education 
system should be organized. Our recommendations 
are intended to strike an appropriate balance of 
power among the various groups and institutions in 
the education system, keeping in mind that the 
overall goal is to increase student learning. The 
system should therefore be organized to support 
the teacher-student relationship. The aim Is to have 
an organizational design that furthers educational 
objectives, makes effective use of resources, 
redresses inequities, and gives all stakeholders a 
voice in important decisions about education. 

stakeholders and power 

As with so many other educational issues, there are 
no simple or obvious answers to questions about 
who should make various decisions, what gover- 
nance structures make most sense, how authority ought to 
be exercised, or even what criteria should be used in coming 
to conclusions. As well, there is surprisingly little research in 
the area of school governance that could direct us to firm 

Over the course of our work, we came to believe that the 
main organizational issues are, first, the high degree of 
uncertainty and confusion about who is in charge; second, 
the sense of imbalance in the sharing of power between the 
key players, with parents and students playing a very minor 
role. There is also a commonly held perception that the 
organization of the system is not furthering its goals, accom- 
panied by a belief that drastic changes in governance are 
required. We carefully considered these concerns, and 
designed our recommendations to address the problems we 

The organizational changes we recommend are all aimed 
at supporting teachers and students in schools. We recom- 
mend giving a stronger voice to students, strengthening the 
relationship between parents and schools, and ensuring that 
principals and teachers have greater autonomy in the 
management of their schools. At the school board level, we 
stress the need to clarify the roles of trustees as distinguished 
from supervisory officers, and outline what we see as the 
school board's appropriate role to support schools in 
improving student learning. 

We also stress the need for the Ministry of Education and 
Training to play a strong leadership role, setting overall 
direction for the province's education policy, and connecting 
education with other areas of public and social policy. We 
also explain why we reject some commonly suggested solu- 
tions, such as giving parents a direct role in managing 
schools, or drastically reducing the number of school boards 
in Ontario, or even eliminating school boards entirely. 

Although we propose some changes, we found no reason 
to alter drastically the basic organization structure of the 
Ontario education system, comprising a Ministry of Educa- 
tion and Training, school boards, and schools. Although this 
system is not perfect, there is no evidence that any alterna- 
tive system would be preferable in balancing competing 
interests, improving student learning, or being more democ- 
ratic. Therefore, rather than radically changing the way 
education is organized, we recommend improvements that 
should make a significant difference for the future. 

The ultimate stakeholder in publicly funded education is 
the public, whose interests must be taken into account. 
Publicly funded schools belong to everyone, and must serve 
society's needs. The best case for public education has always 
been that it is a common good - that everyone, ultimately, 
has a stake in education. Therefore, any organizational 
design must protect and promote public interests. 

The players 

Much of the history of schooling has been an account of 
how each of the many stakeholders tried to influence the 
direction and shape of the system. The key players have their 
formal roles and responsibilities set down in various statutes 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Organizing Education 

£^ ML t the present time tt>e system 
^^appears to be caught up in ttie 
midst of a flood of contradictory 
expectations and notions of 
entitlement. Statements of presumed 
rights are much more common than 
assumptions of responsibility. Son>e 
effort to ciartfy, or to put in place a 
mechanism for dartfying, wtiat each 
of the parties might reasonably 
expect from the other would 
be salutary.' 

and regulations. The Minister of Education, for instance, is 
authorized to set diploma requirements and curriculum 
guidelmes, certify teachers, and require school boards to 
have policies in specific areas. School boards must operate 
schoob according to provincial legislation, provide educa- 
tional programs for all students in their jurisdictions, and 
hire staff. 

Principals, as we noted in Chapter 12, are responsible for 
managing their schools, particularly with regard to the 
content and quality of instruction and the disciphne of 
students. Teachers are to develop courses of study, instruct 
and evaluate their students, and report on student progress. 
Parents and guardians must ensure that children of compul- 
sory school age attend school, while students themselves are 
required to attend classes regularly, learn diligently, and act 
sensibly. Under the School Boards and Teachers Collective 
Negotiations Act, teachers' federations arc mandated to 
conduct negotiations with school boards about their 
members' working conditions and pay. 

It is obvious that some of the language of the Act, espe- 
cially that referring to the Minister, to boards, and to princi- 
pals, is often vague, and that a number of key functions 
(developing curriculum, for instance) overlap. This lack of 
clarity allows perpetual manoeuvcring among players - 
including the Ministry, school board trustees, school board 
administratorv univenities, principals, teachers, teacher feder- 
ations, parents, the business community, even students them- 
selves - to increase their own power. Although some ambigui 
ty « inherent in the system, we have tried to clarify somewhat 
the various roles and respotuibtiities. 

Allocating and exercising decision-making powers 

.\i a level, ihc orj;ani/aiion ot the s«.lii)i)l system is .1 
question of how decision making powers arc allocated and 
exercised. I inding an appropriate balance is a critical theme 
in our proposals lor organizing the school system. 

Ontario schools were originally established and 
controlled by local citizens. With an eye on efficiency and 
equality of opportunity, ht)wcvcr, successive governments 
slowly developed larger units, culminating in 1969 with the 
amalgamation of more than two thousand small boards into 
less than 200 larger school boards, most based on the 
provincial county as the administrative unit. Today there arc 
172 Ontario school boards. 

All through the 20th century, there have been conflicting 
pressures toward centralization and decentralization. In 
Ontario, the 1969 consolidation of school boards not only 
concentrated authority in a smaller number of larger boards, 
it also moved authority from the Ministry to these larger 
boards through the transfer of such functions as supervising 
and inspecting teachers. 

The main arguments in favour of centralization are that a 
central authority can work out common solutions to educa- 
tional problems, ensuring program quality across the 
province; that efficiency and economics of scale are possible 
with central control; and that central authorities are needed 
to ensure social justice and equity. 

The main argument in favour of decentralization is that 
local communities should be able to control their own 
schools, and that they know best what policies and programs 
suit the community. 

There are problems with taking either of these arguments 
to extremes. The challenge is to find an appropriate balance 
of power and control at the school, community, Ministry, 
and provincial levels. In the following sections we indicate 
how we believe authority and power should be reallocated 
in the Ontario school system. In brief, we are recommending 
a stronger voice for students and parents; greater decision- 
making authority for principals, with involvement of teach- 
ers as well; clarifying the role of school boards; and articu- 
lating a strong policy leadership role for the Ministry of 
hdutalion and Training. 

For nw U>«* of l«amln( 




Because schools are the heart of the education system they 
must be the centre of change in education. Change can only 
occur through a re-alignment of roles and responsibilities of 
the key players at the school level. 


In presentations to the Commission, students provided 
insight and perspective, making common-sense suggestions 
for improving schools. We believe the school system will 
benefit substantially by systematically seeking their views and 
taking their opinions seriously. While it makes sense to do 
this on an informal basis for students in Grade 6 and 
younger, we believe it should be formalized for those in 
Grade 7 and up. 

There are three forums in which this should happen. 
First, all boards should include at least one student member, 
elected by fellow students. Student trustees should have 
input into and a vote on all board deliberations, subject to 
the usual conflict-of-interest and legal requirements. Several 
Ontario boards, for instance, the Kenora Board of Education 
and the Stormont, Dundas, and Glengarry Board of Educa- 
tion, have student trustees, although under the current 
provisions of the Education Act, they cannot be regular 
voting trustees. Evaluations to date suggest that having 
student trustees has been successful and meaningful. 

Second, student councils should, in addition to organizing 
social events, be responsible for gathering and presenting 
student views on schooling in a regular and systematic 
manner, 'fhis might be done through regular forums or 
surveys or other means, depending on what the student 
council decides. They should also provide on-going advice to 
student trustees. 

Third, there should be a Student and Youth Council simi- 
lar to the Ontario Parent Council which the Minister recently 
created. The membership would include representatives of 
the three provincial student organizations, a representative of 
recent graduates, and a representative of young people not in 
school. Its mandate, like that of the OPC, would be to advise 
on all educational matters, and to seek further ways to 
involve students in decisions that affect their lives. A formal 
training program should be instituted for all students who 
are elected to be representatives, while part of the profession- 
al development of teachers and principals would include 

e encourage student input into 
curriculum content.. .[and] the 
concept that all students should be 
respected and given an opportunity to 
express themselves... 

Parents, students and administration 
should participate in teacher 

London and Middlesex County Roman Catholic Secondary 
Schools, Student Council Prime Ministers 

training to work closely with the new student leadership. 

Additionally, we also suggest that a Students' Charter of 
Rights and Responsibilities, setting out clearly the kinds of 
roles outlined above, be distributed each year to every 
student in the province, and that school time be made avail- 
able for the student council to ensure that all students are 
fully aware of the contents and implications of the charter. 
Although students already formally have rights beyond 
merely the right to a good education, such as the secondary 
school students' right to be told in advance about the 
content of course work and methods of evaluation, we 
understand these are often ignored. Students need clear 
statements and explanations of their rights and responsibili- 
ties, and of the school's code of behaviour and discipline 

Recommenciatlons 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148 
*We recommend that all boards have at least one student 
member, entitled to vote on all board matters, subject to the 
usual conflict-of-interest and legal requirements. 

*We recommend that student councils be given the responsi- 
bility for organizing students ' viev/s on all aspects of school 
life, and for transmitting these views to teachers and princi- 
pals Vi/ith responses sent back to students in a systematic 
vi/ay, and that they provide advice to student trustees. 

*We recommend that the Minister of Education and Training 
establish a Student and Youth Council, to advise on all 
educational matters, to seek further vi/ays to involve students 
in decisions that affect their lives, and to sponsor research 
about what students can do to improve learning in schools. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Organizing Education 

At Ht is possible that ttte voice of the 
I principal is muffled, albeit not 
intentionally, by several existing 
institutions, which include (1) the 
affiliates of ttte Ontario Teachers' 
Federations, who speak for their 
nvstiorrty stakeholders, the teachers 
of Ontario; (2) the supervisory 
officers, who speak from a more 
gftibti point of view; (3) the parents 
and t hei r respective interest groups, 
who have specific interests for their 
children; and (4) trustees, wtto have 
their own perspectives on their 
potttical responsibilities." ^ 

*We recommend that the Ministry organize a collaborative 
process for developing a Students' Charter of Rights and 
Responsibilities, and that the process include a significant 
role for students. The essential elements of such a charter 
must irKlude a descnption of the kind of information a 
student is entitled to receive, the programs and services to 
which a student is entitled, the responsibilities a student is 
expected to accept, the role that students are entitled to play 
in the decisions made in the system, and the recourse avail- 
able if students feel that their rights have not been upheld. 

'We recommend that students be involved in developing and 
regularly reviewing codes of behaviour and other selected 
policies ar)d procedures that flow from the Students ' Charter 
of Rights and Responsibilities at both tx>ard and school 
levels. These policies and procedures may not take away 
from the rights and responsibilities specified in the charter. 

'We recommerni that information atjout the students' charter 
and all policies and procedures that directly affect students 
be made available to all students in a way most students can 
readily urKierstand. 

Teachert and Principal 

ChtpXen 7 through 10 provide the CximmiiMon'* viiion of 
kHooU and of the program for students. In Chapter 12, we 
outline our pcripectivc on the role of principals and teachers 

in the operation of schools, stressing the responsibilities of 
principals to stimulate and support improved teaching and 
learning in their schools. If principals are respt)nsible for 
creating and sustaining the conditions for effective teaching 
and learning in school, they need to have the power, within 
guidelines set by the school board, to make decisions about 
certain central issues, such as staffing and how funds are to 
be allocated. 

Teachers, as professionals on whom the success of the 
school depends, should also be involved in areas of school 
management, particularly those relating to curriculum, 
instruction, and assessment of learning, as well as to parents 
and the community. If teachers' professiimalism is enhanced 
through stronger preparation and on-going development, as 
we suggest in Chapter 12. then their professional compe- 
tence should be recognized through their participation in 
school decisions. 

We believe that, in their schools, teachers and school 
administrators should have considerable professional auton- 
omy to judge which school organization and teaching strate- 
gies are most likely to lead to high levels of student learning. 
At the same time, they must be held accountable for student 
achievement in the school and for reporting regularly to 

Throughout the developed world there have been, over 
the past decade or more, experiments with what is usually 
termed school-based management or site-based manage- 
ment, in which significant authority is delegated from the 
central authority, usually the .school board, to the school. 
Various models have been established in countries such as 
Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, and Britain, as well as in 
Utah and in Florida's Dade (bounty. 

It is important to note that the term school-based 
management might refer to delegation of authority either to 
the principal and teachers, or, in other cases, to school coun- 
cils in which much or even most of the authority is vested in 
parents. At this point, we refer only to models in which staff 
have increased authority. 1 he decision-making power may 
be vested primarily in the principal or he shared between 
principal and teachers. 

In Canada, the most well-known example is Edmonton, 
which in 1976 became one of the first boards to shift some 
decisionmaking authority to the school. Many school 
boards, including some in Ontario, have since moved at least 

For ttw Low* of iMmtnt 

minimally in this direction. The Carleton Board of Educa- 
tion, for instance, expects schools to make many decisions 
about curriculum, evaluation, reporting, and school struc- 
tures, as well as determine to some extent how the school 
operations budget will be allocated. 

The arguments advanced for such a shift in responsibility 
vary somewhat, but are often framed in terms of freeing 
schools from the constraints of bureaucracy, so that they will 
be more successful. In Dade County, for example, schools 
request waivers to exempt them from various school board 
regulations and collective agreement provisions. 

What has been the result of all this shifting of responsi- 
bility? Has it made a difference to students? In assessing site- 
based management, it is important to realize that, for the 
most part, the shift has taken place for political rather than 
educational reasons.' Joyce Scane, of the Ontario Institute of 
Studies in Education, has concluded that decentralization 
does not have substantial effects on school programs: 

Looking at the research as a whole, there is no evidence that decen- 
tralization to the school level, per se, will lead to improvement in 
classroom practice and student achievement...' 

The important words here are "per se." In other words, 
just because decisions are made at the school level rather 
than the board level does not necessarily mean they are 
better. Sometimes principals and teachers may focus on 
areas that have no payoff at all in terms of student learning, 
or may get so caught up in the day-to-day school manage- 
ment and administration that they are distracted from what 
should be their main activity: providing meaningful educa- 
tional programs to their students. 

This is why, although we recommend that principals have 
considerable autonomy within their schools, we stress their 
responsibility to keep student learning as the top priority. Of 
course, with autonomy and responsibility comes account- 
ability. Principals must not be diverted into focusing on 
issues that are only incidentally related to improving teach- 
ing and learning. Clear expectations from the Ministry and 
the school board set the overall priorities within which 
schools decide how to proceed. 

Simply sharing power is not enough: schools and school 
systems must also be redesigned to ensure that teachers and 
principals actually have the knowledge and skills to make 
changes, that they get accurate and regular feedback about 

AA^^ommunity support and input are 
\^ necessary and welcomed. 
However, educational decisions, in 
our view, must uitimateiy be made by 
the educators. When the school 
community is assured that their input 
is welcome and will be considered, a 
mutual trust between the public and 
educators can be built up. 

The autonomy created through site- 
based mam^ement allows principals, 
teachers and students the opportuni- 
ties to create change, develop 
programs and to make decisions that 
are of value and meaningful to their 
individual schools." 

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry Elementary Principals' 
and Vice-Principals' Association 

school performance, and that there is a clear focus on 
instructional improvement.' Staff, under the leadership of 
the principal, must work together within a framework of 
agreed-upon goals and standards, to develop and implement 
their plans for moving toward their goals. 

Principals and teachers must use their leadership skills to 
build and sustain school cultures that focus on student 
learning. Requiring each school to develop a school growth 
or improvement plan, articulating school objectives and 
plans for achieving them, can be an important tool in 
achieving this. Such school growth plans would be devel- 
oped within the overall framework of MET and school 
board guidelines. 

We have stressed the importance of linking more closely 
schools and community, and here too, we believe that prin- 
cipals should have considerable autonomy, deciding how to 
allocate school funds and design school initiatives to better 
meet local needs. To do this effectively, school staff must 
understand the community served by the school. With the 
help of the school-community councils we propose in Chap- 
ter 14, schools should be better able to meet unique local 
needs. Principals and teachers must reach out to the 
community to forge strong relationships and partnerships 
that will relieve some of the non-academic burdens that 
schools are increasingly shouldering. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Organizing Education 

parents and community alliances, principals need to be able 
to rely on a capable group of department heads to assist 
them in all these areas. Third, department heads must take 
on a strong leadership role in developing and implementing 
the new curriculum we are recommending. Department 
heads together should encourage teachers to work co- 
operatively across grade levels and broader program areas. 
At the same time, their subiect expertise will help them to 
ensure that the essential elements of each subject are 
strengthened, not lost, in the more collaborative and inte- 
grated approach to curriculum. 

As well, we believe that school boards must recognize 
principals as key members of the senior management team, 
with a major role in policy development as well as imple- 

Recommendation 149 

*We recommend that the Ministry phase in a policy requiring 
school boards to turn over an increasingly significant portion 
of the school budget to principals, on the condition that the 
school have a school growth plan: that this plan be moni- 
tored by the txiard; that teachers participate in decision- 
making concerning curriculum, assessment, professional 
development, and staffing; and that the school demonstrate 
how It reaches out to students, parents, and the community. 

One more staff role that is relevant in secondary schools 
should be addressed. The departmental structure could be 
altered to help the principal meet new responsibilities in 
running the school. We heard stiff criticisms of some depart- 
ments for their insularity and territorial mentality, a situa- 
tion that can hardly be tolerated. Department heads are 
needed to provide leadership, both in the school as a whole 
and within their departments to create a collegial profes- 
sional culture that is especially helpful to new teachers. 

As we said in Chapter 12, we see three important new 
roles for department heads. In the first place, because of 
their subject expertise, we want them to the principal 
by helping to evaluate teaching performance as well as help- 
ing teachers improve. Second, they should assist the princi- 
pal m managing the school. With many new responsibilities 
for budget management. tchool-ba.sed as well as board-wide 
policy development, promoting better relationships with 


We believe that it is crucial for schools to work more collab- 
oratively with parents. As we have stressed throughout this 
report, parents have a central role to play in the education of 
their children. In recognition of this role, we recjimmcnd the 
development of a Parents' C'harter of Rights and Responsi- 

The Ministry should develop such a charter, in consulta- 
tion with the regular stakeholders, to be distributed annually 
to each student's family. The charter shciuld clearly set out 
the rights of parents to be made welcome in the school, the 
kind of regular, personal contact they can expect from teach- 
ers, and the kind of support they can expect to enable them 
to be more helpful to their youngsters' school life. 

Recommendations 150. 151, 152 
•We recommend that a Parents' Charter of Rights and 
Responsibilities be developed at the provincial level as a 
result of collaboration among parents, teachers, administra- 
tors, and political decisionmakers. 

*We recommend that parents be involved in developing 
student codes of behaviour, and other policies and proce- 
dures that flow from the Students' and Parents' Charter of 
Rights and Responsibilities at both board and school levels. 

*We recommend that information about the students' and 
parents' charters and all policies and procedures that direct- 
ly affect students and parents be readily available to parents. 

Parents vary in the degree to which they want to be 
involved in their children's schools, and also differ in the 
type of involvement they want to have. On balance, it 
appears that only a small minority of parents want to partic- 

For tt«* Low of L«aming 



ipate in school governance or decision-making. Most parents 
want to be able to communicate their concerns and aspira- 
tions, and to have schools respond in a respectful and help- 
ful manner. Parents want, and are entitled to, information 
about the policies and goals of their child's school and 
board, and about their child's progress. If there are learning 
problems, they want to be informed and want the school to 
address such problems. 

There are several kinds of problems that may arise 
between parents and the school. Some parents may be intim- 
idated by unwelcoming or unresponsive staff members; 
some may be concerned about their own levels of education 
or their imperfect English or French. Some may have only 
small amounts of time because they work long hours. Many 
just want a meaningful relationship with their children's 
school. Whatever the circumstances, there is much that can 
and must be done to make schools more welcoming. Schools 
must continue to reach out to parents who, for whatever 
reason, are uninvolved or uninterested in their children's 
school life. 

We believe all principals and teachers must become aware 
of the research on the value of parent involvement with their 
children's school life, and act upon it. Principals and teachers 
must learn and practice the many effective strategies for 
successfully reaching out to parents, particularly those who 
are unlikely to become involved on their own. 

Certain kinds of parent involvement pay handsome divi- 
dends: higher student achievement, higher aspirations, better 
attendance, improved classroom and school climate, and 
more positive relationships between parents and teachers - a 
welcome list of benefits indeed. The key activities that 
appear to lead to these happy results are, first, following the 
child's progress at school and helping at home with home- 
work and projects; second, attending various school perfor- 
mances and sports events; and third, acting as a volunteer in 
the classroom. Research strongly suggests that such activities 
have a more direct and positive impact on the student's 
progress than does active participation in parent organiza- 
tions, valuable though this may be for the school in general.' 

We believe it is crucial for schools to seek out parental 
opinion on important issues. Well beyond the occasional 
meet-the-teacher sessions, parents need regular mechanisms 
through which they can give input and raise concerns, not 
only in relation to their own children, but also in relation to 

e see greater participation for 
parents at the school level in 
an advisory capacity. The establish- 
ment of school sidvlsory councils 
could help facilitate this. A Ministry 
which sets standards and monitors. 
School boards, representing their 
communities, but with redefined roles 
and probably fewer trustees and 
supervisory officers." 

Council of Ontario Separate Schools 

education and other school issues. For instance, when choic- 
es are being made about the use of multi-age groupings, or 
about smaller class sizes as opposed to specialist teachers, 
parents should have a chance to give their views. 

Although we believe that the school's teachers and princi- 
pal should make decisions about staffing and instruction, 
their judgments should be informed by knowledge of 
parental preferences and concerns. In Chapter 12, we also 
recommend that schools and school boards develop ways of 
systematically eliciting parental opinion about teaching and 
school climate. 

In Chapter 14, we recommend the formation of school- 
community councils, in which we see parents playing a vital 
role. But, because their mandate is primarily to forge 
community alliances, we do not see these councils as having 
a decision-making role in relation to school management, 
although we would expect them to participate and be 
consulted in many aspects of the life of the school. 

We noted earlier that many recent education reforms 
have included a transfer of decision-making authority from 
the school board to the school. In some, but by no means all, 
of these jurisdictions, parents and community representa- 
tives are given significant decision-making power, usually 
through a parent or community council for each school. 
Education reforms in New Zealand and Chicago, for 
instance, have resulted in strong parental roles in gover- 
nance, with significant decision-making powers vested in 
parent councils. In Canada, Quebec has legislated parent 
councils in every school, but in an advisory capacity only. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Organizing Education 

parents arc involved in the life of the school, and to seek out 
parental concerns and advice. 

Recommendation 153 

• We recommend that all schools in Ontario be accountable 
for demonstrating the ways in which they have strengthened 
parents ' involvement in their children s school learning. 

The school growth plan described earlier in this chapter 
is the most likely vehicle for ensuring that schools do this; at 
the next level of accountability, annual board reports will 
disseminate the information. 

In terms of student achievement, 

then a little evidence lo suggest thai parent involvement in govcr- 
lunce affecu sludenl learning in the school, although there may be 
other benefits and indirect effccu.' 

This conclusion leaves a number of unanswered ques- 
tions; for example, would the results be different if parent 
councils operated differently, or if parents and teachers were 
better trained for their new roles, or if other changes were 
made? Nevertheless, we have concluded that, at present, 
there is no solid basis for establishing parent councils as 
governing bodies for all schools in the province." 

In reaching this decision, we carefully considered many 
factors. Only a small minority of parents seem to want 
greater decision-making powers in their children's schools, 
as suggested by the very small number who now are active in 
home-and-school associations and the relatively small 
number who indicated a desire for such active involvement. 
Also, there is little or no evidence that local parent councils 
improve learning - the touchstone for all our deliberations. 
The professional qualifications of the school staff suggest 
they are in the best position to know what constitutes good 
teaching and learning. Such councils would place an 
unneeded additional burden on principals. Furthermore. 
given all this, we feel that a parent council with a mandate to 
manage schools and make decisions would constitute a seri- 
ous i f resources and energy from the real priori - 
lle^ ° '' mark greater parental involvement in 
schoob. ihat being said, wise principals and interested 
parents can. and indeed must, find many ways lo rn<.iirr th.ii 

The cotrittiunity 

The relationship between school and community is so 
central to our vision of reforming the education system that 
we have made it one of our four engines driving the change 
process. The school-community councils we recommend are 
new institutions that we believe will be absolutely essential if 
Ontario schools are to create an improved learning environ- 
ment for all students. 

In Chapter 4, on the purposes of schooling, we distin- 
guished between primary and shared school responsibilities. 
While academic learning is the primary purpose of the 
school system, meeting the varied non-academic needs of 
children is a responsibility the school shares with the broad- 
er community. Teachers and schools can fulfil these social 
responsibilities only if they are supported by appropriate 
resources from the community outside the school. Helping 
to organize and mobilize those resources is the general func- 
tion of these new school-community councils. 

In a real sense they would be the eyes and ears of the 
school in the world outside. Led by the principal, and 
comprising teachers, parents, students, and community 
members, they would identify the needs of the school and of 
the community. They would create the alliances that serve 
the non-academic needs of the students, so that teachers 
could concentrate on better leaching. They would help tarry 
out career-day programs, as well as help find students more 
opportunities and placements in co-operative education 

School-community councils might recommend to the 
principal certain community themes for the school's locally 
determined curriculum content. We see these councils as 
monitoring the charters of rights and responsibilities for 

Foe Vm Lov« of Laamint 


both parents and students. Inevitably they would want to 
advise the principal, in general terms, on ideas for school 
improvement. And finally, it only makes sense, given their 
mandate, that they would have the right to be consulted by 
the school board when a new principal was being chosen. 
But we stress that their role in relation to the management 
of the school is only advisory. 

There are many benefits of collaborative links with the 
community. They 

• strengthen school programs by drawing on new pools of 

• build public support for schools by giving non-educators 
direct knowledge and experience of schools; 

• show students their school is important enough to moti- 
vate other adults to take time to contribute to it; 

• contribute to a culture that encourages mutual concern 
about quality of life.' 

For these reasons, among others, we identified school- 
community alliances as one of the levers of change, and 
recommended in Chapter 14 that school-community coun- 
cils be created in all schools. 

School boards 

Between the province's schools and its Ministry of Education 
and Training stand the school boards. As in so many other 
parts of the education system, dealing in depth with boards 
is more complex than most Ontarians might expect. To 
begin with, depending on how they are counted, the 
province is divided into 172, 169 or 168 school board juris- 
dictions; of these, 128 operate more than one school. A 
board jurisdiction may be a municipality, a county, a region, 
or even a hospital treatment centre. Depending on the size 
of the total population it represents, a board can have from 
three to more than twenty elected trustees. 

Boards range in size from the few that operate no schools 
at all (purchasing educational services for the few students 
in their jurisdiction) and boards such as the Murchison and 
Lyell District School Area Board with fewer than twenty 
students, to the Metropolitan Separate School Board with 
approximately 100,000 students, the largest in Canada. Some 
boards have no administrative staff beyond the school level, 
while others have large and highly sophisticated bureaucra- 

overnment continues to initiate 
provincial policy on one hand and 
to reduce the financial resources on 
the other; the range of services and 
programs required are continuously 
increasing but never decreasing... 
the imbalance creates incredible 
pressures for trustees and staff." 

NIpissing Board of Education 

cies.' Most of the discussion that follows refers primarily to 
the 128 Ontario boards that have more than one school. 

School boards, governed by locally elected trustees, 
decide on the facilities, programs, services, and resources 
that will be made available in a locality, and they also set the 
level of local education taxes. Their responsibilities are 
outlined in the Education Act, as well as in relevant Ministry 
regulations. School boards also hire teachers and other staff, 
and negotiate collective agreements. They develop and deliv- 
er programs and curricula for all students, including those 
with special needs. By setting budgets and requisitioning 
taxes, boards share with the province the responsibility for 
financing education. 

School boards occupy a somewhat precarious place in the 
public consciousness. We suspect that few people know 
either the name of their local trustee or the nature of the 
trustee's role. In most urban areas, the media give little 
attention to the day-to-day operations of the school board, 
although they may publicize crises of various sorts. The 
voter turnout for school-board elections is notoriously low 
(even less than for other local offices), and, as an apparent 
reflection of public interest, many trustees across the 
province are not challenged in elections but are acclaimed 
with no opposition. These unfortunate realities may well call 
into question the legitimacy of the trustee role. This lack of 
public awareness seems particularly inauspicious, given that 
such a large proportion of taxes at the municipal level go 
directly to support education. 

The term school board may refer to trustees, who are 
elected to represent local constituents for three-year terms. 
When the term is used more inclusively, it refers to the 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Organizing Education 

ii ^Educational research indicates that 
^H successful schools have a degree 
of autonomy and that tttey involve 
tt>eir immediate community, particu- 
larty parents, in tt>e exercise of ttiat 
autonomy. The partners in the commu- 
nrty are involved in the setting of 
goals, the development of policies 
aiKl tt>e creation of a basic philosophi- 
cal approach. 

At the same time, the complexity of 
our society is such that schools on 
their own would find K dKflcutt and 
prohibitively expensive to provide ^^ 
many of the services they need. 
School boards can provide to schools 
sophisticated services in such areas 
as curriculum development, supervi- 
sion of instruction, equitable distribu- 
tion of resources, computer services, 
and economical purchasing." 

CouncM of OnUfio OirecKxs ol Education 

trustees and the staff in a given )urisdiction. In addition to 
the elected trustees, the other key people in the central 
ofTices of the school boards are the supervisory officers, 
including the director of education, who are the senior 
administrative staff. 

There are a number of contentious issues relating to 
school boards. They are: 

• establishing whether school boards are needed, and if so, 
what their roles should be; 

• the relationship between trustees and administrators; 

• the remuneration of trustees; 

• the number of trustees; 

• the way school boards relate to Khools; and 

• the number of Khool boards. 

Tlir need for school boards 

In many jurisdictions, school reform has involved eliminat- 
ing or sharply curtailing the power of boards, regional 
decuion-makmg. or administrative bodies in education. 

This has been the case in Britain, with its local hducation 
Authorities (LKAs), in New Zealand, as well as in the C^ity of 
c;hicago. The justification has been that eliminaling a layer 
of bureaucracy increases efficiency and accountability and 
strengthens local control of schools. The effects of such 
changes are not always clear, but there is no compelling 
evidence to suggest that they are positive. It must also be 
noted that generalizing from one country or educational 
context to an entirely different one is dangerous indeed. 

We do not support elimination of school boards in 
Ontario. Particularly in such a large and diverse province, we 
see no wav in which five thousand schools could be adminis- 
tered cither individually or by the Ministry of Hducation and 
Training. We regard boards as having an important democ- 
ratic function; moreover, education is a significant enough 
public activity to merit its own locally elected representatives, 
with responsibilities that neither municipal councillors nor 
members of the provincial legislature can handle properly. 

While we describe it in more detail later in this section, 
the relationship between school boards and their schools can 
briefly be de.scribed as crucial for creating and sustaining the 
kinds of schools we need. Wc also believe that local control 
of education is best exercised by the public election of 
trustees, who are expected to be knowledgeable about 
community priorities and local conditions. 

Nonetheless, wc believe it is important to clarify what the 
school boards' role should be, as distinct from that of the 
Ministry on one hand and individual schools on the other. 
We have recommended that more responsibility for deter- 
mining school budget allocations be delegated to principals, 
and we see a strong policy leadership role for the Ministry. 
Therefore, school boards are necessary for translating 
provincial policy into local contexts, for setting local priori- 
ties, and for providing co-ordination and support for their 

Clarifying roles of trustees and itdminislrators 
Like so many elected office holders and civil servants, 
trustees and administrators co-exist in a state of almost 
permanent tension and mutual dependence. Trustees rely to 
a great extent on the advice and expertise of the supervisory 
officers, who are senior educators with board-wide manage 
ment responsibilities. Although tru.slees are responsible for 
overall policy, and supervi<kory officers for administration, 
the line between the two functions is not always clear. 

ror the Lov« of Learrunf 

Key responsibilities of trustees and senior administrators 

Trustees Director and Supervisory Officers 

Over the last few years, the distinction has become 
increasingly blurred, and senior administrators frequently 
find their time taken up carrying out unimportant tasks for 
trustees, tasks that seem unrelated to educational issues. 
Overlaps, gaps, and competing obligations in both groups 
may detract from the main teaching and learning purposes 
of schools. 

The difficulty for most school boards, therefore, is distin- 
guishing between policy-making and policy implementation. 
Obviously, the two parties will disagree about what exactly 
policy is and what is administration. We were told that 
trustees tend to get too involved in the micro-management 
of operational details that are better left to supervisory staff. 
Moreover, the problem seems to be made worse by Ministry 
regulations that require school boards to ratify many deci- 
sions that staff could handle. 

For instance, boards must now ratify all teacher hirings. It 
would seem to make more sense for them to develop and 
approve hiring policy, leaving staff responsible for hiring 
teachers within such policy guidelines. In turn, staff believe 
they often spend too much time preparing material for 
trustees, rather than concentrating on supporting education 
in schools. 

It is time to clarify the roles and responsibilities of both 
the elected trustees and their administrations; therefore, 
drawing on considerable recent research and writing, we 
suggest a clearer distinction between them.' 

In brief, trustees should not interfere in operational 
matters, but ought to set the broad parameters, and then let 
staff get on, with managing the system within them. This 
includes articulating the mission or vision of the board, 
which usually includes some indication of the values the 
board wishes to infuse throughout the system. Good policy 
development does not prescribe how a policy is to be imple- 
mented, but does set some limits; for example, a board will 
specify a cost figure that is not to be exceeded, conflict-of- 
interest guidelines that are not to be breached, or ethical 
frameworks that are not to be disregarded. It is then up to 
senior administrators to find the best way to achieve the 
required results in different circumstances. Administrators 
can then be held accountable for the results they achieve. 

Given that current regulations do not always support a 
clear division between the roles of elected and appointed 
officials, and in view of the complex issues trustees must 

1. Articulate and support board 
mission/vision to guide planning and 

2. Represent the interests of the 
public, and of constituents. 

3. Establish board policies within the 
provincial framework that are flexible 
and appropriate to local connmunities. 

1. Provide leadership, clarify board 
vision for schools, and connmunicate 
clear goals to schools. 

2. Within board policies, set criteria 
for staff recruitment, selection, and 
training, in order to ensure high- 
quality staff. 

3. Provide co-ordination for school- 
community linkages across 

4. Appoint, support, and monitor the 

4. Help schools develop human 

Director of Education (the chief. 

capacity and get needed financial 

executive officer). 

resources, including re-allocating 

resources as necessary. 

5. Provide direct lines of communica- 

5. Ensure that schools are operated 

tion between the school system and 

according to provincial acts and 

the general public. 

regulations, and that these regula- 

tions serve the needs of students. 

6. Ensure the development and 

6. Assess and approve budgets to 

implementation of educational 

ensure resources and requisition 

programs in the schools. 


7. Are accountable for student 

learning and system monitoring and 

ensure that schools use assessment 

results to improve learning. 

face, we suggest that they be offered well-developed profes- 
sional development programs, as is already the case in many 
school boards. We note the helpful Handbook for School 
Trustees in Ontario, published jointly by the province's 
school trustees' associations and the Ministry of Education 
and Training.'" 

Recommendation 154 

*We recommend that the Minister of Education and Training, 

in consultation with the provincial trustees' associations, 

review and revise the legislation and regulations governing 

education, in order to clarify the policy-making, as distinct 

from the operational, responsibilities of school board 


Trustee remuneration 

Our recommendation on clarifying trustee responsibilities 
has implications for trustee remuneration, a topic that has 
been a matter of public controversy for the past few years. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Organizing Education 


Although elected school board trustees have frequently been 
accused of living high off the public purse, the facts, for the 
most part, paint a quite different picture. 

VN'hile most media attention has focused on a relatively 
few boards whose trustees suddenly proposed to greatly 
increase their own stipends, in fact, in 1992 about half of all 
Ontario boards paid themselves less than $10,000 a year per 
trustee, and in many cases, far less. 

In only 17 boards did trustees receive more than $15,000. 
And only in the following seven boards did they pay them- 
selves as much as $20,000: Etobicoke, Scarborough, Peel, 
Metro Roman Catholic Separate, Metro French-language 
Board (all between $20,500 and $30,000), North York 
($32,000), and the City of Toronto, far ahead of the field at 

The incomplete data available for 1994 indicate only 
small province-wide changes from the 1992 figures, includ- 
ing North York, where trustee pay has risen to $33,330, and 
Scarborough. Scarborough trustees decided to raise their pay 
from $22,000 m 1991 to $30,000 in 1992, which was then to 
have increased to 533,000 in 1993 and to $36,000 in 1994. 
When these decisions caused a media and public uproar, the 
trustees revisited their original decision and settled for 

In the midst of recent generalized attacks agamst high- 
priced tmstees, too little attention has been paid to the fact 
that this province is blessed with hundreds of dedicated 
trustees who spend many hours a month carrying out their 
board duties, often for distinctly modest reimbursements. 

Our view is that our recommendation that the Ministry 
clarify and distinguish more clearly between the functions 
and responsibilities of trustees and administrators will mean 

that the role of the trustee can be defined as part time. If 
trustees focus on their responsibility to articulate a vision or 
mission to guide the board and its schools to set overall poli- 
cy, and focus on results rather than on process and manage- 
ment, there would seem to be little justification for treating 
their responsibilities as a full-time job. 

Therefore, we believe that, as part-timers, all trustees 
should be paid accordingly. While most boards actually do 
provide remuneration consistent with the part-time nature 
of the position, we believe that other boards should follow 
suit; in our view, a reasonable maximum would be $20,000. 
To gain a perspective on this figure, we note that 95 percent 
of all trustees in Ontario fall below it - many of them well 

Recommendation 155 

*We recommend that the Ministry set a scale of honorana 

for trustees, with a maximum of $20,000 per annum. 

Numbers of trustees 

What should be the maximum number of trustees elected 

for each board? At the moment the numbers range between 

8 and 23. Some research on effective boards suggests that, 

because large boards can become unwieldy, caution should 

be exercised in deciding on boards of more than seven 


However, Commission members are not of one mind on 
the right size of a board; some of us feel strongly that 
between 8 and 12 trustees is the optimum, while others 
believe that any number is bound to be arbitrary. Ortainly, 
two relevant factors in determining board size should be its 
geographic location and the population it serves. We 
conclude only that there should be continuing efforts to 
reduce the number of trustees, once consistent criteria have 
been developed. 

School hoards and schools 

Important as it is to clarify the rcspcttivc roles o( trustees 
and administrators, there is still the question of the role of 
school boards in relation to the schools they administer. 
Aside from the obvious personnel and finance functions, 
including collective bargaining, what part do boards play in 
developing and implementing programs and instruction? 

We noted earlier thai, on ihcir own, schools would find it 
difficult tr) sustain excellence and continue to improve; most 

For thu Low at lammm^ 

need significant support from outside the school. In a 
province as large as Ontario with 5000 schools, it is not 
realistic to expect that such support can be directly provided 
by a provincial agency. This is where the school board, 
through its supervisory officers and other professional staff, 
has a role. 

Some research suggests that school boards can be a 
significant factor in how successfully schools in their juris- 
diction manage student learning. In general, the strategy 
seems to involve frequent communication between schools 
and the central office (as well as among schools), with little 
reliance on bureaucratic rules and structures.'^ 

Through their supervisory officers and other professional 
staff, boards can provide direction and focus for schools, 
communicating clear policy guidelines and helping them set 
priorities, often among a multitude of conflicting demands. 
School boards can assist principals and teachers to establish 
professional networks outside their own schools, and can 
mediate in school-community conflicts. The increased 
emphasis on monitoring and reporting on student learning 
and on other indicators (as recommended in Chapter 19) 
will make it particularly important for boards to help 
schools act on the results of board-wide program reviews 
and student-testing programs. Schools will need assistance 
in using the results of such monitoring to improve their 
programs and teaching. Supervisory officers, as well as prin- 
cipals, may need to develop! their own skills and understand- 
ing of these new roles. 

Within Ministry and board guidelines, we believe that 
school boards should give principals maximum flexibility to 
organize and operate their schools as they see fit, with the 
considerable involvement of teachers, and always consider- 
ing input from parents, students, and the community. 

A commonly raised criticism of school boards and of the 
education system in general is that the system is top heavy, 
that too much money is spent outside the classroom and too 
high a proportion of staff are in non-teaching positions." 
The validity of this criticism is difficult to establish, partly 
because the data on staffing allocations across school boards 
are rarely comparable. School boards do not always classify 
staff with similar functions in the same way. 

Although making judgments about available data is not 
easy, the information we have suggests that the problem is 
not as serious as has been commonly claimed. In some 

boards, for instance, staff classified as non-teaching are class- 
room teaching assistants. Although such staff do not have 
teaching certificates, they work directly with students under 
the general direction of teachers. 

We have already pointed out in Chapter 12 that the 
responsibilities of supervisory officers will have to be 
reviewed in light of our recommendations. Staffing decisions 
must be made with a view to strengthening teaching and 
learning functions, and there may well be room for further 
reductions in central office staff 

The number of school boards 

Throughout our public hearing process, we were often told 
that there are too many school boards in Ontario. Many, 
including the Minister of Education, have suggested that 
some boards should be consolidated to provide more effi- 
cient delivery of educational services. Other provinces - for 
example. New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Alberta 
- recently have drastically reduced the number of school 
boards. Given the frequency of the suggestion and the vigour 
with which it was usually made, we examined this issue care- 

At one time Ontario had more than four thousand small 
school boards, many responsible for only one school. 
Following a series of consolidations, the 1969 amalgamation 
reduced what were more than two thousand school boards 
to fewer than two hundred. Since then there have been 
further reductions in the number. Many people may be 
surprised to learn that, on average, school boards in Ontario 
are already larger than those in any other province. As 
shown in Table 1, Ontario has more schools per board and 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Organizing Education 

more students per board than other provinces. In a 1986 
report on trustee apportionment, a research team from the 
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education warned that large 
boards, those with more than 40,000 students, may be in 
danger of losing their connection to the community." 
Ontario already has 13 boards in that category (see Table 2). 


tllioet Board* In CanMflan Provino*** 






V tXMrd 

pec board 
































2.977 1.047.260 19 6.628 352 
5.539 2.036.130 33 12.048 368 
























\ OCT 



7 984 









*V)V(a C«na*ap H m t mi* f ^O- mt an. 'CcanonMC S*r«m BuaMn.' Hfbnmy 1994 
•TTw >«f**> of KXooi baar«t «i MbvU mm raducad m 1W4 to S7. 

pkM ipvaa Awflc^ona fi#iadMMna 

The recent consolidation of school boards in other 
provinces has still resulted in boards considerably smaller 
than most of those in Ontario. Because of the sue and 
complexity of this province, there is no reason to assume 
that the move to more centralized control elsewhere would 
be appropriate here. Ontario has 40 percent of the elemen- 
tary and secondary students in C.anadian schools, located in 
an enormous geographic area and in communities that are 
remarkably diverse. 

Table 2 shows the size distribution of those 128 Ontario 
boards that have more than one school (as opposed to 
schools that purchase services from other boards, or boards 
that operate only one school, or special boards that run 
classes only in care and treatment centres). 

TABU 2: 

Mz* of School Board* in Ontario 

Student enrolment 

Numl)er of twards 

Fewer than 3,000 








75.000 or more 


There is no formula, nor do there seem to be any objec- 
tive criteria, that would allow us to conclude that there are 
too many school boards in Ontario. It is true that removing 
the French-language sections to form separate French- 
language school boards, as we recommend in Chapter 15, 
would result in some boards so small that their viability 
would be dubious, and we encourage such boards to amalga- 
mate with those adjacent to them. In fact, the same may be 
true of some other very small boards. Here, as everywhere in 
this report, we encourage communities to use local strategies 
and solutions to fit local situations. Any more general 
consideration of amalgamation of school boards must take 
into account their incredibly varied nature and size, and 
must also consider mechanisms for sharing services, as well 
as for dealing with political representation. 

tar «M LOM of LMmmi 

Service delivery organizations 

There are a significant number of areas where all boards 
should be seeking greater efficiency; indeed, many already 
do so. For example, a number of smaller school boards are 
not in a position to provide the kind of support teachers and 
schools need to provide good programs to all their students. 
Nor do they have the critical mass to deal efficiently with 
transportation, purchasing, payroll, and other business func- 
tions. In those same geographic areas, health and social 
services agencies also often lack the numbers needed to 
provide good services to school children in every school 
area. Recognizing this problem, some boards have already 
banded together in co-operative efforts, and in one project 
the Ministries of Community and Social Services, Education 
and Training, and Health have jointly set up a program to 
provide integrated services to children in the North. 

Whatever their size, many school boards in Ontario and 
elsewhere are turning to co-operative alliances through 
which they can develop curriculum resources, co-ordinate 
services with other ministries, purchase such services as 
transportation or supplies, provide professional develop- 
ment, or focus on a range of other areas. We see this as a 
desirable development, and strongly urge school boards 
across the province to increase such joint ventures. We 
believe that in many boards there is scope for even greater 
efficiency through sharing such important but costly 
services, and by achieving economies of scale through joint 
purchasing. Such co-operative arrangements may make 
more sense than amalgamation. Money is saved, while local 
representation and control of schools is maintained. 

Although such partnerships and alliances will be essential 
in meeting varied student and community needs in the years 
ahead - especially given the remote possibility of any 
increase in financial resources - they are not problem free. 
Territoriality is a powerful force; sometimes a neutral third 
party is necessary to establish and maintain working 
alliances. As well, unless the responsibility for these alliances 
is specifically assigned to particular positions, they may 
remain reliant on the interest and good will of individuals, 
and thus become vulnerable to staff changes. Nonetheless, 
we strongly support the continued growth of a range of co- 
operative initiatives among boards, and between boards and 
other agencies. 

Co-operative Programs 
in the North 

A review of education 
needs in the North, 
conducted in 1992-93 by 
the Ministry of Education 
and Training, found that 
recent co-operative initia- 
tives are successful in 
addressing student needs, 
but because these initia- 
tives tend to be limited to 
a specific geographic area 
or to a particular level of 

education, significant gaps 

The Integrated Services for 
Northern Children program 
is considered by most 
boards in northern Ontario 
to be very effective. We 
believe other ministries 
should be involved, as 
appropriate, in developing 
a more comprehensive 
netvi^ork of co-operative 

The case of the Metropolitan Toronto (Public) School Board 
The structure of education at the local level in Metro Toron- 
to is quite different from other urban centres and was 
brought to our attention as an issue of concern. Metro 
public schools have a two-tiered system of governance: the 
Metro Board with representatives from seven area boards - 
Etobicoke, York, East York, North York, Scarborough, Toron- 
to, and the Conseil des ficoles Fran^aises de la communaute 
urbaine de Toronto (the French-language board). Separate 
schools for the whole of Metropolitan Toronto are governed 
by the Metro Separate School Board. Our comments here 
relate to the public school boards. 

The Metropolitan Toronto School Board was established 
in 1953 to provide co-ordination of activities across all the 
public school boards in Metropolitan Toronto. Much of the 
justification related to the unequal bases for assessment in 
the different boards, with some capable of raising tax 
revenues much more readily than others. In order to equal- 
ize services across Metro, a decision was made to have a 
super-ordinate umbrella board, with trustees from each of 
the member boards, to apportion resources equitably and to 
provide a common level of educational service. Although the 
individual boards continued to make decisions about many 
areas of policy, the Metro Board made decisions about 
apportioning tax revenues. 

The Metro Board is a steering committee of all seven 
boards, with legislated responsibility for teacher collective 
bargaining in relation to salaries and working conditions. 
Such an arrangement precludes local boards agreeing to 
quite different contract provisions for their teachers. The 
individual boards continue to have separate negotiations to 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Organizing Education 

Co-09«ratl«a Mo<l«l» 
In Ontario 

There I ■■ f. ■: ■ !•• •. in 
Ontdfiu a- J f bCA'tr'f l(X 

coooefativ« organuMions 
to provKie a range of 
Mfv«c«4 10 acftods. For 
•tampte. in Onmra and m 
K«nt arxj Wellir^on courv 
ties, noi only are sct¥>oi 
boards wortung together in 
many business areas, txjt 
they are coopefating «»ith 
the muntcipainies and such 
irtsututiora as hosprtals 
artd libranes in an effort to 
get the most for their 
administrative dollars. 

Some school boards have 
developed partnerships 
(Mith busirwss ar>d with 
other agerKies to take 
better advantage of infor- 
mauon techrwiogy. For 

of EducatKyi has formed a 
cooperative venture tvith 
regional libranes to facili 
tate better access to the 
new information superhlg^■ 

The Ministry provided start 
up fur¥ls for a cooperative 
venture of the Ontario 
Teacfiers' Federation, 
public and Roman Catholic 
trustees' associations, and 
public arvJ Roman Catholic 
supervisory ofricers' asso- 
ciations, to establish the 
Ontario Cumculum Clear- 
irighouse. an organisation 
to help boards buy curncu- 
lum matenals from each 
other, rather than develop 
all their own matenals inde- 

deal with various local issues, as Vkrcll as bargaining with 
non-teaching staff. 

Currently, the Metro Board continues to collect and 
distribute tax revenue to achieve greater per-pupil equity 
across Metro, and also deals with capital grant allocations 
for building and renovating school facilities. As well, Metro 
continues to deal with collective bargaining. Although the 
board operated schools for the dcvclopmcntally challenged, 
responsibility for these schools is being divested to local 
boards. The other function it serves is a co-ordinating one; a 
variety of co-operative initiatives are carried out through the 
Metro Board, including producing some curriculum materi- 
als and offering the Supervisory Officer Qualification 
Program for aspiring supervisory officers on a cost-recovery 

Although the proportion of Metro education costs for the 
additional tier of the Metro Ekiard is not large, the yearly 
administrative costs are still considerable. Given the current 
financial constraints, as well as the public concern about 
value for money, is the continued existence of the Metro 
Toronto School Board justified? If the present funding situa- 
tion continues, it would probably make sense for the Metro 
Board to continue as well, since it serves a valuable function 
in redistributing tax revenues across the Irxal hoards, and 
thus ensures greater equity. The fact that the local boards are 

part of the Metro Board lessens any feelings that redistribu- 
tion is being imposed on them. 

However, we are recommending significant changes to 
the funding structures in the province. If theses changes are 
implemented, many of the Metro Board's functions would 
no longer be required. In Chapter 18, we recommend a shift 
in education financing so that funding would be determined 
by the Ministry, with very limited additional revenue raising 
permitted at the local level. With regard to capital allocation 
for building and renovating schools, the Ministry would also 
determine and distribute these funds. We have already noted 
that with the transfer of schools for the developmentally 
challenged, the Metro Board no longer has any direct 
program responsibilities. 

With the removal of these responsibilities, it would seem 
both logical and efficient to gradually move to one level of 
public school board in Metropolitan Toronto. We believe 
there is every reason for the individual boards to co-operate 
as much as possible, but through a consolidation and shar- 
ing of resources and services, rather than through another 
layer of political decision-making. 

In the preceding section, we note and give our strong 
support to current initiatives in cost sharing among school 
boards. Co-operative arrangements are applicable to small 
and large boards. The Metro Task Force on Cost Savings 
Through Co-operative Activities, established by the Ministry 
in 1994, is intended to create such institutionalized co- 
operative arrangements. The task force - which includes the 
Metro Separate School Board, in addition to the public 
school boards - is currently investigating ways for the area 
boards to cut costs without cutting levels of service, by 
collectively purchasing resources and services, by centraliz- 
ing some functions, and by sharing and co-operatively devel- 
oping others. We fully support this work, which is an excel- 
lent example of the kind of service-sharing arrangement 
discussed above. 

As well, we arc particularly concerned that the advantages 
of collective bargaining with teachers should not be lost. If 
boards bargain individually, negotiation costs are higher for 
both boards and federations. If Metro is eliminated, provin- 
cial legislation should ensure that combined collective 
bargaining is retained. 

On balance, then, we believe the two-tiered system of 
political governance will no longer be necessary, following 

For l»w Love of LaarnkV 

the proposed changes in educational funding. In our view, 
an administrative consortium, rather than another layer of 
political decision-making, would better meet the needs of 
the public schools and school boards in Metropolitan 

Recommendation 156 

*We recommend that following the proposed shift to the 
provincial government of the responsibility for determining 
the funding of education, the two-tiered governance structure 
of the public schools in Metropolitan Toronto be phased out, 
with the Metropolitan Toronto School Board being replaced by 
an administrative consortium of school boards in the Metro- 
politan Toronto area. 

The Ministry of Education and Training 

Role of the Ministry 

Considerable dissatisfaction has been expressed about the 
role of the Ministry of Education and Training. Both the 
public and the education community seem somewhat 
confused and uncertain about what part the Ministry plays 
and what part it should play, not only in relation to elemen- 
tary and secondary education, but in relation to the other 
elements of its mandate: colleges and universities and work- 
place training. As well, there is uncertainty about the 
Ministry's responsibilities vis-a-vis other ministries that deal 
with children and youth. 

Elementary and secondary education: 
Much of-the confusion about the Ministry's relationship to 
elementary and secondary education centres on control and 
the way it is exercised. The Ministry, like other government 
agencies, has traditionally exercised highly centralized 
control over Ontario education, relying primarily on regula- 
tion and monitoring to ensure compliance from boards and 
schools. In the 1960s and 1970s, however, control was so 
decentralized that school boards had a high degree of auton- 
omy in the way they organized, set programs, and made a 
host of other educational decisions. Consolidating school 
boards, eliminating provincial school inspectors, and aban- 
doning provincial Grade 13 examinations contributed to a 
shift of the balance of power toward school boards. 

In addition, the Ministry no longer discharges all the 
responsibilities granted by legislation; for example, certifica- 
tion of teachers now seems to be semi-automatic, de- 

£i ^^uc schools, Commissioners, are 
\#at the 'beck and call' of 
ministry and governmental changes. 
Whenever there is a change in 
Toronto, we experience policy 
swings soon afterwards. Each 
government has an answer for all 
our problems but what is happening 
is lack of specific goals, direction 
and standards." 

Waterloo County Principals' Association 

certification of teachers is almost non-existent, and there is a 
lack of follow-through on monitoring policy implementa- 
tion in some areas. 

In recent years, some large urban boards, especially in 
Metropolitan Toronto and Ottawa, have become financially 
independent of the Ministry, leading to further confusion 
about leadership in the education system. Because of educa- 
tional funding provisions in Ontario, these boards raise 
money through local property taxes, and thus do not rely on 
funds from the province. This enables them to act on their 
own to some extent, without getting Ministry approval for 
all projects, or even to ignore Ministry policy directives. 
Some of these boards developed innovative educational 
programs, such as schools for the arts and for sciences, alter- 
native schools, and other special programs which make them 
leaders in the province's education system. Although policy 
autonomy was not officially sanctioned, the Ministry seemed 
unable, or unwilling, to ensure compliance with many of its 

The result has been a considerable diversity of education- 
al programs and experiences across the province. Although 
such diversity can be positive, if carried to extremes it has 
certain costs. In the opinion of many, there is too much vari- 
ation in program and quality, and costs are not easily 

During the '80s and early '90s, the Ministry also mounted 
a series of initiatives, such as destreaming and the Learning 
Program Secretariat, which seemed to further erode its cred- 
ibility among various stakeholders. In the early '90s, many 
educators saw provincial policy as characterized by fragmen- 
tation, lack of coherence, lack of consistency, and probably 
most crucial, lack of accountability. 

Vol. iV Making It Happen Organizing Education 

-* ^ Jiiai Ssrvic* A^«ncy Networks 

Thc'L j'e a large number of Educational 
Service Agency Networks operating in nnany 
states in the United States, some of wtiich 
have been established for a considerable 
time Reports on their operation and effec 
ttveness provide valuable information for co- 
operative efforts in Ontano. 

Although the Ministry has produced some excellent 
resource materials, these have less impact than might be 
expected. We were told that over the past decade the 
Ministry has prepared some remarkable documents: guide- 
lines, resource guides, curriculum supports, and the like. The 
problem is that, reflecting the tensions between the Ministry 
and the school boards, the boards often pay little attention 
to the Ministry. As a result, few classroom teachers even 
know that this material is available, and students are denied 
the benefit of its existence. 

We believe that in a province with the scale and diversity 
of Ontario, and especially in such uncertain times, there 
must be a dear and consistent direction for education, 
achieved through common learning outcomes, a common 
curriculum, and standards across the province. Therefore, 
the Ministry must play a clearer role. 

However, it must exercise its authority thoughtfully and 
systematically, using the power and influence of a central 
authority to generate a sense of common purpose in the 
educational community. This will reduce the fragmentation 
of many local school boards and schools "doing their own 
thing,' and ensure that there is some shared understanding 
throughout the province. The Ministry must strengthen the 
links between elementary and secondary education and the 
broader community. 

The challenge for the Ministry is to respond to the need 
for local diffcrentution, while providing the necessary direc 
lion and clear expectations. It must set general policy guide- 
lines to be followed by the system; setting the direction 
means setting the agenda for the province's education 
lystcm. The Minutry must set the priorities for Ontario 

education, clarify goals, and define the desired outcomes. 
That would give everyone in the system targets to work 
towards, and criteria by which to decide among the many 
competing priorities. 

The Ministry must also be responsible tor providing 
equitable funding for all students across the province, setting 
guidelines to ensure that students' voices receive serious 
attention. They must ensure that teachers play a central role 
in running schools, that parents are welcomed into schools, 
that the common curriculum is followed, and that the 
system is truly accountable to the public. 

By setting guidelines in these different areas, the Ministry 
can divest itself of direct control and the need to over- 
regulate. It also gives principals and teachers the mandate to 
make schools work better, and makes the proposed College 
of Teachers responsible for teacher education and profes- 
sional development. Furthermore, by taking seriously the 
advice of advisory councils, such as the Ontario Parents 
Council and the student and youth council we recommend, 
the Ministry would demonstrate that real influence can be 
exerted on the system through consultation and without 
formal powers. 

The Ministry's accountability for elementary 
and secondary education: 

In our view, the Ministry must work in a more systematic 
and collaborative way than it has done in the past, with both 
old and new stakeholders. Right now, it often seems to oper- 
ate in isolation from its clients and other stakeholders. It is 
seen as placing demands on the school system in a confused 
and disorganized fashion, with constant reorganization and 
major policy shifts, many of which are delivered without an 
adequate and compelling rationale. 

Throughout the course of our work, we heard complaints 
about the many changes of direction made by the Ministry 
of Education and Training, and the additional demands it 
has placed on schools and school boards in the past few 
years. Hducators are particularly concerned about the lack of 
professional expertise in the Ministry to ensure expert input 
into the Ministry's decision-making process and to help 
boards when they need assistance. 

We sympathize with these concerns, and believe that the 
Ministry needs to pay attention to its constituencies and, as 
we have stres.sed, communicate clearly the overall direction 

For ttw tOM o( LMiming 

of education in Ontario, as well as the intended outcomes of 
policies. At the same time, the Ministry has to take a leader- 
ship role, knowing full well that policy may have to come 
before consensus has been reached. 

The Ministry must be more accountable to the public and 
to the education community. In Chapter 19, we propose a 
format for an annual report from the Minister that we 
believe will be an effective way for the public to get enough 
information to make informed judgments about elementary 
and secondary education in the province. 

We caution educators and the public that they may be 
hoping for the impossible if they believe that the Ministry 
can issue a complete and unambiguous educational plan for 
the whole province that will receive universal acclaim. 

In Chapter 20, when we discuss implementing reforms, 
we stress that although the Ministry must be clear and firm 
about the general principles of its educational vision, people 
on school boards and in schools will have to apply these 
principles in ways that make sense in the local context. And 
because the situation is dynamic it is difficult - if not 
impossible - to predict in advance just what circumstances 
will arise. 

Teachers' unions in Ontario also belong in this discus- 
sion. Through collective agreements, negotiated locally with 
each school board, the federations have a significant influ- 
ence on education practice at both the elementary and 
secondary levels. They affect policy in many ways and are 
actively involved in professional development for teachers. 

The relationship between the Ministry and the federa- 
tions is important but difficult. It seems obvious to us that, 
if the education system is to improve in the many ways we 
have prescribed, it is essential that both sectors must focus 
on building collaboration within the system. The Ministry, 
boards, and the federations must work together in the 
service of better learning for students. 

Recommendation 157 

*We recommend that the Ministry clearly set out its leader- 
ship and management role, especially in relation to school 
boards, teacher federations, and faculties of education, and 
that it develop a plan for more complete communication with 
all those interested in elementary and secondary education. 

££ ^Phere appears to be a growing frus- 
I tration among, not only school 
personnel, but society in general, 
resulting in a breakdown of confi- 
dence in the ability of the Ministry of 
Education and Training to provide the 
'strategic' leadership required at this 
time. The fact that there have been 
five Ministers of Education in the past 
five years and that key civil servants 
have either left or been transferred 
must be seriously questioned, not 
only the reason for the constant 
change of office, but also the impact 
of the changes upon the Ministry 
itself and the educational system in 
general. It is obvious that the educa- 
tional system of Ontario needs the 
immediate attention at the Ministry 
of Education and Training level to 
avoid a crisis. Indeed, many people 
would say we already have a crisis 
on our hands." 

Scarborough Board of Education: 
Secondary School Principals' Association 

Beyond elementary and secondary education: 
In addition to schools and school boards, there are several 
other partners in the broader education community. All have 
interests in, and power over, some aspects of elementary and 
secondary education. None can be ignored. 

In this regard it is important to note that in 1992 the 
Ministry of Education became the Ministry of Education 
and Training, incorporating the three former Ministries of 
Education, Colleges and Universities, and Skills Develop- 
ment. It now has responsibility for post-secondary education 
and, through the Ontario Training Adjustment Board, for 
training as well. The Ministry's broader mandate has signifi- 
cant implications in relation to its place in the elementary 
and secondary education system. The Ministry is directly 
responsible for policy governing education and training at 
all levels; this should considerably ease the difficulties of 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Organizing Education 

tant lor the Miniitry, in ihc next several 
c actively involved in auuring a M((ni(k4nt 
incrrAse in partner^ip^ and cu-ordination among 
whooU. colleges, and univertitiev to that educational 
■ ices arc belter articulated and ttructured as an 
.MJblc coniinuum. 

aligning related polic~y areas that, until recently, operated as 
distinct and separate entities. 

The Ministry's responsibilities to the broader educational 
system also suggest to us that it must make a priority of 
better transition programs between the various sectors. We 
think it is important for the Ministry, in the next several 
years, to be actively involved in assuring a significant 
increase in partnerships and co-ordination among schools, 
colleges, and universities, so that educational services arc 
better articulated and structured as an accessible continuum. 

As well, through the training board, the Ministry has a 
strategic role in rationalizing education and training policies 
and resources. And, as a super- ministry responsible for one 
of the two largest areas of social policies and programs, it is 
a central and crucial part of the provincial government. 

We strongly urge that the Ministry use its power to influ- 
ence government planning so that the needs of learners of 
all ages are addressed in a more co-ordinated manner. 

("olleges and universities arc a powerful influence on 
elementary and secondary education. Beyond the particular 
interests of colleges and universities in relation to high- 
Khool students and graduates, universities - and faculties of 
education, in particular - have an impact through their 
control of many aspects of teacher education, including 
admission to teacher preparation programs and develop- 
ment of the curriculum for student teachers. 

As we noted in Chapter 12, because they control admis- 
sions, universities and faculties of education act as gate- 
keepers to the leaching profession. The .Ministry can make 
significant strides with these partners to bring about more 
coUaborativr action in support of educational reform. 

Our proposed C^ollege of Teachers (see Chapter 12) will 
play a key role in the education system we envisage. We 
recommend that an Ontario (College of Teachers be estab- 
lished, with responsibility for setting professional standards 
for the teaching profession. This would include accreditation 
or recognition of teacher education programs and establish 
the requirements for initial and continuing certification. The 
formation of the college is intended to grant teachers control 
over many aspects of their professional lives. The college 
should not be controlled by any special interest group. 

(iivcn the mandate of the new Ministry of Kducation and 
Training, elementary and secondary education is now a force 
in the larger world of education and training. Educators in 
the Ministry's various sectors cannot afford to act in isola- 
tion, either fiscally or educationally. The era of autonomous 
sectors is gone, and all concerned must learn to take account 
of the wider education community. 

With its very broad mandate, the Ministry of Education 
and Training is ideally placed to ensure that elementary and 
secondary education policies arc more closely integrated 
with policy relating to higher education, with workplace 
training, and with lifelong learning. 

Ihe Ministry and the rest of government - 
beyond education and training: 

Throughout this report, we emphasize the need for a more 
comprehensive approach to education, learning takes place 
within a social context and, while educators must focus on 
their prime responsibility - ensuring intellectual develop- 
ment - we also discuss their shared responsibilities in meet- 
ing a whole host of needs that arc part of the lives of chil- 

In Chapter 14 we discuss community education as one of 
the engines for change and define the roles and responsibili- 
ties of principals, schools, and school boards in creating 
community alliances to support the learning process. The 
Ministry also has a critical role and responsibility in this 
regard. Because it is responsible for education and training 
in this province, the Ministry is in a unique position to 
understand the needs of learners and particularly the blocks 
to a successful educational experience. Wc believe that a key 
priority for the Ministry must be the coordinated develop- 
ment of government policies, program.s, and services to 
create a more effective network of support services for learn- 

For Ihm U>v« of Laarning 

In the same way that all stakeholders in education 
must find new ways to collaborate, the Ministry must 
develop new collaborative approaches with other 
government players. 

ers and their families as a means of ensuring the healthy 
development of all children. 

This has a number of implications for the Ministry. Just 
as teachers cannot isolate themselves within the world of the 
classroom, the Ministry can no longer isolate itself within 
the world of education. It must have a significant interest in, 
and build the capacity to play, a key role in shaping all 
public policies related to the healthy development of chil- 

This includes policy areas with which the Ministry has 
traditionally been associated - social services and health, for 
example - as well as less familiar areas, such as recreation, 
employment, and culture. Just as principals and schools 
must be leaders in building community alliances to better 
support student learning, so too must the Ministry take a 
leadership role in building provincial alliances that better 
support learning in this province. 

At the provincial level, that means active participation in 
reviewing policies, programs, and funding structures to 
create a more co-ordinated and comprehensive network of 
supports for children and their families. Locally, it means 
active participation in assessing local needs and planning 
local approaches to service delivery. 

In the same way that all stakeholders in education must 
find new ways to collaborate, the Ministry must develop new 
collaborative approaches with other government players. 
Provincially, that involves assuming responsibility for devel- 
oping collaboration among various government and provin- 
cial interests. Locally, it means assuming responsibility for 
developing collaboration among various local interests and 
education partners. 

Minority participation and influence in the 
Ministry's decision-making: 

We know that some stakeholders do not perceive the 
Ministry as being representative and inclusive of all individ- 
uals and communities in the schools - not even of those 
formally granted constitutional rights, such as the Roman 
Catholic and Franco-Ontarian minorities. WTiile we address 
the question of representation of our diverse communities in 
several parts of the report, here we consider the issue of 
sharing power within Ministry structures. 

First, the formally recognized components of the educa- 
tion system must also be formal parts of the Ministry. 

Although, over the years, slow recognition of the Franco- 
Ontarian minority led to the development of what the 
Ministry calls a team, there is no parallel body for Roman 
Catholics. That is why, in Chapter 15, we recommend that a 
team be established with special responsibilities for and 
expertise in Catholic education concerns, similar to the fran- 
cophone team. We hope, of course, that these teams will not 
be reduced to speaking only about their specific issues, but 
will become part of the Ministry's mainstream. 

But we want to go further than such basic organizational 
recognition of minority constituencies. We also recommend 
that influential representation from the Catholic and 
Franco-Ontarian educational milieux be put in place at all 
levels of professional and managerial Ministry staff. 

We note that the francophone minority has had an assis- 
tant deputy minister (ADM) position for some 15 years now. 
But, as observation and experience show - despite titles and 
functions - a structure can always informally marginalize 
certain players, especially those with responsibilities for 
minorities. The more significant the representation, the less 
likely the marginalization. Indeed, we believe that over the 
years such senior positions will be filled by individuals 
recognized as outstanding leaders. 

It is therefore only natural that, in the near future, a 
person from the Catholic or francophone educational world 
will become the deputy minister of Training and Education 
for Ontario, with responsibility for managing the entire 

As a group, assistant deputy ministers should be truly 
representative of the grassroots of the educational commu- 
nity. Although there is no magic formula for creating true 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Organizing Education 

boards. They can ensure that provincial policy directions arc 
understood, that implementation takes local realities into 
account, thai exemplary practices are shared, and that press- 
ing problems arc jointly addressed and resolved. 

political participation, we have already recommended that, 
at all times, ADMs should formally include one Roman 
Catholic and one francophone of influence. Of course, there 
may well be more than one of each - we arc not promoting 
mere tokenism. 

Recommendation 158 

*ln order to maximize their influence within the Ministry, we 
recommend that assistant deputy ministers representing 
particular constituencies be placed in charge of the portfolio 
of issues related to their respective constituencies, as well 
as being responsible for other important dossiers related to 
education for all Ontarians. 

A Mmislry presence at the local level: 

In a province as large and diverse as Ontario, the Ministry 

clearly cannot govern education entirely from downtown 

Toronto. Ai we note later, the Ministry must link with other 

mmislries, as well as with others in the broader educational 

community, and must do so at the provincial and local 


As well as the central Ministry of Education and Training 
office* in Toronto, there arc six regional offices throughout 
the provmcc: central, eastern, mid-northern, northeastern, 
northwestern, and western. Because the offices arc located in 
communities around the province, they are well placed to 
lake a lead role in co-ordinalion at the local level, where as 
we ttre\s in Chapter 14, action is most crucial. We would 
encourage the .Vlmistry to make this a priority for all its 
regional offices. 

The regional offices can also play a vital role in helping to 
fmler better relations between the Ministry and the school 

The provincial governrncnl 

W'c have discussed the issue of co-ordinating the efforts of 
all those who deal with the needs of children and youth. The 
Ministry cannot act alone; the provincial government must 
play a significant part in co-ordinating the many ministries 
that have an impact on the well-being of children. Without 
commitment and co-ordinatit)n at the top, it will be impos- 
sible to succeed. There is no question that such inter- 
ministerial co-ordination is difficult to initiate, and even 
more difficult to sustain - as demonstrated recently by diffi- 
culties in maintaining an inter-ministerial committee estab- 
lished for the purpose of co-ordinating services for children. 

Youn, Mine, and Ours, the report of the Clhildren and 
Youth Project Steering Committee of the Premier's Council 
on Health, Well-Bcing, and Social justice, was specifically 
concerned about ensuring such inter-ministerial links. It 
reported that 

The provincial governrncnl, as legislalnr, regulator, policy-maker 
and funder, has a key role in encouraging positive change at the 
community level ... The Committee is asking the Province to act as 
a catalyst and enabler of change - [to] set standards; ensure equity: 
link resources to measurable results and evaluate success; encourage 
communities to build on current initiatives that are working; 
promote creativity and flexibility; and support communities to find 
their own innovative solutions.' 

VN'hilc we endorse this statement and urge the govern- 
ment to move ahead on these lines as quickly as possible, we 
go further. If large numbers of children continue to suffer 
the effects of poverty; if teachers and schools arc made 
responsible for delivering an increasing number of social 
programs, in addition lo traditional academic programs; if 
agencies funded by other departments of government 
continue to define their responsibilities as separate from 
schools; then the government, which has the power to re- 
deploy resources and to change mandates, has failed. 

While we call on the Minister of Education and Training 
to provide leadership within government, we know that only 
when government at the highest levels decides that inter- 

For tht LOM or LMmNiC 

While schools, school boards, and the Ministry of 
Education and Training have important roles to play, 
there is an important need to clarify these roles, and 
to shift power and responsibilities, as appropriate, to 
better suit changed circumstances. 

departmental collaboration is non-negotiable will it occur. 
And without that decisiveness and that leadership, the best 
teachers and the best principals will be unable to meet the 
agenda we have set for them: to develop and nurture high 
levels of literacies in all our children. 


We believe that, in spite of changes in society and in educa- 
tion, the overall organizational structure of education in 
Ontario still makes sense. It is important to start with the 
teacher-student relationship and build the system to support 
it, with the bottom line being student learning. While 
schools, school boards, and the Ministry of Education and 
Training have important roles to play, there is an important 
need to clarify these roles, and to shift power and responsi- 
bilities, as appropriate, to better suit changed circumstances. 

Henry Mintzberg, a well-known organizational theorist at 
McGill University, writes "Power is a major factor, one that 
cannot be ignored by anyone interested in understanding 
how organizations work and end up doing what they do.""' 
All those with a stake in the school system - the Minister of 
Education and Training; the ministry's civil service; school 
board trustees and administrators; universities; principals; 
teachers; teacher federations; parents; the business commu- 
nity; even, from time to time, students themselves - try to 
increase their own power. 

Our proposals, here and in Chapters 15 and 16, are 
attempts to find a better balance among all these forces, a 
balance that will achieve system goals, promote effective use 
of resources, redress inequities, and respond to the needs of 
different parts of the system and of Ontario's various 
geographic regions. 

Although we do not recommend any radical changes in 
the overall organizational structure of education in the 
province, we do recommend a review and redefinition of 
some roles and responsibilities. We are also suggesting a shift 
of some responsibilities away from school boards. In some 
cases, these would move to the schools, in others to the 

We anticipate a reorganization or downsizing of central 
office staff as a result of other recommendations in the 
report, particularly those related to curriculum development 
(see Chapters 7 to 10) and taxing powers (discussed in 
Chapter 18). That may be countered somewhat by increased 

responsibilities in relation to community education alliances 
(as discussed in Chapter 14). 

On balance, we try to ensure that, within clearly under- 
stood and agreed-upon provincial guidelines, local commu- 
nities and their schools have the scope to meet their needs as 
they see fit. Our proposals protect students and the public by 
ensuring high standards, as well as clarity about curriculum 
and intended learning, right across the province. At the same 
time, they allow teachers, principals, parents, and their local 
communities not only the freedom, but the resources, to 
craft their own solutions and programs. In other words, we 
see the school system as combining stability and flexibility as 
much as possible. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Organizing Education 


1 B<lty Malcn, 'Enacting SiK-bascd Management: A Political 
Utilities Analysis.' Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 3 (1994): 249-67. 

2 loyce Scant, "NNliai the Literature Tells U$ about School- 
based Management m Selected lurisdictions: Implications for 
Ontario," p. 22. Paper written for the Ontario Royal 
Commission on Learning, 1994. 

3 Priscilla Wohlstetter, Koxane Smyer, and Susan Albers 
Mohrman,~New Boundaries for School-based Management: 
The High Involvement Model," Educational Evaluation and 
Policy Analysts 16. no. 3 ( 1994): 268-86. 

4 For a good summary of the research, see Suzanne Ziegler, 
The Effects of Parent Involvement on Children's Achievement: 
The Significance of Home/School Links, report 185 (Toronto 
Board of Education, 1987). 

For more detail, sec reports by loyce L. Epstein, one of the 
more recent ones being "School and Family Connections," in 
Families in Community Settings, ed. D.G. Unger and M.B. 
Sussman (New York: Haworth Press, 1990). 

5 Michael G. Fullan with Suzanne Stiegclbauer, 77ie New 
Meaning of Educational Change (Toronto: OISE Press. 1991 ), 
p. 237. 

6 We acknowledge that the Chicago reforms have received 
mixed reviews from observers, participants, and researchers. 
On balance, however, we are aware of no compelling 
evidence that wrould suggest Ontario should follow this kind 
of school governance model. See, for instance, Anthony S. 
Bryk and others, "The State of Chicago School Reform." Phi 
Delta Kappan 76, no. I (1994): 74-78. 

7 B. Wilson and T. Corcoran, Successful Secondary Schools: 
Visions of Excellence in American Education (Philadelphia: 
Falmer Press. 1988). 

8 Of the 170-odd Ontario boards. 20 are called District School 
Area Boards. These and another eight very small Roman 
Catholic Separate School boards operate mostly in remote 
areas of the province, usually with only one school, with 
fewer than 100 students under their jurisdiction. Most of 
them tuvc no administrators beyond the school principal, 
and are physically distant from other boards. There is also a 
Protestant separate school board in Penclanguishene and a 
board operating only a secondary school m Moosonee. Four 
boards do not operate Khoolt at all, usually buying educa- 
tion for the students living in their area from other boards. 
Others are care and treatment centre boards connected with 
hospitals or other treatment centres in half-a-dozen cities. 
There arc. ihcrcforc, only 128 Ontario boards that fit the 

image of what most people probably mean when ihey speak 
of school boards, that is, boards operating a number of 
schools, and having some central board administrative staff. 
Much of the text in this section refrrN, unless otherwise 
noted, to these 128 boards. 

9 For example: 

)ohn Carver, Hoards That Make a Difference: A New Design 
for Leadership in Nonprofit and Public Organizations (San 
Francisco: )ossey-Bass, 1994). 

Michael Kirst, "A Framework for Redefining the Role and 
Responsibilities of Local School Boards" (Washington, DC: 
Institute for Educational leadership, 1993). 

10 Ontario, Ministry of Education and Training, and Ontario 
school trustee associations, Handbook for School Trustees in 

(Toronto, 1992). 

1 1 Carver, Boards That Make a Difference, p. 222. 

1 2 F"or instance: 

Linda LaKoquc and IVtcr (U)lcman, "Quality Control: School 
Accountability and District Ethos," in Educational Policy for 
Effective Schools, cd. Mark Holmes, Kenneth Lcithwood, and 
Donald F Musella (Toronto: OISE Press. 1989), p. 168-91. 

Karen Seashore Louis and Matthew B. Miles. Improving the 
Urban High School: What Works and Why ( New York: 
Teachers College Press. 1990). 

Susan Rosenholtz, Teachers' Workplace: The Social Organiza- 
tion of Schools (New York: Longman, 1989). 

13 The Metropolitan Toronto Board of Trade circulated figures 
in December of 1993 claiming that a large proportion of staff 
in various Metro boards was non-teaching. In particular, 
they reported that only 46. 1 percent of Toronto Board of 
Education employees were "on grid teachers." However, 
according to Toronto Board sources, the percentage of leach- 
ing staff is 65 to 75 percent, depending on how staff such as 
classroom teaching assistants are classified. 

1 4. Edward Humphreys and others. Alternative Approaches to 

Determining Distribution of School Board Trustee Representa- 
tion, vol 2. (Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education, 1986), 
p. 61. 

1 5 Premier's Council on Health, Well- Being, and Social lustice. 
Yours, Mine, and Ours (Toronto: Ontario Children and Youth 
Project. 1994), p. 46. 

16 Henry Mmt/berg, Power In and Around Organizations 
(Englewood Cliffs. N|: Prentice Hall, 1983), p. I. 

For th« |j(M« o( LMmmt 



r*.j\' •<*? 


Equity in education requires financial equity. 
Although the very complex issue of education 
funding in general was not a specific part of our 
mandate, we are convinced that our goal of 
providing an excellent education for all learners 
cannot become reality unless the way education Is 
funded in Ontario is changed radically. This chapter 
explains briefly how we came to that conclusion 
and makes recommendations we believe will lead 
to more equitable learning opportunities across 
the province. 

We are aware that financing education cannot be 
discussed in isolation; it is inextricably linked, 
not only to equity, but to the questions of power 
and influence we discussed in the previous chapter, and to 
accountability, the topic of the next chapter. 

Historical context 

Historically, the initiative to establish schools in Ontario 
came from the local level or from private sources. Local 
levies did not become tied to the property tax until 1849, 
when the Baldwin Act was passed; the following year munic- 
ipalities were given the right to raise taxes on property. 

Provincial funding was sporadic at best until the 1850s, 
when the government, under the leadership of Egerton 
Ryerson, introduced a systematic but limited form of grants 
to give more students access to schools. Ryerson also tied 
these grants to more regulatory measures designed to 
improve the quality of education across the province. 

In spite of attempts to equalize the money available 
across Ontario, enormous disparities remained. In 1907, the 
government first began to pay a sliding scale of grants based 
on local ability to raise money; in 1924, it decided to use the 
amount of property assessment as the measure of local 
wealth. However, it was not until the 1940s, when the govern- 
ment introduced the concept of "approved costs," that it was 
able to maintain some degree of control over funding and 
began to achieve some degree of equity. 

Initially, the province identified some specific costs for 
certain programs, and provided grants to ensure that all 
schools had enough funds to cover those costs. Gradually, 
during the '50s and '60s, it increased the types of expendi- 

tures included in the "approved costs" - and increased the 
amount of money made available to schools. At the same 
time, because some municipalities were deliberately under- 
valuing their assessment in order to attract more grant 
money, the province also introduced assessment equalization 
factors, which were used to arrive at a more uniform base 
for making grants to a municipality or school board. The 
province continued the process of making adjustments and 
reducing funding inequities. 

In 1964, William Davis, then Minister of Education, 
implemented the Ontario Foundation Tax Plan, which based 
the cost of education on a model school program. These 
costs were estimated from actual costs in sample boards 
across Ontario. The province set a mill rate that had to be 
levied by all boards and then provided grants to bring all 
boards up to the foundation level. (A mill represents $1 of 
tax for every $1,000 of property assessment; for example, a 
property assessed at $100,000 with a mill rate of 25 will 
attract taxes of $2,500.) The government also made a 
commitment to increase provincial support to 60 percent of 
education costs by 1972-73. 

By allowing boards to spend funds beyond the founda- 
tion level, as long as the money was raised from local taxes, 
the government acknowledged local needs; at the same time, 
however, this built in a continuing source of spending 
inequity across boards, and also made it difficult to achieve 
the promised level of government support. 

Eventually, the level of support did reach 60.5 percent, 
but only because the government imposed a ceiling on 
expenditures; boards spending more were subject to penal- 
ties. This gave the government control over the total expen- 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Funding 

diturc and ensured that it knew exactly how much the 60 
percent provincial share would cost. However, school boards, 
especially those with significant assessment possibilities, 
claimed that approved costs did not give sufTicicnt weight to 
different local needs, and the government relaxed the penalties. 

Although the government continued to identity an 
approved ceiling and, to ensure province-wide equity within 
it, continued paying grants, some boards soon began to 
spend well beyond the imposed limits. Until recently, the 
government continued to increase the ceiling and the 
amount it paid in grants, to account for both inflation and 
the cost of new programs, but the increases did not keep 
pace with the actual growth in board expenditures; there- 
fore, the government's share of the total amount paid for 
education has slipped steadily. VS'hile in 1964, the approved 
costs were based on real expenditures, the current ceiling no 
longer reflects reality and, once again, there are great dispar- 
ities in the amounts different boards spend. 

Education funding in Ontario 

fcducaiion in Ontario is financed by a combination of prop- 
erty taxes and provincial grants. Ontario's school boards 
collectively raise slightly more than half of their total 
revenue largely from local property taxes on residential, 
commercial, and industrial properties. The remaining fund- 
ing comes from the province in the form of education 
grants. What these figures disguise, however, is that depend- 
ing on the size or wraith of the local assessment base, some 
boards get nothing from the province, while others receive 
virtually their entire budget. 

The proportion received from grants and from local taxes 
depends on the assessment wealth of the board, according to 
the following: 

• First, the Ministry of Education and Training establishes 
for each board an amount per student that the board may 
spend; this is kni>wn as the "expenditure ceiling. " 

• Second, the Ministry also establishes a provincial mill rate 
on an equalized basis. Boards are expected to raise from 
local taxes the amount this mill rate will produce when 
applied to its assessment base. 

• Third, the Ministry pays grants to a board to lIosc any gap 
between the amount raised locally by the provincial mill rate 
and the expenditure ceiling. 

Any expenditure over the ceiling has to be raised locally. 
School boards with a strong commercial and industrial 
assessment base are able to generate the most money 
through local property taxes; some can spend well beyond 
the ceiling without taxing at a higher rate. Other boards' 
local lax bases cannot even support the expenditure ceiling. 

Ontario's method of financing schools through a combi- 
nation of property taxes and provincial grants is not unique 
in Canada, although a higher proportion of our education 
revenue comes through property taxes than in any other 
province. The relatively low level of direct provincial support 
for elementary and secondary education means that the 
province has less control over school-board decision- 
making, particularly with boards that have the capacity to 
raise entire budgets from local taxes. 

Current concerns 

Based on our public hearmgs, combined with insights from 
our research,' it is clear that two issues arc important to the 
future of school reform. The first is equity - the question of 
whether the system distributes available resources in a 
manner that is fair to all students in the province. I he 
second issue is what we call adequacy - the question of what 
funding is required to provide the kind of school program 
we envision. 


hducational equity, the necessity ot whuh wc have stre.s.sed 
throughout the report (particularly in (Chapters l.S and 16), 
requires financial equity. Although Ontario does not suffer 

For tlw Lowt of tMrmnC 


Pei^Pupil Expenditure and Elementary Assessment Wealth 

Index in Selected Boards, Ranked in Order of Wealth 



PerPupil Total 









Per Elementary 


Pupil 1993 

Chapleau RCSS 


6,541 elem. 



Geraldton District RCSS 


6,415 elem. 



Kenora District RCSS 


6,401 elem. 


8,814 sec. 



SImcoe Country RCSS 


5.565 elem. 


11.911 sec. 



Hearst District RCSS 


6.227 elem. 


8.136 sec. 





6,222 elem. 


10,674 sec. 



Kapuskasing District 


6.597 elem. 



9.215 sec. 



Waterloo County RCSS 


6.041 elem. 


5.797 sec. 



London-Middlesex County 


5.390 elem. 



7,913 sec. 



Windsor RCSS 


5,990 elem. 


6,300 sec. 



Ottawa-Carleton French 


9,866 elem. 



9.322 sec. 



Red Lake 


7.085 elem. 


8.455 sec. 



Hamllton-Wentworth RCSS 


5.799 elem. 


6.277 sec. 





7.696 elem. 


17.777 sec. 





7.406 elem. 


10.793 sec. 





6,235 elem. 


7.021 sec. 



Waterloo County 


6,302 elem. 


7.206 sec. 



SImcoe County 


6.084 elem. 


7,031 sec. 





6,881 elem. 


7,213 sec. 



Metropolitan Toronto 


6,211 elem. 



6,444 sec. 



Provincial Average 





6.398 elem. 


7.752 sec. 





8.161 elem. 


7.672 sec. 



Ottawa RCSS 


6.618 elem. 


6.634 sec. 





7.170 elem. 


14,247 sec. 





9,058 elem. 


11,355 sec. 





8,179 elem. 


7,717 sec. 



Metropolitan Toronto 


8,356 elem. 


8.902 sec. 



from the extreme inequities common in some parts of the 
United States (for example, some New York suburbs spend 
twice as much as nearby inner city boards)," there are serious 
problems with the Ontario system, in comparison both with 
other provinces and with what most people believe would be 

Table 1* shows that there is still a gap of several thousand 
dollars between per-pupil expenditures in boards like 
Ottawa and Toronto on the one hand, and the Roman 
Catholic separate school boards in Chapleau, Geraldton, and 
Kenora on the other. When the higher building and trans- 
portation costs in these assessment-poorer boards are 
factored in, the differences in amounts available, per pupil, 
for actual in-class expenditures is still greater. Even public 
boards in relatively large urban centres such as Hamilton 
and London have considerably lower assessment wealth and 
spend significantly less per pupil than Ottawa or Metro 
Toronto, and separate school boards in those areas have 
even less. 

As a result of variations in assessment wealth, many 
boards provide program levels that appear to be significantly 
in excess of provincial standards, while others have difficulty 
offering a basic program and very few options. In the past, 
when resources were more readily available, the inequities 
could be dealt with by increasing the level of the "have-nots" 
to that of the "haves," but this is no longer possible. Instead, 
the same pie must be sliced and distributed differently. 

* Cost figures given in the table are actual per-pupil expenditures in 1992. It 
should be noted that these figures include capital projects, which can vary from 
year to year and board to board. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Funding 

Inri^uitm within the approved (.ciling 

I. For gcographiCiiJ and Ic^l rcuons, boards have 
extremely varied aueumenl bases. 

;nc boards can raise more money on the provin- 
bia. anil rate than the ceiling indicates is necessary. 

3. Some boards derive very little from local taxation 
and. being extremely dependent on grants, have little 
leeway for discrrtiotury spending to meet local needs. 

Inequities beyond the approved ceiling 

1. E4)uiry in the entire funding structure is based on 
the premise that the expenditure ceiling is adequate to 
cover the costs of educating a student. In fact, all 
boards have had to spend above the ceilings in recent 

2. For all expenditures above the ceiling, boards may 
draw only on local taxes. On the basis of the same 
mill rate increase, some can collect 20 times as much 
money a others. 

Given that some boards will get a smaller portion, proposals 
for such funding reforms arc necessarily controversial. 

At the public hearings, we were told repeatedly that the 
method of funding education makes it almost impossible for 
some boards to provide what the speakers considered 
adequate education programs and services to students with- 
out incurring serious deficits. As well, taxes on commercial 
and industrial assessment are linked to concerns about busi- 
nesses failing or moving out of a jurisdiction. 

These funding issues are not new: several commissions 
have concluded that the current system is not working. In 
December 1985, the Commission on the Financing of 
Elementary and Secondary Education in Ontario (the 
Macdonaid commission) came to that conclusion, as did the 
Fair Tax Commivsion in 1993. 

On the face of it, the current funding scheme is equitable: 
the combination of grants and taxation means that boards 
receive the same revenue up to the expenditure ceiling. It is, 
in fact, deeply flawed in regard to both revenue within the 
ceiling, and, most certainly, in regard to the revenue needed 
beyond the ceiling. 

There are several key sources of inequity in the current 
syitem. marry of which we heard about in the hearings and 

Determination and direction of commercial 
and industrial revenue 

There is a diftcrence in the way some commercial and indus- 
trial revenue is determined and who receives it. For example, 
the main industries in northern Ontario are related to 
forestry, mining, and hunting and fishing. A pulp-and-paper 
company in the area covered by the Red Lake Board of 
Education pays stumpagc Ices (or the trees it cuts, not taxes 
on the land on which the trees arc cut. That fee is paid to the 
Province of Ontario, not directly to the local school board, 
although some will be returned through the grants that the 
province pays to the school board. The rest goes into general 
revenues, out of which the province pays grants to other 
school boards and for other initiatives. However, the same 
pulp-and-paper company pays taxes on its mill operation 
directly to the school board in Kenora. 

Similarly, hunting and fishing licences are paid to the 
province, which means that no education tax is generated 
by the land and water on which the hunting and fishing 
take place. Taxes on some mining operations are paid to 
the province, while other operations provide a rich source 
of income for the local municipality and school board. 
These tax anomalies were also identified by the Fair Tax 
(Commission, and were addressed in several of their 

Tax revenue from corporate head offices and 
seats of government 

Commercial and industrial revenue is often generated in one 
place but paid to a municipal authority in another. In most 
such cases, it is paid to larger urban centres, regardless of 
where it has actually been generated. For instance, major 
corporate head offices tend t<» be clustered in a few large 
urban areas, while the corporate income comes from across 
the province. 

The presence of Parliament in Ottawa and of the Ontario 
Legislature in Toronto generates considerable tax revenue for 
those cities, through direct government spending and the 
spending of government employees, as well as through the 
impact on tourism. 

The taxes that sustain these operations, as well as taxes 
that directly or indirectly subsidi7e such tourist attractions 
as the National Arts Ontre (which gels tax money rai.sed in 
all parts of Canada), the Ontario Science Centre, and 

Forth* LOM o( Laaming 

In brief, then, the key sources of inequitable funding are: 

SkyDome come from all parts of the province - as do visi- 
tors to them. Not surprisingly, therefore, the Ottawa Board 
of Education has almost twice the provincial average of per- 
pupil property assessment wealth, while Metropolitan 
Toronto has more than twice the provincial average, as is 
obvious from Table 1 . 

• the way commercial and industrial revenues are deter- 
mined and directed; 

• the fact that tax revenue from corporate head offices 
and seats of government, although generated across the 
province, are directed only to the municipality in which 
these headquarters reside; 

• lack of access to the commercial and industrial tax base 
by separate school boards; 

• the default provision. 

Access to commercial and industrial tax base 
by separate school boards 

Not only are there inequities between locations in the 
province, there are inequities between the ability of Roman 
Catholic and public boards to raise funds in the same 
geographic areas. (Because more than 80 percent of French- 
language students are also Roman Catholic, they, too, are 
affected by this disparity.) For example, Roman Catholic 
school boards continue to have limited access to the 
commercial and industrial tax base. 

In response to recommendations of the Macdonald 
commission, the province introduced co-terminous pooling: 
placing the commercial and industrial taxes collected in the 
area covered by a public board and a Roman Catholic board 
- or a French-language board where one exists - into a pool 
from which both draw funds. 

However, this has not removed all the inequities that exist 
between the two systems: pooling is still being phased in, 
and funds are currently distributed to the boards, not on the 
basis of per-pupil needs, but rn proportion to the amount of 
assessment homeowners direct to each board. Given that all 
boards strive to obtain adequate funding, this method of 
apportioning remains a source of friction between public 
and separate boards, and constitutes an obstacle to co- 
operation between local boards. 

In presenting the 1993 budget, the Minister of Finance 
announced that funding would be changed to a per-pupil 
basis, but that will only be phased in beginning in 1996. 

Default provision 

People who for various reasons - ignorance, misinforma- 
tion, negligence - do not specifically direct their taxes to the 
separate school board or to a French-language board are 
assumed to be public school supporters, and their taxes are 
automatically sent to the English-language public board. 
This is done under what is known as the "default provision," 
and has generally resulted in public school boards getting 

more than their fair share of property taxes from the resi- 
dential, commercial, and industrial assessments. 

In brief, then, the key sources of inequitable funding are: 

• the way commercial and industrial revenues are deter- 
mined and directed; 

• the fact that tax revenue from corporate head offices and 
seats of government, although generated across the province, 
are directed only to the municipality in which these head- 
quarters reside; 

• lack of access to the commercial and industrial tax base by 
separate school boards; 

• the default provision. 

The first three are related to the inequitable distribution 
of the commercial and industrial tax revenues - inequities 
either across regions, or between separate and public boards. 
We believe our recommendations will resolve all three issues. 

The fourth is concerned with inequity in the distribution 
of the residential assessment, and we also make a recom- 
mendation to resolve this problem. 

The Fair Tax Commission recommended that the use of 
commercial and industrial property taxes to pay for educa- 
tion be eliminated and replaced by provincial funding from 
other sources, including personal income tax. 

There are other options as well, but it is not within our 
mandate or competence to prescribe the precise means to 
reach the desired end - greater financial equity across the 
province. We do insist, however, that the government is 
responsible for ensuring that there is an equitable amount of 
money available, per pupil, across the province so that each 
student gets the programs and services necessary for achiev- 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Funding 

1 nc ^.lrKl^ ot iiun^c wc rcmmmciKl ttiniuj;iuuit iiiis 
report lit povsihic onlv it there i> equitable 
' . ng for all iludent^. ret;jrdles» ol' where they live. 
I ti r in turn, is possible only it the government 
rcsirucium th« funding system for elementary and 
Kcundarv education. 

ing the recommended learning outcomes. It can do so only if 
most of the amount spent on education is determined 
provincially on a per-pupil basis. 

We want to emphasize that when we recommend inorc 
equitable funding, we are emphatically not saying that all 
boards should receive exactly the same amount per pupil. 
There are legitimate reasons why some should spend more 
money on some or all their students. For example, French- 
language education may require more funds, especially in 
areas that are not near centres of Franco-Ontarian culture. 
That is the reason for our earlier recommendation of fund- 
ing for animation culturelle. Similarly, boards in the north, 
particularly those not in urban areas, have higher operating 
costs, as do schools in communities with significant 
numbers of immigrants. 

We therefore support the government's current practice 
of using different weighting factors or special grants to 
adjust the amounts paid to individual schools boards. 

The kinds of change we recommend throughout this 
report are possible only if there is equitable funding for all 
students, regardless of where they live. That, in turn, is 
possible only if the government restructures the funding 
system for elementary and secondary education. But we note 
that there are many parts of the province where different 
kinds of grants or weighting factors would be taken into 
account, and it is impossible to predict in advance what thc 
concrete financial consequences for individual boards would 
be, with a more equitable fmancc system. 

Recommendations 159. 160 

• We recommend that equal per-pupil funding across the 
province, as well as additional money needed by some 
school boards for true equity, be decided at the provincial 
level, and that the province ensure that funds be properly 

• We also recommend that boards be allowed to raise a 
further sum. no greater than 10 percent of their provincially 
determined budget, from residential assessment only. 

Because the so-called default system tends to create a 
windfall for the Fngiish-language public school system, and 
in view t)f our recommendation that there should continue 
to be limited access to the residential assessment base, 
further action is necessary. 

Recommendation 161 

•IVe recommend that all residential property owners be 
required to direct their taxes to the school system they are 
entitled to and wish to support, and that undirected taxes be 
pooled and distributed on a per-pupil basis. 


It seems to us that neither equity nor fair weighting practices 

arc possible as long as there is a lack of clarity about the 

level of programs and services established for all Ontario 


As we indicated in our brief history of funding, it has 
been 30 years since the implementation of the Ontario 
Foundation Tax Flan, which was based on actual costs at 
that time. From 1991 to 1993, the Ministry's Education 
Finance Reform Project worked on determining, again, the 
real costs of education, and on developing a new funding 
model that would lead to greater equity. The Ministry has 
not yet acted on the work of this project. 

(jiven our mandate and timelines, the Commission 
cannot address the question of adequacy more thoroughly. 
Wc note, however, that the combination of a lack of equity 
in the access to funding, and a distribution of resources that 
n<i longer bears any relationship to actual cost, is bound to 
increase the sense of injustice felt by so many Ontarians. 

Therefore, we urge the Ministry of Education and Train- 
ing to build on the work of such groups as the Fair Tax 
Commission and the Education Finance Reform Project and 

For tha LOM o( LMmmg 

establish exactly how much money is needed to provide an 
adequate education program in all parts of Ontario, includ- 
ing the required support services called for in our recom- 

Recommendation 162 

*We recommend that the Ministry of Education and Training 
first decide what it considers to be an adequate educational 
program for the province, and then determine the cost of 
delivering this program in various areas of the province, 
taking into account different student needs and varying 
community characteristics, such as geography, poverty rates, 
and language, that affect education costs. 


We have addressed the two key funding issues of equity and 
adequacy. Some of the concerns about efficiency that were 
brought to our attention were discussed in Chapter 17. In 
Chapter 19, when we look at accountability, we will deal with 
these concerns again. Our recommendations for centralizing 
curriculum development, having school boards enter into 
arrangements to share services, and creating better integrated 
health and social support services at the local level will help 
make the system more effective and efficient. 

Widely varying access to 
assessment, as between 
rural and urban, public and 
separate boards, and 
arbitrary expenditure 
ceilings that do not cover 
basic costs for any boards, 
have combined to convince 
the Commission that there 
must be radical reform of 
provisions for financing 
education in Ontario. This 
is particularly true if 

boards and the province 
are to implement the 
contained in this report. 

Therefore, we have recom- 
mended centralization of 
decisions about the total 
budget necessary for a 
particular board to deliver 
an approved program, and 
limits on raising additional 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Funding 

End not** 

S<«, for example: 

Stephen B. Ljwion and Roulcen Wignall, eds.. Scrimping or 
Stiiuindering' Finiirutng ( iirtviJuirt 'ichooU (Turonio: OISE 
PrcM. 198V 

Ontario, M in iMr\ m k-Aiu<.jtii>n, Report of the Commmwn on 
the Financing of Elementary and Secondary Education in 
Ontario (Toronto, 1985). ChairperMin: H. Ian Macdunald. 

Ontario Tax Commission. Fair Taxation in a Changing World 
(Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993). 

Tim Sale, An Analyns of School Funding Acrois Canada 
(Vancouver: EduServ. 1993). 

lofuthan Kozol, Savage Inequalities: Children in America's 
Sciioofa (New York: Crown, 1991 ), p. 120. 

For Uw Lovt of tMrnmc 





'>»'^ ■ >«■'--,• '^■/.f^<Y>> 


le Accountability 
of tlie System 


The combination of two phenomena - the 
world-wide focus on quality, results, and 
accountability, and the emphasis of educating 
all of society to a much higher level and for a 
quite different world - has put tremendous 
pressure on education systems, schools, 

and educators. 

G. Rappolt, "Toward Accountability and 
Results-Oriented Education," Orb/t 24, no. 2 

Accountability in education: What does it involve? 

In this era of decreasing revenues and increasing uncer- 
tainty about the future, accountabiUty is a key concern 
for many people. Virtually all public institutions have 
been criticized for failing to meet the needs of the groups 
they were intended to serve. In education, the dissatis- 
faction is often coupled with a belief that if only schools and 
those who teach in them were more "accountable," the prob- 
lems relating to standards of learning and effective use of tax 
dollars would be resolved. However, as noted by educational 
researcher Lorna Earl in a paper written for the Commission: 

Unfortunately, it is rarely clear what is meant by accountability. It is 
an emotionally charged term that implies such things as striving for 
success, confidence, trust, communication and responsiveness, but 
does not define actual behaviours or practices.' 

As with every other issue we addressed, people naturally 
assume that, because concerns about inadequacies of the 
system are easy enough to articulate, solutions are as easy 
to find. And, as with every other issue, it is simply not so 
on matters of accountability. The issues involved, in fact, 
are quite complex, and if people are serious about intro- 
ducing accountability into the publicly funded education 
system - as this Commission is - responses must be equal 
to the problem. 

Accountability means exactly that: Who accounts to the 
public for what happens in schools? Equally, it could be 
called responsibility: Who is responsible for the performance 
of our schools? How do we know what we are entitled to 
expect from schools? How do we know whether schools are 
delivering on this entitlement? Whom do we hold to account 

- who is responsible - if we are not satisfied with the 
answers we get? 

Accountability in the education system, then, means that 
information has to be available to the public, to taxpayers, 
and to parents, in a form that allows them to have reason- 
able expectations of the system, to make reasonable judg- 
ments about how well the system has performed, and to 
know who is responsible if they are not satisfied. 

The most fundamental form of accountability is that of 
the classroom teacher to the parents, and of the school to the 
community. It has been extraordinarily difficult for parents 
to find out simply what the curriculum is and how their 
children are performing. Although our focus in this chapter 
is on system accountability, the ultimate concern for parents 
and students is, naturally, with individual student learning. 
But at both the individual and the system level, we should 
remember that accountability is not an end in itself: its func- 
tion is to ensure that information about performance is 
actually used to improve that performance in the future. In 
other words, "accountability" and "reform" should always be 
closely linked. 

Two types of accountability are relevant: fiscal and 
program. Below, we look briefly at each, and then discuss 
what additional measures should, in our view, be taken to 
satisfy the public that the educational system is operating as 
it should, and that identified problems are being addressed. 

"Fiscal accountability" at the school, school board, and 
Ministry level is addressed by the use of auditing processes 
to examine operations on a regular basis. As well, the 
Ministry conducts spot audits of boards, examining its 
transportation functions, verifying enrolment figures, and 

Vol. IV Making It Happen The Accountability of the System 


ccountabJIKy is a term that 
should apply to each student's 
individual learning experience. This 
could be measured most effectively 
through student evaluation of 
schools, teachers, and programs." 

ensuring that provincial grants arc used as specified. Such 
audits usually focus on whether funds are administered 
honestly and according to regulations. Many people told us 
they wanted to know more about whether the system is run 
as efficiently as it ought to be, and whether funds are allocat- 
ed appropriately. 

In his 1993 annual report, Erik Peters, the provincial 
auditor, looked not only at the usual fiscal issues, but also 
addres.sed "value for money" questions, suggesting; areas that 
needed to be improved. He noted, for example, that: 

Present arrangcfnenis for the development and delivery of curricu- 
lum could be more cost effective and are not adequate to determine 
that a curriculum of consistent quality m both official languages is 
taught and learned across the province. Therefore, procedures to 
measure and report on the effectiveness of education programs and 
services are not yet satisfactory.' 

We believe that such initiatives should continue, but we 
caution that auditing an education system is a complicated 
process. As we stressed in Chapter II, on assessment proce- 
dures, the qualitative acts of teaching and learning do not 
easily lend themselves to quantitative measures of efficiency 
and effectiveness; fudging schools on the basis of inappro- 
priate tools docs not contribute to public knowledge. 

"Program accountability." in the sense of establishing and 
assuring quality of student performance, is a key priority. We 
agree with the many observers, both in and outside the 
educational system, who believe the lime has come for a 
clear id of criteria by which performance can be judged: 
people need to know what ttudenis are expected to have 
learned by the lime ihcy complete a given course or grade 

(the outcomes) - and what different levels of achievement 
mean (standards). Such a framework can, and must, be used 
to monitor and enhance the progress of students and the 
performance of the system. The results of such monitoring 
must be communicated in an understandable and timely 
way to all stakeholders. 

In Chapter 1 1 we addressed the need for clearer and more 
useful assessment of student learning - a very large part of 
improved program accountability. That is the purpose of the 
province-wide literacy tests we recommend for every student 
in Grades 3 and 1 1. And individual results to students and 
parents, and system results to all interested parties must be 
clearly communicated. That these system-wide assessments 
are associated with what we term "literacy guarantees" is a 
particularly powerful accountability mechanism. Of course, 
the question of the adequacy of the standards applied to the 
test results is also a fundamental accountability question. 

We have also said that the Ministry should continue to 
conduct other program reviews, through testing sample 
groups of students across the province. Results from such 
reviews make it possible to judge the adequacy of the 
curriculum .ind whether the official curriculum is actually 
being taught and learned in schools. 

Beyond that, student assessment would be primarily the 
responsibility of the teacher and the school board, and, as we 
note, it is important for all teachers to learn more about how 
best to assess student learning and use the results of assess- 
nienls to improve instruction and program. 

Who is accountable? 

Ihc cclucaiion system involves both elected and appointed 
policy makers, and both are accountable for their actions. At 
the local level, trustees are accountable to the electorate 
every three years, although it is widely acknowledged that 
complications exist: there is little attention paid by the 
media to the activities of boards of education, little useful 
discu.ssion of education issues during elections, and notori- 
ously low voter turnouts. At the provincial level, the Minister 
of Education and Training is, of course, accountable to the 
electorate whenever an election is held, as is the government 
as a whole. 

Although such political accountability is important, it 
hardly seems sufficient to us, because the information that 
would allow voters to make informed decisions about the 

Fof th* Low of Learning 

system may well not be available. In terms of political 
accountability, policy makers at the local and provincial level 
must answer for the soundness of their policies, and also, to 
some extent, for the results of those policies. 

On the administrative and managerial side, there is a need 
for accountability for implementing policies and for moni- 
toring the process and the impact of implementation. 

If education policy makers are going to be held account- 
able, they will need measures of educational quality. Without 
these, they cannot report reliably and meaningfully on the 
soundness of their policies. 

A A J^ arents and the community are 
■ demanding tiiat schools and 
teachers be accountable for the 
money spent and for student 
outcomes. School boards must show 
evidence that they respond to the 
needs of all students within their 
systems ../ 

Association for Bright Children 

Indicators of quality 

The education system, like any other publicly funded system, 
is accountable to the public for operating effectively, effi- 
ciently, and equitably - although, as we have stressed, such 
accountability is far easier to demand than to deliver. If the 
system is to be as accountable as possible, there must be far 
more clarity about its purposes or objectives. We believe that 
considerably more information should be made available, 
and it should be collected regularly and presented in more 
consistent, understandable, and meaningful ways. This will 
enable members of the public to look at it and arrive at their 
own conclusions about how well the system is operating. 

The first step in the process, as we emphasize in Chapter 
17, is that the provincial government, through the Ministry 
of Education and Training, establish clear directions and 
expectations for the education system, in terms of student 
learning, regular assessment, parental involvement, and other 
important objectives. 

The term "indicators" is used to refer to quantitative and 
qualitative data that describe various features of the school 
system. The obvious problem is that from an education 
system as a vast as Ontario's, one can derive endless statistics, 
and there can be indicators that tell us something about liter- 
ally any part of the system - and they may refer to the 
student, school, board, or provincial level. Decisions about 
appropriate indicators of a successful system will determine 
what kind of information should be collected. 

Student achievement is the most obvious indicator of the 
effectiveness of an education system. If students are doing 
well on measures of learning in relation to standards estab- 
lished locally and those established province-wide or beyond, 
schools and school systems are usually considered to be 

doing their jobs satisfactorily and providing value for 
taxpayers' dollars. 

At the moment, there is a wide-spread sense that schools 
are not doing the jobs well enough, based on both anecdotal 
evidence and media reports of certain provincial, national, 
and international tests. 

Questions of acceptable standards and their levels, became 
a particularly contentious issue in Ontario in 1994, when the 
results of Grade 1 2 writing reviews and Grade 9 reading and 
writing tests were released. Members of the public seem to be 
concerned that expectations of students are too low, and that 
acceptable standards are not high enough. 

While this report consistently stresses the need for more 
challenging and rigorous learning for our children, we stress 
that an in-depth sense of student achievement is far more 
difficult to assess than the media and the public often seem 
to think. 

Moreover, student achievement, crucial as it is, is not 
the only indicator of the quality of the system, and it is not 
the only outcome for which the system is accountable to 
the public. 

Other indicators of educational success and quality 
include such factors as the proportion of students who enter 
college or university, or who enter employment readily; the 
relative representation of minority students across all 
achievement levels and across different programs; per-pupil 
costs; the drop-out rate (the percentage of students who 
leave school before graduating); attendance rates of both 
staff and students; the rate at which students progress 
through the school system. A different type of indicator, but 
an important one, relates to the way in which teacher and 

Vol. IV Making It Happen The Accountability of the System 


ntario legisl£ition, regulations 
and policies mandate early and 
on-going identification [and] support 
for children with special neods ... The 
current reality in Ontario however is 
that ttiere is no consistency among 
boards in identification and provision 
of services for students with special 
needs because ttie Ministry of 
Ethiea ttoii does not ensure that 
bo a rd * are held accountable for these 
legal requirements ... There Is no 
•ccountabllity mechanism in place, 
since the Ministry of Education and 
TraMi^ is reluctant to withhold 
grants or revoke supervisory 
officers' documents." 

L«amin( 0«»at>)lrttes Association of Ontario 

administrator performance is evaluated, and how the results 
of evaluation are used to improve performance of individu- 
als and of the system as a whole. 

There are also indicators that are not (or not directly) 
learning related, but also suggest the degree to which a 
school or system is well managed. These include cost effi- 
ciencies, implementation of fair employment practices, and 
the achievement of acceptable standards of workplace and 
school safety. 

Finally, we believe that the level of satisfaction expressed 
by students and parents - and, to some extent, by the 
community - is also a useful indicator. To what extent do 
these groups feel their concerns arc addressed, their ideas 
welcomed, their needs met? 

Policy makers and administrators can. through regular 
and systematic sampling of student, parent, and public opin- 
ion, be alerted to potential problems that need to addressed. 
Let us be clear: we are by no means suggesting that educa- 
tion policy and practice should be determined by public 
opinion. It should not. However, if an education system is to 
serve its public well, the system should monitor the concerns 
and rra«.tiiins of those it serves. 

Assessment agency 

L mil rcv-cruly, Ontario, m comparison with other jurisdic- 
tions, did not place a high priority on monitoring, assessing, 
and reporting various aspects ol school system performance, 
at cither the provincial or local level. I he problem is that, 
without regular monitoring, teachers and principals do not 
receive the kind of feedback that allows them to their 
instruction and curriculum planning. Nor does the public 
have the information on which to base reasonable judgments 
of schools. Assessments, therefore, must not only be carried 
out, but must be widely reported in understandable ways. 

Although most people, including educators, are coming 
to agree that more monitoring of system performance is 
justified, there is little consensus on just how this should be 
done. There is particular disagreement on whether an inde- 
pendent agcnc-y should evaluate and report on the system, or 
whether the responsibility should be left with the Ministry: 
there is some concern about the capacity of the Ministry to 
carry out monitoring, or to be as open and objective as 

In other countries, including the United States and 
Australia, there are models of agencies that do large-scale 
assessments; they usually operate nationally rather than just 
at the state level. They tend to be quite large institutions that 
develop tests, administer them, and report on the results. 
Such large-scale assessments are extremely expensive to 
develop and administer, and are not easy to change when 
there are major shifts in curriculum policies. 

While throughout our work we have been reluctant to 
recommend the creation of new bureaucratic structures, 
largely for the reasons just cited, we found, in the end, that 
the argument for an outside agency is persuasive. 

Education policy is .set by governments and, therefore, is 
by definition political. But in matters of a.sscssment, public 
credibility is probably the overriding need. Therefore, an 
arm's-length agency, removed from the political arena, seems 
to be the inevitable solution. 

We see such an agency as consisting of a small number of 
experts in education and assessment with overall responsi- 
bility for evaluating and reporting on the success of 
Ontario's education policies. As a mark of its independence, 
this Office of Learning Assessment and Accountability, as we 
have chosen to call it, would report directly to the legisla- 
ture, perhaps through the Standing Committee on Social 

tar ttw LoM of LMmmg 



The first job of the new office would be responsibUity for 
the Grade 3 language and mathematics test and for the 
Grade 1 1 literacy test, as recommended in Chapter 1 1 for all 
students. To keep the office small and flexible, it would not 
itself develop and administer these tests, but would contract 
with assessment experts, preferably, but not exclusively, from 

The contract process would involve issuing a public call 
for proposals, to be advertised widely. We would hope that 
the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) and 
other Ontario graduate schools of education would respond 
enthusiastically to the call for proposals, as would measure- 
ment experts in departments of psychology or elsewhere. 

Recommendation 163 (Cf. Chapter 11, Rec. 51) 
*We recommend that the government establish an Office of 
Learning Assessment and Accountability, reporting to the 
Legislature. Its first responsibility would be the 
Grades 3 and 11 system-wide, every-student assessments. 

The Ministry and school boards have a variety of infor- 
mation-gathering mechanisms that can and should be 
adapted to give additional information on such things as 
drop-out rates and breakdown of data by region, language, 
gender, race, etc. There is no need for other agencies to 
develop new systems, but it is important that the existing 
systems be improved to ensure that necessary information is 
available for the Office of Learning Assessment and Account- 
ability and for the Ministry, so they can provide accurate 
information to the public on the effectiveness of the entire 
education system. 

Accountability and consistency 

What is critical, and what will require some changes in data- 
gathering and reporting procedures, is that the data be 
comparable from board to board and from year to year. One 
of the problems in assessing today's education system is a 
lack of good past data for useful comparisons. Information 
on drop-out rates, for instance, has been difficult to get and 
to interpret, but the Ministry, in collaboration with several 
school boards, is currently developing common systems for 
tracking and reporting them. 

Over a number of years, many school boards have devel- 
oped their own systems for keeping track of information 
about programs, staff, students, and finances, as well as 

n recent years the provincial auditor 
has also devoted some attention to 
school boards. In these audits the 
focus has been not only on fiscal 
probity, but has also addressed "value 
for money." As Directors of Education 
we strongly support increasing use of 
'value^'oMnoney' analysis and 

Council of Directors of Education 

about student achievement. Not surprisingly, they are reluc- 
tant to abandon their investments by adopting new and 
different systems, even though these might be more useful 
for province-wide use. 

However, we note that adoption of the Grades 3 and 1 1 
tests will require all school boards to use a single provincial 
identification number for students; once that is done, devel- 
oping a single database for all students in the province will 
be much easier. The Ministry established a Student Informa- 
tion System in 1986, which could be the basis of an expand- 
ed system for tracking students; it would be important to 
maintain data after students leave the system, in order to do 
longitudinal research when that is appropriate. 

We have already mentioned other existing mechanisms 
for accountability, such as the work of the provincial audi- 
tor, and other provincial reviews and audits. We expect these 
mechanisms to continue to be used, but see a need for clear- 
er guidelines, as well as for greater public scrutiny and 

We firmly believe that the best way to ensure accountabil- 
ity is to make public the relevant information about the 
characteristics and performance of the school system, and to 
publish it in a way that is readily understood and interpreted 
by people. Only then can members of the public decide 
whether their schools are providing the kind and level of 
service they want. 

In recent years, the Ministry has not always closely moni- 
tored boards' implementation of its policies and related 
programs. Monitoring is sometimes perfunctory: boards are 
required to file documents showing they have the required 
policy statement or plan (on special education, for example. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Ttie Accountability of the System 

or on anti-racism), but not whether that policy or plan is, in 
fact, being implemented in the schools - or, even more 
important, whether the policy is having the intended effect. 

We believe that provincial policies should be developed in 
terms of broad directions, and should be accompanied by a 
clear description of how they are to be assessed. Then, the 
most important monitoring is of the intended results, or 
outcomes, leaving it up to school boards to decide the details 
of how they are to be achieved. 

The difficult challenge is to balance central direction- 
setting and monitoring with local flexibility about the ways 
desired results are achieved, linking "top-down" and 
"bottom-up" strategies for reform. Because the Ministry sets 
the province's direction for schooling, it must articulate its 
sense of a shared purpose, and set clear expectations. 
Schools and school boards would then be responsible for 
deciding, within the broad guidelines, and based on their 
knowledge of the local context, how they will work to meet 
those expectations. 

Although government monitoring - evaluating whether 
local schools are doing what they are supposed to be doing - 
is quite rightly seen as a key element of accountability, 
monitormg is expensive. Therefore, the information gath- 
ered must be available to, and actually used by, schools and 
school boards. 

We are convinced that, in the long run, the most critical 
accountability mechanism is full public disclosure of all rele- 
vant data concerning school and school system performance, 
delivered in a meaningful form. It has been suggested to us 
that the .Ministry ought to apply sanctions to boards that 
niher do not comply with Mini.slry regulations, or whose 

performance is not satisfactory; withholding funds is the 
most frequently suggested sanction. This is difficult for the 
Ministry to implement, because students and parents will 

We believe, however, that if data are made available to the 
public in ways that are understandable, consistent, and 
comparable, parents and the community will put pressure 
on schools and school boards tt) improve weak areas and 
close gaps. It they do not, trustees will not be re-elected, and 
it will be difficult for principals and supervisory officers to 
maintain any credibility. In a democracy, this is the ultimate 
form of accountability. In other words, we believe that if 
people have the information they need, they will be able to 
judge and act appropriately. 


\Nc also believe that the information on the system indica- 
tors and on student assessment should be readily accessible, 
not only to the public, but, wherever possible, to the press. 

The Minister of Education and Training and individual 
school boards prepare annual public reports, although we 
doubt that most Ontarians have ever read one. We think 
these reports could be considerably more valuable than is 
now the case. 

In the first place, clear content guidelines for both the 
Minister's and school boards' annual reports, with a list of 
agreed-on indicators to be addressed, would make it easier 
for the public to understand and make judgments about the 
information and about the system. Although it is not diffi- 
cult to agree on at least some indicators of a successful 
education system, achieving consensus on comparable ways 
of gathering, summarizing, and reporting such information 
is much more difficult. Various measures or indicators can 
be seen as snapshots, providing diagnostic information 
about many aspects of the school system. No one measure 
can give a full picture: several have to be examined together 
if members of the public are to make reasonable judgments. 
Questions of how indicators arc to be developed and how 
the indices arc to be used must be addressed by the users, 
and by the technical experts who develop the statistical 

I'hc Office of Ixrarning Assessment and Acc«>untability 
should begin its work on this task by bringing together 
education stakeholders, including boards, federations, and 

For tht Lam o( LMmmg 



e ask ... that affordability, 
financial accountability, and 

faculties of education, as well as parent, student, and 
community groups. Working with the other groups, it would 
develop the lists of indicators and, with input from educa- 
tion stakeholders, decide how the indicators should be 
defined, calculated, and reported. 

Recommendation 164 

*We recommend that the Office of Learning Assessment and 

Accountability aiso be responsible for developing indicators of 

system performance, to be used at the board and provincial 


Indicators for school board reports would include report- 
ing on the results of large-scale and other assessments and 
on audits specific to the board. Reports would also include 
an indication of what actions have been taken to address 
problems revealed by the assessment, and what further 
actions are planned. 

The indicators used by the Ministry should also include 
reporting on assessments and follow-up; it would be expect- 
ed that board and Ministry reports would provide summary 
statistics decided on by the Office of Learning Assessment 
and Accountability. 

In our view, the Quebec Ministry of Education produces 
reports that may be useful as an example for Ontario. 
Quebec's Educational Indicators for the Elementary and 
Secondary Levels is analogous to Ontario's Key Statistics, but 
is more complete. It not only tracks indicators over time, but 
also comments on the most important points arising from 
an analysis of the indicators, all presented in an attractive 
and easy-to-comprehend 80-page format.^ 

Recommendation 165 

*We recommend that the Office of Learning Assessment and 
Accountability, working with education stakeholders, also 
establish guidelines for the content of annual reports 
prepared by school boards and by the Minister of Education 
and Training. Further, we recommend that: 

a) these reports be published and be freely and widely 
available in schools and community locations; 

b) the Ministry of Education and Training ensure that all 
school boards be informed of guidelines for the reports, 
and that they follow those guidelines. 

good man^ement become top 
priorities for all school boards. 

Taxpayers' Coalition Niagara 

Moreover, we believe that boards and the Ministry must 
pay more attention to providing useful information to the 
public on an on-going basis; they should ensure that infor- 
mation on policies and their intended outcomes is available, 
as are the results of any evaluations. Some of this will be 
published in annual reports, but other data, such as descrip- 
tions of policies and their outcomes, will have to be provid- 
ed in a more timely way; as well, there will be occasions 
when it is useful to have more detail than would be appro- 
priate for an annual report. 

In order to assure the public that all information and 
reports are accurate, that interpretations are defensible, and 
that boards and the Ministry are held accountable for learn- 
ing, the Office of Learning Assessment and Accountability 
should do spot checks of a sample of board reports, and 
monitor board and Ministry assessments of outcomes. The 
office should report publicly on these activities, and could 
do so, informally, by having the head of the office meet 
regularly with the Committee of the Legislature, and, 
formally, through an annual report. We stress that, to keep 
costs down, the review should be done on a sample of 
reports and assessments. 

We would not want any structure we recommend to exist 
beyond its actual usefulness. It is not impossible that the 
Office of Learning Assessment and Accountability might one 
day prove redundant, and it is entirely plausible that its 
responsibilities might need to be revised. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen The Accountability of the System 



to Mff^OfV^ 

OHIO* of LMniing UgMlalur* 





Studenu ] 
Parent* i 


Accountable for What 

provmce-wrtde Grades 3 and 11 

student assessment 

cnonitonng tMard reports on 

implementation arMl results of 

board and provincial policies 

monitonng Min<stry of Education 

arvl Training reports on 

impiementation arKl results of 

provlrtcial policies 

develop indicators 

review tx>ards' dissemination of 

their reports 

professional star>dards for 


accreditation of adequate 

professional preparation ar>d 

development programs 

professional standards 

for teaching 

Recommendation 166 

•We therefore recommend that the work and mandate of the 
Office of Learning Assessment and Accountability be 
reviewed in five years. 

In Chapter 12, wc recommended the formation of an 
Ontario College of Teachers, as a professional self-governing 
body responsible for setting professional teaching standards 
in the province: thus, it would play a critical role in the 
provincial accountability framework. The college would be 
responsible for ensuring that high professional standards of 
teaching, and of teacher preparation programs, meet the 
needs of Ontario schools. Its duties would also include 
setting and monitoring the framework governing renewal of 
teacher certification every five years. 

Because we have now recommended the addition of two 
new bodies to the education system, it might be helpful to 
summarize briefly what they would do and to whom they 
are accountable, as shown in Table I . 

Finally, we have made recommendations concerning the 
education responsibilities of ministries other than that of 
Education and Training, and of other agencies of govern- 
ment. Should the government assign such duties to other 
government bodies, there would have to be an accountability 
ntechanism for those agencies. 


I mil ri-Lintly, issues of accountability did not receive as 
much attention in Ontario education as many taxpayers and 
members of the public wt>uld have wished. However, there 
have been many changes in the past few years. For instance, 
public reporting of the provincial Grade 9 reading and writ- 
ing tests, released in the fall of 1994, not only provided 
board data, but school results as well. 

VVc are of two minds about this development. On the one 
hand, we, of course, applaud the move to share all useful 
information about students' performance with the public. 
On the other, we remain seriously concerned that informa- 
tion without perspective, context, or proper interpretation 
can, in fact, do more harm than good. As we point out in 
Chapter 1 1, serious tests are not horse races and should not 
be reported or judged as such. 

To appraise an entire education system on the basis of 
one test or a single set of tests, and to ignore the many 
factors that determine whether one school's students do 
better than another's, is an imperfect exercise at best. 

We want the system to be open and accountable, and our 
recommendations would go far to achieving that goal. But 
we also want that information to be meaningful and rele- 
vant. In that context, we would hope the media will present 
data in a proper context in a way that enhances, rather than 
distorts, public understanding. 

Once good information becomes available, the onus will 
be on the public and on parents to it to make reasonable 
judgments, and to find out how schools plan to improve 
programs on the basis of current results. 

The onus will also be on educators to work together to 
continue to improve their programs on the basis of the 
feedback represented by such results. After all, the point of 
developing better accountability mechanisms is to help 
schools to be more effective. 

For the Um« of LMmmg 


Lorna M. Earl, "Accountability and Assessment: Ensuring 
Quality in Ontario Schools." Paper prepared for the Ontario 
Royal Commission on Learning, 1994. 

Ontario, Office of the Provincial Auditor, 1993 Annual 
Report: Accounting, Accountability, Value for Money (Toronto, 
1993), p. 66. 

Quebec, Ministry of Education, Education Indicators for the 
Elementary and Secondary Levels (Quebec City, 1993). 

Vol. IV Making It Happen The Accountability of tt)e System 

I . 

'< *>v ^"^;^< 

the Reforms 

Implementation has been referred to as the Great 
Barrier Reef - the point at which many a good 
curriculum sinks without a trace. 

David Pratt, Curriculum Planning, 1994 

Reform asks everyone in the education system to 
change their roles and responsibilities, not just 
teachers and students. 

Jane David, "Systemic Reform: 
^ Creating the Capacity for Change," 1993 

This has been a Commission with few illusions - or at 
least it has tried to be. From the first, we attempted to 
be sensitive to the atmosphere in which we were 
operating, to the constraints we knew we were facing, and to 
the realities of the outside world. 

We began our work in a public mood bordering on cyni- 
cism. "Another commission? Just what Ontario needs!" 
Doubtless, that was the way some people greeted the 
announcement of the Commission's creation. After all, had 
there not already been a dozen, a hundred, reports on 
Ontario education? Was this yet another device to stall? 
Would the province's education system ever be reformed? 

We looked at what had happened to all the various 
reports that had been produced - whether their recommen- 
dations had been implemented fully, how many had been 
implemented half-heartedly, how many ignored completely, 
and why. We learned that governments have introduced an 
almost endless series of changes into Ontario schools over 
the past several decades; some of them emanated directly 
from studies and reports while others were so changed from 
the original conception as to be hardly recognizable. We felt 
it was important to understand the past before we made 
more recommendations for the future. 

Throughout the writing of this report, we tried to pay 
attention to the lessons learned about the process of change 
- that is, how change happens in a massive, complex system 
such as Ontario's. The answer is only with supreme difficul- 
ty. The change process, perhaps not surprisingly, has proved 
to be almost as complex as the institution itself 

Many people would be bitterly disappointed if this report 
merely collected dust on a shelf; therefore, it may seem para- 
doxical for us to produce a scenario for a transformed 

school system that - as we are the first to acknowledge - has 
an almost Utopian cast to it. But it is based on quite realistic 
ideas, solid research, and many success stories. Idealistic? 
Maybe. But what a target to aim at! What a vision to help 
guide the next steps! 

As we thought about the process of implementing the 
reforms advocated here, we tried to analyze, with some care, 
the roles of the various stakeholders in the world of educa- 
tion; the way each has been, and continues to be, capable of 
facilitating or resisting change; and the involvement each has 
had in recent education reforms. This chapter makes sugges- 
tions, for both the immediate and longer term, for various 
stakeholder groups as they begin the process of making 
changes needed to improve schools for all Ontarians. 

It is, in fact, the public, as well as all the other stakehold- 
ers, who will decide if our recommendations should be 
pursued. Teachers, parents, students, administrators, citizens 
- all must ask themselves if they are prepared to make the 
commitment, to take the calculated risk of moving ahead 
with these reforms. As well, teachers' federations are a vital 
group in this process. We recognize they will have concerns 
about some recommendations, but hope they acknowledge 
the way we value teachers, and the increased responsibility 
and recognition we give them as a crucial part of the educa- 
tion system. 

All the groups have a vital role to play, not only in asking 
school boards and the Ministry to act, but in acting them- 
selves. Among others, students must make their views 
known to schools; parents must insist on a stronger role in 
their children's schooling; and teachers must take a greater 
degree of collective responsibility for student learning, for 
their own professional growth, and for the profession. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Implementing the Reforms 

Wc b«lirvc thdt developing an implcmcnution strategy 
wu inherent in our responsibility as a Cominkssion, 
.1" ' ''Ui our task would not be complete without 
> .. . . '^tlon> on making our vision of schools a reality. 

Wc arc also well aware that this report is being published 
close to the time of a provincial election. We would be 
disappointed if it becatne a political football. It deserves 
better, as do the Ontario students, teachers, and parents it is 
meant to serve, and the thousands of people who took the 
trouble to share their views with us. Wc challenge all three 
parties to put the needs of students first, and to commit 
themselves to action on the major recommendations in this 

We believe that developing an implementation strategy 
was inherent in our responsibility as a Commission, and that 
our task would not be complete without suggestions on 
making our vision of schools a reality. 

Previous reports 

Our review of government reports on Ontario education 
over the last 25 years, since Hall- Dennis in 1968, shows that 
many recommendations were not actually implemented. It 
also shows that many of our recommendations arc not new; 
many have appeared in earlier reports, and are still not policy. 

Hall- Dennis, for instance, recommended that teachers be 
moved "from the fringe to the heart of professional decision- 
making' and proposed that self-government be granted to 
teachers through a body to be called the C^ollcgc of Teachers 
of Ontario, which would have the power to license and disci- 
pline iu memben. 

In his 1988 report f)n preventing drop-outs, Cicorgc 
Radwanski strongly recommended universal Early (.hild- 
hood Education programs as fundamental to getting chil- 
dren off to a good sun in school. 

In neither case was the recommendation adopted or 
implemented; when Bette Stephenson was Minister of 
Education she introduced a propt>sal for a ('ollegc of Teach- 
ers, but ran into resistance from the teachers' federations. 
Proposals for expansion of Elarly Clhildhood Education 
programs have foundered on issues of cost, and on political 
and philosophical grounds. 

However, a simple tally of the number of recommenda- 
tions adopted or ignored might give a distorted picture of 
the impact of inquiries and reports. It could be argued that, 
even when recommendations arc not adopted as their 
authors intended, such reports have a considerable effect on 
schools and on educational policy. Ideas that may be slightly 
ahead of their time, for instance, enter the discourse about 
education, and may shift beliefs and attitudes; they may be 
adopted later, when there is a more receptive climate. 

Even when government adopts policies and expects 
school boards and scht)ols to implement changes, the 
process may not go as smoothly as anticipated, (^nc policy 
analyst wryly notes that "teachers have the ultimate control 
over policy when they enter the classroom to teach."' For 
example, the Ministry's curriculum documents, designed to 
provide more focus and substance to elementary-school 
science programs, had less impact on school programs than 
expected because teachers did not change their programs to 
the extent policy makers and curriculum developers intend- 
ed. Wc want to avoid a similar fate for our recommendations. 

The change process: 

How educational change happens 

bducaliona! change ii technically Mmplf and MKially complex." 

In the 1960s, in the midst of affluence, money was not an 
issue, and many people thought educational change was a 
simple matter of developing new programs, curricula, 
materials, or teaching methods, and then disseminating 
them (often in a form described as "teacher proof") to 
teachers and schools, who were expected to implement the 
new ways of doing things. The results of this approach were 
quite disappointing: teachers rarely changed their practices. 
Since then, educators have learned much about the adop- 
tion and implementation of educational policy, and ab«»ut 
the process of educational change in general. In the words of 
Professor Milbrcy McLaughlin of .Stanford University, 

Forttw luM«o(ljMming 

J-OfeU Whete 

Perhaps the overarching, obvious conclusion running through 
empirical research on policy implementation is that it is incredibly 
hard to make something happen, most especially across layers of 
government and institutions.* 

Whether educational change actually occurs in practice 
depends largely on will and skill ^ the extent to which people 
believe change is desirable, and the extent to which they have 
the necessary skill and knowledge to make the changes. 
Although neither is easily or directly controlled by policy 
makers, the issue of will or motivation is particularly diffi- 
cult. Teachers, for instance, may be interested in improve- 
ment, but if changes are unilaterally imposed by policy 
makers and administrators, or if proposed changes do not 
make sense to them, it is hardly surprising if they resist. 

Studies of successful and unsuccessful educational-change 
projects have led to some remarkably consistent findings 
about what factors make the difference. They amount to 
creating an atmosphere and conditions of pressure and 
support necessary to move a complex system forward. The 
critical factors seem to be: 

• combining "top-down" and "bottom-up" strategies 

• developing capacity and skill through training and 

• leadership at all levels that clarifies priorities and 
encourages others 

• teacher participation and commitment 

• a significant but manageable scope of change 

• open sharing of information 

• monitoring progress and solving problems. 

Our suggestions for implementing change take these into 
account. Although it is important to create a mandate for 
change and to monitor progress, policy makers who rely 
solely on these two approaches will be disappointed if they 
hope for significantly improved schools. The Ministry must 
communicate the rationale for change and the direction in 
which schools are expected to move. It must support school 
boards, schools, and educators in developing a clear under- 
standing of the new goals, and in building the capacity to 
achieve these goals in each community.' 

change actually occurs in 
practice depends largely 
on will and skill. 

What about the Commission? What do we hope 
our worit will achieve? 

Our recommendations are focused on four key changes that, 
we believe, will generate further improvements. The four 
strategies we are suggesting will foster both the will and skill. 

Based on the evidence available, we believe the Ontario 
school system does some things very well, and many things 
fairly well. But our analysis suggests that most students 
could learn more, and learn better. We have pointed to the 
need for a more focused and more engaging education 
system to take us into the 21st century. We have noted the 
demographic shifts, the changing social fabric, new knowl- 
edge about learning and teaching, and the importance of 
new technologies. We have suggested that schools need to 
change to address these new conditions. 

We believe that it is possible to get beyond "fairly well," to 
a system in which many more students graduate, and gradu- 
ate with more knowledge and with better skills as thinkers 
and as doers. In such a system, students would be better 
prepared for work, for post-secondary education, and for 
lives as fully contributing members of their communities. 
Although education reform is not a substitute for societal 
reform, we argue that schools can do a great deal to improve 
the lives of their students, and we believe our recommenda- 
tions can help. 

People in and outside the system expressed concern about 
lack of focus, teacher overload, student learning, and stan- 
dards. We believe our statement of purpose is the founda- 
tion of a system characterized by focus, quality, openness, 
fairness, and efficiency. In opting for change, we are 
concerned not only about specific recommendations, but 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Implementing the Reforms 


\ "S 

'\Sniali changes can result 

in large changes as the 

process develops the 

critical mass and 

momentum needed to 

produce a significant 


Gareui Morgan. Imagmmiion. 1993 


• W'c argue throughout for an equitable system: in funding, 
in opportunity, in recognition, and in participation, with the 
expectation of greater achievement for all students. 

• We urge a new and more appropriate balance of power 
and influence, with a system that is open to new ideas and to 
participation by parents and the community. 

• We want to ensure that there is systematic feedback and 
monitoring, at both the classroom and system levels, so that 
plans and attempts at improvement are continually re- 
focused and adjusted in response to problems and successes. 

even more about the overall vision of schooling we arc 

To avoid piecemeal solutions to isolated problems, we 
have tried to identify key directions, based on our vision of 
what schools could be, and on an understanding of how 
change actually takes place in schools. Students have 
changed, teachers have changed, families have changed, tech- 
nology has changed, society has changed. How can schools 
not change? They must now be redesigned for the new era. 
This task begins with our report. 

Before we move to our key recommendations and the 
intervention strategies for moving the system in the direc- 
tion of reform, we believe it is necessary to describe our 
approach to reform. It can be summarized as follows: 

• We articulate the purposes of schools, and situate them in 
relation to other social institutions; doing so means focusing 
primarily on learning and teaching, with the development of 
intellectual competence being the top priority. By "intellec- 
tual competence' we mean more than traditional academic 
skills, and we include imagining, creating, synthesizing, 
comparmg, and analyzing. Schools, like families and other 
institutions, have other purposes as well: teaching values, 
fostering social development, and preparing young people 
for employment and participation in democratic life. We 
argue, however, that the community must assume greater 
responsibility for important non-academic needs. 

• We take account of research and exemplary practice relat- 
ing to learning, teaching, and human development. 

• We pay attention to the culture of schools, and to creating 
and tuilaining the conditions that will maximize student 

Engines or lever* for change 

1 hrou^jhout tills report. \vc li.ui.- made recommendations 
related to the most vital areas of education reform. These 
must be 

• a more challenging curriculum and improved 
student learning 

• improved assessment and accountability 

• power, authority, and equity. 

These recommendations - there are more than one 
hundred - cover bt)th general and specific issues, involve 
both large and small changes, and suggest new directions, 
but also reinforce initiatives already under way. We have 
discussed fully many of the issues facing schools, and have 
concluded with major recommendations and some specific 
suggestions. The recommendations focus on our vision of 
the school system and on major strategies designed to put 
the vision into practice. 

The education system, like other large institutions, is slow 
to change and difficult to redirect. This quality is a strength, 
in that it provides stability, and a problem, in that it discour- 
ages renewal. We need ways of overcoming the inertia of a 
large and often cumbersome system to stimulate and sustain 
major change. 

We identified critical intervention points in the system, 
with the idea of initiating change within these areas. These 
changes can act as engines or levers, moving the svstem in 
the direction of reform. The engines are: 

• early childhood education 

• teacher professionalization and development 

• information technology 

• community-education alliances. 

For th« Um* of l^ammt 

Early childhood education 

Our first intervention strategy involves an earlier and more 
comprehensive start to formal education. By providing 
better learning opportunities for very young children - at 
three years instead of four, and full time instead of half time 
- schools can positively affect what comes after. An earlier 
and stronger start leads to better preparation for basic litera- 
cy and numeracy, and the prospect of building on that head 
start throughout the school years. 

The responsibilities parents and schools have for children 
of three and four are very much intertwined; both influence 
affective and intellectual development. Just as schools or 
other institutions also have an important nurturing role, 
parents also teach. This interconnectedness opens the 
possibilities of low-cost but highly effective community 
interventions, providing "parent development," which will 
significantly pay off in children's later intellectual develop- 
ment. (See Volume II, Chapter 7.) 

Community-education alliances 

We are recommending stronger links between schools and 
other sectors of government and the community in order to 
strengthen and support schools, while ensuring that other 
important social and personal needs are met. If we are to 
meet changing societal needs and support learning, new 
ways must be found to strengthen those who want to raise 
healthy, competent children. ^ 

The recommendations related to community partner- 
ships are intended to free up teachers so they can better 
focus on their students' learning, helping students to learn 
the social skills they require to work in a group, and to 
complete the school's core curriculum. The certified teacher 
who has chosen and been trained to help students learn to 
read and write, or to learn academic subjects, should not be 
expected to have the public-health worker's expertise in drug 
or sex education, or the trained social worker's ability to lead 
students through a curriculum in decision-making or 
conflict resolution. 

Moreover, it makes good sense for such community 
resources to be more readily available to schools. When 
health- and community-service personnel provide recre- 
ation, health, and social-development programs, or practis- 
ing artists offer arts programs, teachers will have more time 
in the day and week to spend on activities essential to 
improving learning for students: planning and evaluating 

the program they deliver individually and collaboratively, 
working together to improve their assessment skills, and 
connecting more often and more effectively with parents. 

Such community links can also open up the school, and 
situate it at the nexus of a local community and its various 
resources, all of which exist to support the people who live 
there - in this case, the young people. 

The role of principal will also change as the school 
becomes more integrally linked to the community beyond its 
walls. School/community councils have a vital contribution 
to make in helping to draw in and co-ordinate community 
partners. The necessary interdependence between teaching 
professionals and other people is in itself a lesson for youth 
about how society works. The fact that some members of the 
community work as volunteers is another valuable lesson 
about the way society operates, and what we should expect 
of ourselves and of others. 

If community partnerships are to work, the way depart- 
ments of government work - largely in isolation and some- 
times in competition - must change. Unless government 
ensures that responsibility is shared centrally and locally, by 
the appropriate sectors, the presence of community 
members in the school will, in itself, create significant 
demands on educators' time. Various government depart- 
ments must focus more on co-ordination and collaboration 
across the usual bureaucratic boundaries, bringing together 
policies to support the healthy development of children. 
Such policies will reward collaborative action at the local 
level, making it easier for different groups to work together. 
Funding provisions will also have to be changed, to ensure 
that co-operation, rather than isolation, is the norm. The 
government, for instance, might decide to fund only those 

Vol, IV Making It Happen Implementing the Reforms 

proposals in which various sectors arc working together on a 
project. (Ser \.>liinu- IV, Chapter 14.) 

Teacher development and professionalizalion 

ProlcssiDnai responsibility, autoni)my, and accuuntability are 
essential to the teaching force we envision. We recommend 
that teachers have more collective responsibility for their 
profession, with control being shifted from the Ministry to 
an independent College of Teachers. It would have authority 
for teaching standards, as well as for accreditation of 
teacher-education programs, and for setting standards of 
professional development. This shift would recognize that 
teaching should be acknowledged as a profession whose 
members are capable of setting their own standards of 
professional practice. It is essential to evaluate the perfor- 
mance of all educators, and we stress the need to follow 
through effectively when performance is unsatisfactory. 

Teacher development, both before and after certification, 
is an essential vehicle for implementing the other proposed 
reforms. No school system is better than its teachers, and no 
amount of legislation and regulation of policy and practice 
will affect student learning unless there are well-educated 
and dedicated teachers who are clear about their goals. 

If reforms are to be implemented, teachers must under- 
stand what is expected, believe that the reforms make sense, 
and know how to get started. Schools must be places where 
teachers and principals work together to set priorities, agree 
on plans for action, and keep track of progress. Because they 
must do all this while continuing to operate the school, there 
will be a tension between the need for stability and for 
continuity on the one hand, and for change on the other. 

Although we recommend lengthening and strengthening 
the teacher preparation program, no such program would be 
enough to educate teachers for a career in which there is 
always more to be learned, honed, and practised than can be 
squeezed into a one- or two-year program, teachers must 
continue to learn throughout their careers, and one of the 
best possible venues is the school itself. Research shows that 
the development of teacher collaboration that focuses on 
continuously improving teaching and monitoring results is 
the most effective route to success. Such "collaborative 
cultures" embrace the involvement of students and parents 
in the education enterprise. This results in a co-ordinated 
program that is effective and that pays attention to student 
progress. Schools must be learning organizations for teach- 
ers if they are to be effective learning organizations for 
students. (Sec Volume III.) 

Information technology 

{k)mputcr hardware and software combine to become a 
powerful new tool for learning, making the road smoother 
and faster for students and teachers. It is genuinely motivat- 
ing for students - a fa.scinating way to learn more, and to 
learn quite different things, it makes routine tasks for 
students and teachers more pleasant and efficient, but more 
significantly, it opens up the world to learning in a way that 
is brand new, and that can set a pattern for lifelong learning. 

Instruction can be more easily tailored to student needs, 
enabling students to move at their own pace. Of even greater 
importance is thai through electronic technology students 
can move beyond dependence on their teachers for access to 
knowledge: through communications software and access to 
data banks, CD-ROMs, and libraries, they can become more 
independent learners. Moreover, information technology 
offers the potential for developing problem-solving and 
reasoning abilities. With that new technology, teachers 
become more, not less, important as they work with students 
to accommodate and integrate complex knowledge bases. 

In short, information technology is becoming essential to 
teachers' continuing ability to do their jobs well, and to 
students' future success in a world where computer literacy 
is becoming as universal and essential as print literacy. 

Throughout our report we talk about the fundamental 
purpose of schools as building literacy - going bcy<'nd basic 
literacy to the higher literacies thai are expected of the well 

Forlh* toM of iMmtnK 

educated. People can not remain well educated if they stop 
reading, or stop talking with others who can challenge their 
thinking. Increasingly, reading and discussion happen on- 
screen. The access that the computer brings to knowledge, 
through print, sound, and graphics, as well as through 
discussion, cannot be gained in any other way. 

Computerized networks of professionals, such as the 
Ontario Teachers' Federation network "The Culture of 
Change," have already shown themselves to be more power- 
ful than many conventional means of building and updating 
teacher knowledge and professionalism, and are likely to 
have the same impact on other kinds of work. Increasingly, 
students, on their own, are acquiring knowledge of what 
computers can do. At school that familiarity must be made 
universal, so that computers facilitate equal opportunities 
and equal outcomes in a learning environment, and so that 
their potential as educational tools for life, not only as enter- 
tainment, is realized. 

Computers are used as working tools by writers, mathe- 
maticians, scientists, artists and designers. They can be used 
in schools to become libraries and learning circles, tied into 
global networks dedicated to building and sharing knowl- 
edge and understanding. (See Volume IV, Chapter 13.) 

By itself, each of these four engines offers significant 
benefits; combined, their power increases substantially. 
While all our engines for change focus on the school and the 
classroom, they also reach out to change other systems: the 
teacher-education and child-care systems, as well as govern- 
ment policies and programs designed to support children 
and families. Operating schools, like educating the youth 
within them, becomes more of a community issue, with 
joint responsibility. Meeting the needs of young people 
effectively and efficiently will mean some redefinition of 
who works in schools, with whom, and with what kind of 
funding, support, and co-ordination. That is why some of 
our recommendations go beyond the education system per 
se, and involve government and community players. 

What actions are needed? 

All stakeholders must take action and responsibility for 
implementation of our recommendations, or else change 
will not take place. Politicians, we know, are unlikely to 
move in bold new directions unless they perceive that there 
is a public demand for them to do so. Therefore, the first 
important step in implementation is for parents, students. 

All stakeholders must take action and responsibility for 
implementation of our recommendations, or else 
change will not take place. 

Time lines are important, but implementation of 
complex reforms means more than working through 
the list of tasks and actions to be taken. Because the 
unexpected always happens, schedules will have to be 
adjusted and new issues will have to be considered. 

taxpayers, and other groups and associations to express their 
support for ideas in the report. If the general orientation 
and recommendations of this report represent good public 
policy in the eyes of Ontarians; if they meet public expecta- 
tions of what the educational policy should be; the public 
should say so, individually and as members of groups, 
through the various channels available. 

That said, we must stress that simplistic solutions do not 
work for complicated problems. Better ideas or more money 
do not guarantee better schools; there are no quick fixes. Co- 
ordinated action on many fronts is needed, and the system 
must acknowledge that, at the beginning of the reform 
process, not all the answers are known. Inevitably, the situa- 
tion will change even as people begin to act, making it 
impossible to set out a detailed implementation plan that 
would provide a complete guide to schools and others. 

Implementation is not just a question of doing a series of 
tasks or steps that have been set out sequentially. Rather, 
above all else, it is a question of people understanding what 
reforms mean in concrete and practical terms. The Ministry 
of Education and Training must adopt an implementation 
strategy that, first and foremost, helps to clarify the precise 
requirements for each of the key directions for reform. 

Time lines are important, but implementation of 
complex reforms means more than working through the list 
of tasks and actions to be taken. Because the unexpected 
always happens, schedules will have to be adjusted and new 
issues will have to be considered. 

With these cautions in mind, we have developed the 
beginning of an implementation plan. Implementation 
involves changes in practice, and because we believe quick 
action is necessary, we have identified actions that all stake- 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Implementing the Reforms 

view, an Implcmcnuiiun Cummiuiun would b« 
%t vehicle tor ovcr»ecing the progress of reforms. 

holders can take to move schools and the school system in 
the desired directions. 

Although many meaningful changes can be implemented 
locally without Ministry sanction, we look first at the actions 
required at the provincial level, because these set the direc- 
tion for all of Ontario. Wc then suggest actions to be taken 
by others, including school boards, schools, and parents. 

An liiipl«ni«ntJrtlon commission 

(lOvcriiiiKiit rcs('unMliilit\ tnr introducing and follow- 
ing political agendas, and for the daily management of 
ministries. These do not easily permit the re-adjustments 
needed to also accommodate changing directions in a large 
system such as education. We, therefore, believe that a 
special mechanism is needed to oversee implementation of 
the reforms recommended in this report. 

Recommendation 167 

'We recommend the establtshment of an Implementation 
Commission to oversee the implementation of the recommen- 
dations made by the Royal Commission on Learning. 

In our view, an Implementation Commission would be 
the best vehicle for overseeing the progress of reforms. The 
Implementation (Commission would report to the I.egisla 
ture through the .Minister of Education and Training, and 
would be required to publish a report every six months. 

The Commission should be established for a three-year 
term, with a small secretariat to support its work. The Chief 
Commissioner should be someone who is credible to educa- 
tors and the public. 

We assume there would be a committee structure, with 
members drawn from the field, from faculties of education. 

and from federations. Participants would focus on imple- 
mentation of recommendations in specific areas, such as 
harly Childhood Education, information technology, teacher 
development, and so on. However, the Implementation 
Commission would continue to stress the inter-relationship 
of the recommendations for reform, to guard against the 
danger of fragmentation and work done at cross-purposes. 

As implementation gets under way, the Commission 
would provide information to be used by all those involved 
in education as the basis for further improvement. Data 
from pilot projects would be widely shared, and information 
from student learning assessments would be used to improve 
programs and instruction. 

The Implementation (Commission would also keep 
educational reform on the public agenda. Its working 
committee structure would give it a high profile, through 
links with educators and communities around the province, 
regular annual reports to the Minister and to the Premier's 
Office, and regular (at least twice yearly) informal reports to 
the general public, similar in format to the Royal Commis- 
sion's Spotlight on Learning newsletters. 

Finally, the Implementation CCommission could monitor 
and assess whether reforms were having the intended effect, 
and what changes needed to be made. 

We specifically expect the Implementation Commission 
to establish criteria by which each of the reforms would be 
evaluated, and to contract, perhaps through the Office of 
Learning Accountability and Assessment, for evaluations of 
pilot projects and early reform initiatives. The results of such 
evaluations would be widely available, to be used to improve 
future implementation efforts. 

Several briefs, including the first one at our public hear- 
ings, called for a kind of "on-going Royal Commission on 
Education" to which special problems and ideas for reforms 
could be addressed. We understand the intent of the idea, 
but consider that once the push towards the implementation 
of the report has been given by the Implementation 
(Commission, it is best to direct future demands directly to 
the Ministry, where they belong. 

Other support for implementation 

Change takes many different, i)(tcn parallel, paths, and the 
actions of different players at different levels are needed to 
achieve the final goal of reforming a system. Of course, the 
Minister and the Ministry are expected to play a key role in 

For tha LOM of Ltamtng 


bringing about change. But by themselves they cannot do 
much. Stakeholders, as well as individuals in the system, can 
and must initiate change in their fields. 

Beyond the Implementation Commission, there is the 
Ministry (and to some extent, school boards), which can use 
various strategies in moving ahead with reform. The 
Ministry of Education and Training must first establish a 
clear direction and expectations, in terms of such factors as 
student learning, regular assessment, and parental involve- 
ment, by setting policy guidelines to ensure desired 

The Ministry must balance central direction setting and 
monitoring with local flexibility about the way to achieve 
desired results. Here, too, we see the importance of firm 
principles, but flexibility in applying them. Policy imple- 
mentation in the province should shift from "control" to 
"service."' Provincial authorities must set clear expectations 
related to student learning, and then help school boards 
meet them, while school boards do the same in relation to 

Although we can't mandate everything that matters, 
mandates can be effective in kick-starting systems, by 
providing clarity about goals and information about 
progress. The danger is in relying solely on such regulatory 
approaches, because important changes are difficult, and 
require skill, motivation, commitment, and judgment from 
those who must make the changes work. 

The Ministry and school boards can also provide incen- 
tives to encourage schools and teachers to move into new 
areas. Incentive grants encourage school boards, individual 
schools, and consortia to set up pilot programs. Such 
concrete local initiatives can then be used as models for 

Changing organizational structures is another way of 
stimulating reform. For instance, the Office of Learning 
Assessment and Accountability is intended to deal more 
effectively with assessment and accountability issues, while 
school/community councils would co-ordinate community 
resources more effectively, and give the community a 
stronger voice in the school. 

None of these approaches, however, will work unless 
schools and those involved with them have the necessary 
skills and resources. Teachers need professional development 
and curriculum support materials. Parents, community 
representatives, and school staff need preparation and 


School improvement efforts 

are most likely to succee 

where there is a combination 

of internal commitment to 

and incentives for change, and 

external pressure 

and support. 

Karen Louis and Matthew Miles, 
Improving the Urban High School, 1990 

support so they can get school/community councils operat- 
ing effectively. 

The reforms we are suggesting are not simple, and in 
many cases there are few working models to follow. More- 
over, the context for educators and students is constantly in 
flux, and what might make sense today could be unworkable 
next year. Therefore, implementation plans are more like 
road maps than blueprints: they cannot specify every detail 
in advance. 

Provincial actions 

There must also be clear expressions of support for reform 
from the provincial government, accompanied by wide 
dissemination of this report, in both its full and brief 
versions. Discussion of the key ideas of the report must be 
encouraged, in both the education and the broader commu- 
nities, to increase the understanding of the principles guid- 
ing the proposed reforms. There must then be a statement, 
from the Minister of Education or the Premier, or both, on 
what the government plans to do in response to our report: 
whether they support the key directions we have identified, 
and what implementation plan, with time lines, has been 
developed. The first step, of course, is to establish the Imple- 
mentation Commission, with clear and broad authority to 
oversee the process. 

The province must be clear and firm about principles, 
and about the directions in which schools should be 
moving. But it is equally important to be flexible about the 
means that schools and school boards adopt to move in the 
desired directions. One such principle is that schools must 
increase the involvement of parents in ways that benefit 
student learning. However, there should be considerable 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Implementing the Reforms 


rhc first practical step 

reform is to take it. 

Murray Scftaler, Ttm fittinoc*fOS m (fw CtMsroom. 1976 

in any ^JL J- 

• set up a council at the I'rcnmr's k\il to consider how to 
strengthen inter-ininisterial work, and co-ordinate ierviccs 
for children, with the designation of a senior minister 
responsible for such co-ordination in addition to his or her 
regular portfcilio 

• plan changes in funding structures 

• plan changes in French-language governance 

• the MET changes its structures and functions as recom- 
mended by the RCOL 

• sponsor and encourage working conferences to discuss 
and begin to implement key recommendations of the RCOL 

flexibility about how schools and school boards increase 
parent involvement. The Ministry and school boards should, 
therefore, support diversity in local arrangements, as long as 
that diversity suppoiis and is consistent with the general 

If the government is serious about its response to our 
report, it may choose to use the following list of suggested 
actions as a starting point. Appendix I to this chapter 
provides examples of further actions that could be taken by 
the provincial government and the Ministry in each of the 
next three years, as well as indications of what might be put 
in place over the next five to ten years. 

Time lines are critical to any implementation plan, 
although some flexibility must be built in. Although 199.S is 
an election year - a somewhat disruptive time for imple- 
menting major new public policies - we think the recom- 
mended actions constitute an appropriate agenda for all 
parties, regardless of which one forms the government. 

Sutfested short-term actions for the provincial 
^ovornmont and for the Ministry: 1995-96 
/ he framework for reform 

• the government and the .V1F.T respond to the RCOL 
report, indicating their support and plans for implementa- 
tion, with time lines 

• set up Implementation Commission through the MtT 

• prepare enabling legislation as necessary to implement 
RCOL recommendation* 

• preparr <n f<»r the 0>llege of Teachers 

• »etupt( ingA.vses*ment and Accountability 

• create a central body to co-ordinate information technology 


• develop an action plan for curriculum development and 
provincial reviews 

• continue implementing The Common Curriculum, with a 
clearer focus on a few clear outcomes 

• bring together schools and other interested groups 
concerning Grade 12 outcomes and new specialized 

Assessment and accountability 

• the MHT and Office of Learning Assessment and Account- 
ability begin planning Grade 3 and 1 1 assessments 

• provide target funding to OISF. and/or other graduate 
faculties of education and/or 1-2 consortia involving boards 
and faculties of education to establish centres of expertise re 
assessment of student learning and program evaluation. 

Power, influence, and equity 

• prcp.ire legislative ch.inges for short term action, e.g.. 
voting student trustees, status of aboriginal band-operatcd 

• repeal of Section 136 regarding preferential hiring of 
Roman Catholic teachers 

• provide targeting incentive funding at both the provincial 
and board level, to begin phasing in school/community 

• develop and begin to apply funding formulas that will 
encourage more co-operative service arrangements between 
school boards 

• develop students' and parents' Charters of Rights and 

For tfw Ijom o( LMmtnt 

Early childhood education 

• set up a joint college/faculty of education committee to 
discuss short-term and long-term arrangements for prepara- 
tion and certification of staff 

• develop policy to guide program development, relation- 
ships to current child-care providers, certification and 
preparation of staff and organization 

• begin establishing learning outcomes for ECE programs 

• survey space needs for ECE 

• plan pilot project for phasing in ECE programs in schools 

• establish models for integrated daycare and ECE programs 

Teacher prof essionalization and development 

• plan with key groups the composition and authority of the 
College of Teachers 

• set up review/evaluation teams for principal preparation 
courses and supervisory officer qualification programs, and 
begin evaluations 

• fund and establish a pilot project concerning the two-year 
preservice preparation program, with a full evaluation 

• encourage faculties of education to introduce programs 
requested by Catholic school systems 

Information technology 

• seek out partnership agreements with computer firms 

• plan development and licensing of more Canadian educa- 
tional software, where appropriate 

• negotiate agreements between the MET and businesses to 
give discarded computers to schools 

Community-education alliances 

• identify the inter-government and inter-Ministry initia- 
tives necessary to remove barriers to community-education 
alliances; for instance, changes in legislation to provide for a 
common age of consent (the age at which a young person is 
considered adult) to facilitate service delivery to older 

• develop guidelines for programs to be provided in schools 
by arts, health, social service and recreation agencies, in 
collaboration with other ministries 

• prepare (or contract for preparation of) a directory of 
community/education partnership initiatives, categorized for 
easy access, as well as empirically based guidelines for the 
development of such initiatives 

opin M.„.«.. 

B significant changes can be 

made by teachers and 
principals in schools. 

Actions by other stakeholders 

The Ministry of Education and Training and the provincial 
government must act. So, too, must educators and commu- 
nity members. Parents, students, teachers, faculties of educa- 
tion, and others can make a big difference at the local level, 
and can also put pressure on the Ministry and the govern- 
ment. Appendix 2 to this chapter provides examples of 
actions that these groups can take immediately, without 
waiting for changes at the provincial level. 

Once the government has enacted enabling legislation 
and clarified the overall rationale for the reforms, all those 
involved in Ontario education will have to act simultaneous- 
ly in a number of areas. For instance, changes in curricula 
will have to be accompanied by changes in assessment that, 
in turn, are not possible without on-going teacher develop- 
ment. All these actions will need to be closely co-ordinated 
so they reinforce each other. 

Although all parties, from the provincial government to 
students, have a role to play in changing the education 
system, there are three groups whose initial responses and 
actions will be crucial. The first is the provincial government 
- particularly, but by no means only, the Ministry of Educa- 
tion and Training. As the major regulatory and policy- 
making bodies, ministries set the direction for the province. 
Second are the school boards, which translate Ministry poli- 
cy at the local level, and have considerable power to set local 
priorities within provincial guidelines. And third are the 
Ontario Teachers' Federation and its five affiliates, who 
represent 120,000 teachers, and are a major force on the 
province's educational scene. Their support will be decisive 
in achieving the gains we anticipate. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Implementing the Reforms 

We stress, however, that many of the most significant 
changes can be made by teachers and principals in schools, 
without waiting for governments or boards to act. As 
Jennifer Ixwington and Graham Orpwood observed in their 
recent book. Overdue Assignment: 

Schools will not flourish if teachers and others In the system hunker 
down in hopes of waiting out the storm. Instead, ... those who work 
in |the system! must develop a strong; capacity for self-renewal.' 

Cost lssu*s 

Lust issues are critical, particularly in light of Ontario's 
continuing budgetary difFiculties. Educational change cannot 
wait until we have more money, and in any case, we do not 
believe that more money is necessarily the answer. Instead, 
reform must now be achieved by shifting the focus of the 
system, allocating the same pot of money in different ways. 
There is no avoiding the fact that many choices will be 
painful. Setting priorities is difficult, not only within the 
education system, but also between education and other 
societal needs. 

Given the complexity and uncertainty of specific cost 
projections, as well as our lime frame and limited resources, 
we cannot provide detailed cost estimates. These will need to 
be done by the Ministry. In the end, choices must be 
governed by the cost of providing adequate programs to 
students across the province, the amount of money available 
for education, and the priorities that are set. 

NN' 'hat many of our recommendations have 

cost i; . and in most cases, we have made sugges- 

tions about redirecting funds within the system, with little 
or no new money required. Equali7.ation of funding across 

the province, for instance, should involve redistribution 
rather than additional resources. 

Budgetary constraints have become a lung term feature 
of the system. It is therefore critical that funds are targeted 
to the areas where they will have the most impact. That is 
why we recommend, for instance, Early Childhood Educa- 
tion programs, because investments in quality programs for 
very young children will pay off later in reduced need for 
remedial programs and other social supports. Such an 
approach might be compared to preventive health care, with 
the assumption that money spent on early prevention initia- 
tives will, in the long run, reduce costs. Since we are recom- 
mending that students graduate from secondary school after 
12 years in the system, rather than the 13 years many of 
them now take, we anticipate significant savings at the level 
of senior secondary school. 

We also point out that the initial costs of school-based 
Early Childhood Education programs should be partially 
offset by reduced costs for subsidized daycare. 

Costs for large-scale assessments and for increased moni- 
toring should also produce favourable cost/benefit results, as 
long as the information is used for improving the system 
and targeting efforts more accurately. C^osts of developing 
and administering challenge exams and General Education 
Diploma exams, as recommended in Chapter 10, will be 
partially offset by less time spent in school by students. 
(They won't have to lake courses if they already know the 
material and demonstrate their knowledge in these exams.) 

We also expect costs of some reforms to be offset by 
savings from improved efficiencies in other parts of the 
delivery system. We suggest, for example, that clarification of 
the roles of trustees and supervisory officers, as well as some 
shifts of responsibility to schools and the Ministry, should 
lead to savings as fewer central-office staff will be required. 

We also suggest increased sharing of resources and 
services between boards and other local agencies; greater and 
more effective use of various staffing formulas and commu- 
nity resources in schools; and centralized curriculum devel- 
opment, to avoid duplication of effort among school boards. 

It is difficult to estimate the cost implications of greater 
co-ordination of government services and increased 
community alliances, particularly because these involve 
ministries other than the Ministry of Education and Train- 
ing. But we anticipate that, after the initial start-up, better 
coordination of services will result not only in improved 

For tht Low of Laamtnc 

services but in a more streamlined system with significant 
reductions in duplication of effort and administration. 

An important consideration in costing is that many of 
our recommendations incorporate a rethought use of time 
and other resources. Done imaginatively and effectively, this 
is a low-cost strategy for making other things happen. In 
particular, we have identified a variety of ways in which flex- 
ibility can be built into teachers' working lives at little cost. 
For example, throughout the report we recommend the use 
of volunteers, peer tutors, and cross-age tutors, which bene- 
fits those tutoring and those being tutored. 

We also recommend that, in their second year of pre- 
service preparation, student teachers work in schools as 
interns, significantly adding to the staff resources, and 
potentially freeing teachers for collaborative curriculum 
work. School/community councils would act to bring addi- 
tional resources into schools, while more flexible groupings 
of some students could free time for teachers to provide 
more intensive remedial or enrichment opportunities to 
others. The creative use of technology is another time- 
fireeing strategy. 

Although savings from such shifts in the way time and 
other assets are perceived and utilized are difficult to calcu- 
late, they are a low-cost way of substantially adding to exist- 
ing resources. 

Although there will undoubtedly be costs attached to 
implementing our recommendations - as there are for any 
changes - we expect these to be offset by savings in the 
longer term. However, it is crucial that funding choices be 
made deliberately, on the basis of educational priorities. 

A call to action 

We believe that our recommendations and intervention 
strategies provide powerful directions and tools for reform. 
We want our recommendations to be implemented; we want 
the school system of Ontario to become more responsive, 
open, and flexible; we want higher levels of student learning; 
we want well-prepared, highly motivated teachers taking 
greater collective responsibility for professional issues. But 
we are not naive. We realize that there are constraints and 
barriers. These must not, however, stop stakeholders from 
moving forward. 

We are under no illusions that hurdles are easy to over- 
come, or that our suggestions will always be successful. We 
believe, however, that the journey must begin. Schools and 

For many people the challenge of change is overwhelm- 
ing. The shift towards new forms of organization and 
management often calls for a leap of faith that many 
people are not prepared to make. They need help and 
encouragement. But above all else, they need to learn 
specific tactics and techniques that can make them 
more effective. 

Gareth Morgan, Finding Your 15% 
(Video series), 1993 

their communities need a reasonably clear vision of the 
destination, the will to overcome or work around the 
constraints, and a commitment to imaginative problem- 
solving. If there was ever a time for a massive call to action, 
that time is now. We suggest ways of overcoming some of 
the key barriers to change. 


Having already acknowledged the difficulty in getting a large 
and complicated system to change course, we stress the 
importance of having the government give clear direction 
and a well-articulated sense of the overall goals, as well as 
incentives for change. We also underline that, through the 
public hearing process, we were strongly reminded that pres- 
sures for change are mounting, and cannot be resisted. 

Support for innovative initiatives that operate outside the 
usual organizational and bureaucratic constraints can help 
overcome inertia. Highly visible projects can provide the 
incentive for others to develop their own innovations. 

Power issues 

Although it is rarely acknowledged openly, concerns about 
protecting influence often get in the way of change. No 
group wants to lose power. Those who have more, at what- 
ever level of the hierarchy, may resist efforts to decrease 
their spheres of influence, or to democratize organizational 
decision -making processes. Educators, however, like others 
in contemporary society, are aware that times have changed, 
and that the education system must become more responsive 
to parent and community concerns. We stress that the goals 
of increased student learning and the opening up of a closed 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Implementing the Reforms 

students. This clearer focus and direction should help 
ameliorate the overload problem. 

Ihc truth, however, is that the overload will worsen if 
people do not take action. Will and skill, although not magic 
solutions, can be effective antidotes to overload. We believe 
that an essential (but difficult) first step is for teachers, 
schools, and boards to critically review what they are now 
doing and to set priorities. Hducators must identify tasks 
that may no longer be important, or that arc better done by 
others, in a difficult process that has been termed "organized 

education s>'stcm should guide the decisions of all stake- 
holders on the best wav to organize schooling. 

CcUective bargaining issues 

Specific provisions ot collective agreements must not 
prevent changes that will improve student learning. There 
must be more flexibility in the use of staff and in the way 
time 15 allocated and accounted for. Teachers' federations 
have been tireless and effective in their roles as advocates for 
teachers, and have also positively addressed many profes- 
sional issues. However, the rigidities of collective agreements 
may not always work to the benefit of students and schools. 
More flexible approaches to collective bargaining seem to be 
appropriate if schools are to change with changing social 

In this report, we have repeatedly acknowledged the ines- 
timable value and contributions of teachers, and have 
recommended a variety of measures to support them in 
their very challenging work. We expect, in turn, that federa- 
tions will be flexible on issues where the interests of students 
and teachers may, to some extent, conflict. 


We often heard that schools and the people in them are 
overloaded, and find it difficult - if not impossible - to take 
on more responsibilities. We acknowledge these concerns, 
and although we have no magic solution to alleviate them, 
we do think our recommendations address the problems. 
Most important, the report takes a stand in clarifying the 
purpose of schools, stressing that schools exist first and fore- 
most for the intellectual and academic nurturing of 

Lack of resources 

We recognize the serious financial constraints affecting both 
provincial and local governments, constraints shared by 
most public institutions in the 1990s. Expansionary times 
have long gone, and society is becoming aware that 
complaints do nothing to case fiscal difficulties. Although 
constraints are real, they should not be seen as an insur- 
mountable barrier. In some cases, low-cost options are high- 
ly effective; we have already pointed to peer tutoring as a 
low-cost program with benefits to students. In our opinion, 
volunteers are another under-used and low-cost resource. In 
other cases, educators and the public should be prepared to 
argue for re-allocation of funds to ensure that essential and 
high-priority services and programs are available. 

Achieving the kind of school system we envisage will be 
difficult, but it is a worthy ideal. We have not shied away 
from difficult issues, even when wc cannot offer clear or 
guaranteed solutions. 

Will our recommendations be implemented faithfully? 
That will be decided by the government, school boards, 
schools, teachers, parents, students, and others with a stake 
in education in Ontario. If the Commission's vision is to be 
realized, these people and organiz^ations must move forward 
without waiting for others to take the first step. 

We began our report by highlighting the dramatically 
altered context in which schools now operate. Profound 
social, economic, demographic, and technological changes 
have made the old forms of schooling outmoded. We went 
on to suggest that changes in the education system, impor- 
tant as they are, are not enough. People must rethink how 
schools relate to the community, and htiw the education 
system relates to the rest of government and to other societal 

For Itw I^M o( IjMmni 


We want real change in the hves of students and teachers. 
We are not interested in political rhetoric about education. 
We have indicated what is required in terms of the govern- 
ment's response and implementation plan, but if substantial 
changes are to occur, more than provincial policy changes 
are needed. 

School boards, faculties of education, principals, teachers, 
parents, and students can and must act. They need not - 
and, indeed, should not - wait for governments. Local 
actions will produce improvements in classrooms and 
schools, and will also put pressure on decision-makers to 
follow through with necessary supports. 

In other words, everybody has to take responsibility for 
making schools increasingly better. A 1994 implementation 
guide published by the British Columbia Ministry of Educa- 
tion sets out how each stakeholder contributes to reform. 
Because we found it to be an excellent summary of responsi- 
bilities, we reproduce it here: 

Implementation responsibilities 

• Ministry provides leadership and implementation support 

• School boards organize planning and allocation of financial, 
human and learning resources in support of implementation 

• Teachers and school administrators participate in [board] and 
school-based planning for implementation of new policies, and 
implement policies according to provincial guidelines 

• Students work to take advantage of learning opportunities offered 
by provincial and local programs 

• Parents help children to develop clear values and self-discipline, 
and to apply themselves to their schoolwork 

• Provincial and professional organizations (teachers' federations] 
plan, and assist members to understand, adapt and implement new 
policies and programs 

• College of Teachers reviews requirements for certification and 
teacher education in relation to the new programs 

• Business and labour work with local school boards and schools to 
develop partnerships in and outside of schools to assist in the imple- 
mentation of new programs, especially in the area of work experi- 
ence and career development' 

We would add to this list the need for parents and other 
community members to work with schools to establish 
school/community councils, and to look for ways to link 
school, home, and community more effectively, while 

"To wait to introduce 
J change until we have 

unanimity is usually to 
wait forever ... There is 
probably no innovation 
that has benefitted 
humankind that was not 
originally condemned by 
experts as impractical, 
impossible, or immoral." 

David Pratt, Curriculum Planning, 1994 

Students are responsible for organizing their systematic 
input to schools. 

The actions that people take in schools, in the communi- 
ty, and in government, will have a cumulative effect in 
moving reform forward. They will: 

• build commitment to the necessary reforms, and encourage 
action by all stakeholders, at the local and provincial levels 

• develop capacity and skill among educators, parents, 
students, and others, to implement the changes 

• create organizational cultures supportive of changes, and 
provide necessary resources for schools, school boards, the 
Ministry, and community groups 

• provide relevant feedback to schools and to the public, 
about how the process is proceeding and about early 
outcomes, and ensure that such feedback is used to improve 
future implementation. 

We end our report by suggesting actions for all those who 
care about Ontario's schools. Through thousands of such 
actions, guided by the goal of improved learning for all 
students, our schools will rise to the challenge of preparing 
children and adolescents for the 21st century. 

Together, those with the biggest stake in Ontario educa- 
tion can work to make our recommendations a reality. They 
can also insist that the government act promptly to imple- 
ment the report. "Systems ... don't change by themselves; 
people change systems." The report of the Royal Commis- 
sion on Learning is now in the hands of the people of 
Ontario. Its future is up to you. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Implementing the Reforms 


Onuho, Provincul Committee on Aims and Objectives of 
Education m the Schools of Ontario, Living ami Ltarning 
(Toronto: Newton Publishing, 1968), p. 134. 

Allan R. Odden. "New Patterns of Education Policy Imple- 
mentation and Challenges for the 1990s," m tiiuiatum Poliqf 
Implementation (Albany: State University of New York Press, 
1991). p. 326. 

Michael G. Fullan with Suzanne Stiegelbaucr, The Net* 
Meaning of Educational Change (Toronto: OISE Press, 1991 ), 
p. 65. 

Milbrey W. McLaughlin, "Learning from Experience: Lessons 
from Policy Implementation." in Odden, Education Policy 
Implementation, p. 187. 

Matthew Miles, "Practical Guidelines for School Administra- 
tors: How to Get There' (paper presented at the annual 
meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 

Two recent articles point to the challenge of helping a large 
and diverse educational community understand highly 
complex and difficult changes, and the danger that people 
will rely on oversimplified interpretations of new policies. 

Roland Case. "Our Crude Handling of Educational Reforms: 
The Case of Curricular Integration," Canadian Journal of 
Education 19, no. 1 ( 1994): 80-93. 

Walter Werner. "Defining Curriculum Policy through 
Slogans," Journal of Education Policy 6, no. 2 ( 1991 ): 225-38. 

Kenneth I^thwood and Byron Dart, "Guidelines for Imple- 
menting Educational Policy in British Columbia," p. 7. Draft 
paper prepared for the British Columbia Ministry of Educa- 
tion. 1994. 

G. Orpwood and I. Lewinglon, Overdue Assignment: Taking 
RaponsiMity for Canada's Schoob (Rexdale, ON: )ohn Wiley. 
1993), p. 182. 

British (;>>lumbia. Ministry of Education, Putting Policies into 
Practice: Implementation Guitir ( Victoria, 1994), p. 2-3. 

For the UiM of IjMmtnc 

Appendix 1: Action Plan for Government 

Examples of longer-term actions for the province 
and the Ministry of Education and Training 

Year 2 (1996-97) 

• continue legislative change for longer-term actions; 

• monitor the initial changes, and on the basis of these experiences, 
develop guidelines for further implementation, create necessary 
training and professional development programs, disseminate 
information throughout the province; 

• establish the College of Teachers; MET transfers control of teacher 
education, certification (initial and continuing); 

• phase in French-language governance and other changes in board 

• carry out evaluations of principal courses and SOQPs; follow 
through on results by setting out improvement targets - with 

Over the longer term (10 years, with MET setting out 
detailed implementation plans to guide efforts over this 

• initiate full implementation of Early Childhood Education 

• implement the new curriculum in its entirety; 

• implement new-teacher preparation and professional develop- 
ment programs; 

• initiate the annual administration of Grade 3 and 1 1 assessments; 

• implement the full range of changes in funding structures and 
French-language governance; 

• create a framework for on-going improvement, based on the 
results of assessments. 

Year 3 (1997-98) 

• set outcomes for all grades; 

• implement Grade 3 and Grade 1 1 assessments; 

• assure that all funding and local governance changes are in place 
for 1997 municipal and school board elections; 

• plan, with the College of Teachers, the new-teacher, pre-service 
prerequisites for admission and program requirements, and the 
requirements for on-going professional development; 

• make decisions re continuation of various prinicpals' courses and 

• request curriculum teams to write support documents (through 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Implementing the Reforms 

Appendix 2: Action Plan for Education Stakeholder* 

•f lwm»iH»t» or •hort-torm actions: To bo dono In 1995-96 by oducation stakoholdoro 

To94< of RCOl S«teoo4 Board* 

R9C041HVI#4MltfC lOnft 



AsalM m dtssAfTwiM Assist in communi' Provtde RCOL infor 

mg information about eating RCOL infor mation to parents. 

RCOt. report and malion to members, students, and 

racofranandauons. community. 

Review current 
programs in light o( 
RCOL discussion 
and recommenda- 

Help to organize arul 
attend information 

Work witfi Softools 
and scfiooi boards to 
distnbute RCOL s 
short version 
summary tt>rou0i 

hold information 



Idanufy omlcuium 

Continue program 

Review programs re 

Contact teachers 

Work on establishing 


•xparUM. hnkwtth 

of producing 

programs arx) teach 

changes needed so 

about ways to help 

peer coaching and 


MET. other boards. 

specific additional 

ing approacr>es to 

that student teach 

your child leam. 

tutonng program. 

with federations. 


irwrease levels of 

ers are prepared to 

arxl wrth faculties of 

support matenals 

cfiallenge. ensure 

teach the common 


that all students 
benefit, and identify 
teacher in service 


iderKify teacher in- 

Provide professional 

Ensure that all 


Contact teachers 

Produce best efforts 

service ne«<ts. and 
coHaborata witfi 
other school boards, 
ledaralKKts. and 
with faculttea of 
aducauon m setting 
up programs. 

programs tor 
members on 
student assess- 
ment, and collabo- 
rate with boards 
and faculties on 
such programs. 

teactiers learn atxiut programs relating atXKit use of 

assessing student 
learning effectively. 

to assessment arxl 
through hiring, 
professional devel 
opment o( faculty 
members, and 
curriculum for pre- 
service programs. 

assessment results 
to help your child 

on assessment 

■ ■iMWiWg 

^w«« and 


Begtn turning over 
more budget and 

•ooounUbWty to 

Develop federation 
perspective on hem 
best to implement 
nxKe differentiatad 
staffing m schools. 

Expand and 
strengthen ways to 
communicate wnh 

Explore setting up 
professional devel 
opment scTiools in 
which practising 
taact«ers have 
sigrtlflcant Input 
arnl mfluerKe in 

WorV with your 
school ary]/or 
school tward re 
setting up scfKxH/ 
community councils. 

WorV with teacTiers 
to strengtfien 
student councils. 

Survey axMUng 
kindargartan. cMO- 
car*. andcMfwr 
space to plan for 
aoconvnodaUon of 

ad(Micir\^ ciMldren 

WorV toward coordl^ 
nation of Early ChMd- 
hood Education artd 
school staff. 

Survey eiistmg 
space with a view 
to planntnghow 

Wort( wrthi 
to develop prt)grams 
for prepanng staff 
for Earty Childhood 
Education programs. 

Request that school 
board begin linking 
with current 
providers of earty 
childhood education 

Wortt w«t^ prinapals 
arx) teacfters to 
develop ways in 
«4iich senior students 
can help In Early 
Childhood Education 

young childran. 

for the Love of Laammg 

Topic of RCOL School Boards 








Identify hardware 
and software needs. 

Expand work on 
professional elec- 
tronic networks. 

Ensure that all 
teachers have famil- 
iarity and expertise 
with computers and 
electronic communi- 
cations - to 
strengthen learning. 

All student teachers 
learn to use technol- 
ogy to strengthen 
student learning. 

Volunteer to assist 
in classrooms re 
computer usage 
during and/or after 

Identify students who 
can help staff and 
other students in 
using information 

Identify professional Work with faculties Identify priorities for Meet with represen- Work with school to Establish a program 

development of education re 

priorities of all board various alternative 
staff and trustees. models of profes- 
sional development. 

Create inventory 
of existing links 
with community 

Establish federation 
perspectives on 
how best to link 
with community 
beyond school, and 
to co-ordinate 
programs and 
services to the 
advantage of 
students, as well 
as teachers. 

professional develop- tatives from school 
ment and identify boards and teacher 

what can be provided federations re joint 
with in-school programs and how 

expertise. mandatory profes- 

sional development 
will be implemented. 

Identify a problem 
shared by school 
and community, 
as focus for action. 

Develop courses to 
explore community 

plan professional 
development for 
school community 
council members. 

Ask schools to bring 
in outside resources 
and volunteers - 
and identify commu- 
nity expertise. 

of leadership develop- 
ment for students. 

Start student-initiated 
community service 

For the community partnership engine in particular, community 
agencies and business groups are also stakeholders. They all can 
take action to initiate and support closer links between schools 
and their communities. Senior officials in various community agen- 
cies and business groups can contact school boards re common 
interests, joint ventures, conferences to build common under- 
standing, as well as putting pressure on government to support 
such links through regulatory and funding mechanisms. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Implementing the Reforms 

For the Love 
of Learning: 

This section includes the connplete set of 
recommendations of the Royal Commission 
on Learning. 

Chapter 7: The Learner from Birth to Age 6 

The Commission recommends: 

1. That Early Childhood Education (ECE) be provided by all 
school boards to all children from 3 to 5 years of age whose 
parents/guardians choose to enrol them. ECE would gradual- 
ly replace existing junior and senior kindergarten programs, 
and become a part of the public education system; 

2. That the ECE program be phased in as space becomes 

3. That, in the implementation of ECE, the provincial govern- 
ment give priority funding to French-language school units; 

4. That the Ministry of Education and Training develop a 
guide, suitable for parents, teachers, and other caregivers, 
outlining stages of learning (and desirable and expectable 
learner outcomes) from birth onwards, and that it link to the 
common core curriculum, beginning in Grade 1. This guide, 
which would include specific learner outcomes at age 6, 
would be used in developing the curriculum for the Early 
Childhood Education program. 

Chapter 8: The Learner from Age 6 to 15 

The Commission recommends: 

5. That learner outcomes in language, mathematics, science, 
computer literacy, and group learning/interpersonal skills 
and values be clearly described by the Ministry of Education 
and Training from pre-Grade 1 through the completion of 
secondary school, and that these be linked with the work of 
the College Standards and Accreditation Council, as well as 

universities; and that clearly written standards, similar in 
intent to those available in mathematics and language 
(numeracy and literacy), also be developed in the other 
three areas; 

6. That the acquisition of a third language become an intrin- 
sic part of the common curriculum from a young age up to 
Grade 9 inclusively, with the understanding that the choice 
of language(s) taught or acquired will be determined locally, 
and that the acquisition of such a third language outside 
schools will be recognized as equivalent by an examination 
process, similar to what we term challenge exams within the 
secondary school credit system; 

7. That all elementary schools integrate a daily period of 
regular physical exercise of no less than 30 minutes of 
continuous activity as an essential part of a healthy school 
environment. Schools that have problems scheduling daily 
periods should, as a minimum, require three exercise periods 
per week; 

8. That, at the Grade 1-5/6 level, an educator monitor a 
student's progress during the years the student is at the 
school, and be assigned responsibility for maintaining that 
student's record; 

9. That the Ministry of Education and Training and the local 
boards of education provide incentives to large middle (and 
secondary) schools to create smaller learning units, such as 
schools-within-schools or houses; 

10. That, beginning in Grade 7, every student have a Cumu- 
lative Education Plan, which includes the student's academic 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Recommendations to the Total Report 

and other learning experiences, is understood to be the 
major planning tool tor the student's secondary and post- 
secondary education, and is reviewed semi-annually by the 
student, parents, and by the teacher who has a continuing 
relationship with and responsibility tor that student as long 
as she or he remains in the school; 

1 1. That curriculum guidelines be developed in each subject 
taught within the common curriculum, to assist teachers in 
designing programs that will help students achieve the learn- 
ing outcomes in The Common Curriculum. These guidelines 
should include concrete suggestions on how teachers can 
share with parents ways to help their children at home; 

12. That the Minister of Education and Training aniond the 
regulations to enable school boards to extend the length of 
the school day and/or school year; 

13. That the Ministry of Education and Training work with 
curriculum and learning specialists to develop strategies 
(based on sound theory and practice and enriched with 
detailed examples) for providing more flexibility in the 
amount of time available to students for mastering curricu- 

14. That local schools and boards be allowed to develop and 
offer programs in addition to those in The Common Curricu- 
lum, as long as those options meet provincially developed 
criteria, and as long as at least 90 percent of instructional 
time is devoted to the common curriculum for Grades 1 

to 9. 

Chapter 9: The Learner from Age 15 to 18 

The Commission recommends: 

15. That the Ministry of Education and Training review 
community college education - its mandate, funding, coher- 
ence, and how it fits into the system of education in Ontario, 
including clarification of access routes from secondary 
Khool to college, and with special attention being paid to 
students who are not university-bound; 

16. That secondary Khool be defined as a three year 
program, beginning after Cirade 9, and that students be 
permitted to take a maximum of three courses beyond the 
rr<)iiirr(i 21. f(ir a totjl of not more than 24 credits. We 

further recommend that all courses in which the student has 
enrolled - whether completed t)r incomplete, passed or 
failed - be recorded on that student's transcript; 

17. That only two, not three, differentiated types of courses 
should exist; 

18. That some courses (to be called Ontario Academic Cours- 
es, or OAcCs) be offered with an academic emphasis; that 
others (to be called Ontario Applied Courses, or OApCs) be 
offered, with an emphasis on application; and that still others 
be presented as common courses, blending academic and 
applied approaches, and with no special designation; 

19. That large secondary schools be reorganized into 
"schools-within-schools" or "houses," in which students have 
a core of teachers and peers with whom they interact for a 
substantial part of their program. Such units may be topic-, 
discipline-, or interest-focused; 

20. That as a mandatory diploma requirement ail students 
participate each year in physical exercise at least three limes 
per week, for not less than 30 minutes per session, either in 
or outside physical education classes; 

21. That as a mandatory diploma requirement all students 
take part in a minimum of 20 hours per year (two hours per 
month) of community service, facilitated and monitored by 
the school, to take place outside or inside the school; 

22. That the same efforts to centrally develop strategies and 
ideas for increasing flexibility and individualization of the 
pace of learning, which we called for in the common core 
curriculum, be applied to the specialization years; 

23. That a set of graduation outcomes be developed for the 
end of Grade 12; that they be subject and skill oriented, as 
well as relatively brief; and that they cover common learner 
outcomes for all students as well as supplemental learner 
outcomes for the OAcC and the OApC programs; 

24. That students have the option of receiving as many as 
two international language credits toward their diploma no 
matter where they obtained their training or knowledge of 
the languagc(s) if, upon examination, they demonstrate 
appropriate levels of language mastery; 

For tht l/rm ol l«amtng 

25. That the Ontario Training and Adjustment Board 
(OTAB) be given the mandate to take leadership, working in 
partnership with school boards, community colleges, and 
other community partners, to establish programs that will 
assist secondary school graduates and drop-outs to transfer 
successfully to the workforce, including increasing opportu- 
nities for apprenticeship and for other kinds of training as 
well as employment counselling; 

26. That the Ministry of Education and Training create a 
brief and clear document that describes for parents what 
their children are expected to learn and to know, based on 
the developmental framework of stages of learning from 
birth to school entrance. The Common Curriculum, and the 
secondary school graduation outcomes. Succinct information 
on college and university programs should be also included; 

27. That, in order to ensure that all Ontario residents, 
regardless of age, have access to a secondary school diploma, 
publicly funded school boards be given the mandate and the 
funds to provide adult educational programs; 

28. That a consistent process of prior learning assessment be 
developed for adult students in Ontario, and that this process 
include an examination for a secondary school equivalency 

29. That the Ministry of Education and Training, with its 
mandate which includes post-secondary education, require 
the development of challenge exams and other appropriate 
forms of prior learning assessment by colleges and universi- 
ties, to be used up to and including the granting of diplomas 
and degrees; 

30. That the right of adults to pursue literacy education must 
be protected, regardless of employment status or intentions; 

31. That COFAM/OTAB immediately define and set aside, 
for short- and medium-term adult literacy programs, a fran- 
cophone allotment that is not linked to participation in the 
workforce, in addition to the francophone programs linked 
to workforce status and intention. 

Chapter 10: Supports for Learning: Special 
Needs and Special Opportunities 

The Commission recommends: 

32. That the Ministry make it mandatory for English- 
language school units to provide ESL/ESD, and French- 
language school units to provide ALF/PDF, to ensure that 
immigrant students with limited or no fluency in English or 
French, and Charter rights holders with limited or no fluen- 
cy in French, receive the support they require, using locally 
chosen models of delivery. In its block-funding grants, the 
Ministry should include the budgetary supplements required 
to allow the schools to offer these programs wherever the 
community identifies a need for them. 

33. That no child who shows difficulty or who lags behind 
peers in learning to read be labelled "learning disabled" 
unless and until he or she has received intensive individual 
assistance in learning to read, which has not resulted in 
improved academic performance; 

34. That in addition to gifted programs, acceleration, based 
on teacher assessment, challenge exams, and/or other appro- 
priate measures become widely available as an important 
option for students; 

35. That when parents and educators agree on the best 
programming for the student, and there is a written record 
of a parent's informed agreement, no Identification, Place- 
ment, and Review Committee (IPRC) process occur; 

36. That when there is no agreement, and an IPRC meeting 
must take place, a mediator/facilitator be chosen, on an ad 
hoc basis, to facilitate discussion and compromise, to allevi- 
ate the likelihood of a legal appeal; and that the legislation 
be rewritten to provide for this pre-appeal mediation; 

37. That when a student has been formally identified and 
placed, the annual review be replaced by semi-annual indi- 
vidual assessment that will show whether and how much the 
student has progressed over a five-month period, and deci- 
sions about continuation of the program be made based on 
objective evidence as well on as the judgment of the educa- 
tors and parents in regard to the student's progress; 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Recommendations to the Total Report 

38. That school boards look for ways to provide assistance to 
thoic who need it, without tving that assistance to a formal 
identification process. 

39. That, while integration should be the norm, school 
boards continue to provide a continuum of services for 
students whose needs would, in the opinion of parents and 
educators, be best served in other settings; 

40. That all elementary school teachers have regular access to 
a "community career coordinator" responsible for co-ordi- 
nating the school's community-based, career-awareness 
curriculum, and working with teachers and community 
members to build and support the program; 

41. That, beginning in Grade 6 or 7 and continuing through 
Grade 12, all schools have appropriately trained and certified 
career-education specialists to carry out career counselling 

42. That the Ministry, in co-operation with professional 
career-education groups, the Ontario School Counsellors' 
Association, and the Association of Career Centres in Educa- 
tional Settings, and with representation from colleges, 
universities, and business and labour, develop a continuum 
of appropriate learner outcomes in career awareness and 
career education for Grades 1-12; 

43. That the Ministry of Education and Training take the 
lead in working with the Ministry of Health to develop a 
defmition of es.sential mental-health promotion programs 
and services that should be available in the school setting; 
the professional training necessary to provide them; the 
services that should be offered to students outside the 
schools and by whom; and the way responsibility for provid- 
ing these services is shared across ministries; 

44. That the Ministry of Education and Training cLirity the 
nature and function of personal and social guidance coun- 
selling in schools by: 

.1) redefining the appropriate training required for a 
guidance or pervinal counsellor, and creating and 
implementing a plan for educating and re-educating 
those people who arc now, or should now be, deliver- 
ing these services to students; this redefinition should 
be done in co-operation with the Ontario School 

C'ounsellors' Association and rcprcscntalives of 
colleges and universities; such training should also he 
accessible through avenues other than teacher educa- 
b) ensuring that delivery of these services be implement- 
ed by personnel who, after a date to be specified, have 
received the agreed-on training; 

45. That the Ministry of Education and Training develop a 
new guideline for social/personal guidance to replace Guid- 
ance, Intermediate and Senior Divisions, ]984, including a 
description of the kind of differentiated staffing needed to 
deliver guidance and counselling services in schools, both 
elementary ami secondary. 

Chapter 11: Evaluating Achievement 

The Commission recomdieiidb. 

46. That significantly more time in pre-service and continu- 
ing professional development be devoted to training teachers 
to assess student learning in a way that will help students 
improve their performance, and we recommend supervised 
practice and guidance as the principal leaching/learning 
mechanism for doing so; 

47. That the Ministry of Education and Training begin 
immediately to develop resource materials that help teachers 
learn to assess student work accurately and consistently, on 
the specific learner outcomes upon which standardized 
assessment and reporting will be based; 

48. That the Ministry of Education and Training, in 
conjunction with professional educators, assessment experts, 
parents, students, and members of the general public, design 
a common report card appropriate for each grade. lb be 
known as the Ontario Student Achievement Report, it would 
relate directly to the outcomes and standards of the given 
year or course and, in all years, would be used as the main 
vehicle for communicating, to j>arents and students, informa- 
tion about the students achievements. UTiilc school hoards 
would not be permitted to delete any part of the OSAR, they 
could seek permi.ssion from the Ministry to add to it; 


For ttw l^w« o( LMmim 

49. That the Ministry monitor its own assessment instru- 
ments for possible bias, and work with boards and profes- 
sional bodies to monitor other assessment instruments; that 
teachers be offered more knowledge and training in detect- 
ing and eradicating bias in all aspects of assessment; and that 
the Ministry monitor the effects of assessment on various 

50. That all students be given two uniform assessments at 
the end of Grade 3, one in literacy and one in numeracy, 
based on specific learner outcomes and standards that are 
well known to teachers, parents, and to students themselves; 

51. That the construction, administration, scoring, and 
reporting of the two assessments be the responsibility of a 
small agency, independent of the Ministry of Education and 
Training, and operating at a very senior level, to be called the 
Office of Learning Assessment and Accountability; 

52. That a literacy test be given to students, which they must 
pass before receiving their secondary school diploma; 

53. That the Ministry continue to be involved in and to 
support national and international assessments, and work to 
improve their calibre; 

54. That the Ministry develop detailed, multi-year plans for 
large-scale assessments (program reviews, examination 
monitoring), which establish the data to be collected and the 
way implementation will be monitored, and report the 
results publicly, and provide for the interpretation and use of 
results to educators and to the public; 

55. That, initially, and for a five- to seven-year period, until 
the process is well established in the school system and in 
the public consciousness, an independent accountability 
agency be charged with implementing and reporting the 
Grades 3 and 1 1 universal student assessments. The reports 
and recommendations of the Office of Learning Assessment 
and Accountability would go directly to the Minister and the 

56. That the Ministry of Education and Training, in consul- 
tation with community members and researchers, develop a 
specific procedure for collecting and reporting province- 
wide data on student achievement (marks, and Grade 3 and 

Grade II literacy test results) for groups identified accord- 
ing to gender, race, ethno-cultural background, and socio- 
economic status. 

Chapter 12: The Educators 

The Commission recommends: 

57. That the Education Act be amended to allow instructors 
who are not certified teachers to supervise students, under 
specified conditions and circumstances, and to deliver 
certain non-academic programs. Instructors might be 
health, recreational, and social-work personnel, or other 
members of the community, as designated by the school's 

58. That a professional self-regulatory body for teaching, the 
Ontario College of Teachers, be established, with the 
powers, duties, and membership of the College set out in 
legislation. The College should be responsible for determin- 
ing professional standards, certification, and accreditation of 
teacher education programs. Professional educators should 
form a majority of the membership of the College, with 
substantial representation of non-educators from the 
community at large; 

59. That the College of Teachers, in close co-operation with 
faculties of education, develop a framework for accrediting 
teacher preparation programs offered by Ontario faculties of 
education, and that the College be responsible for carrying 
out such accreditation processes; 

60. That faculties of education and school staff who super- 
vise student teachers be accountable for ensuring that those 
recommended for Ontario Teaching Certificates have the 
qualities required for admission to the teaching profession, 
and that those candidates who do not show such qualities be 
advised to leave teacher preparation programs; 

61. That faculties expand their efforts to admit more student 
teachers from previously under-represented groups, includ- 
ing ethno-cultural and racial minorities, aboriginal commu- 
nities, and those who are disabled, and that they be account- 
able to the College of Teachers for demonstrating significant 
progress toward achieving this objective; 

62. That faculties of education, school boards, and teachers' 
federations develop joint programs to encourage more 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Recommendations to ttie Total Report 

young people from minority groups to consider teaching as 
a career, and to ensure that minority youth and adults inter- 
ested in teaching have opportunities to gain the necessary 
experience with children and adolescents; 

63. That faculties of education establish partnership arrange- 
ments with selected school boards and schools in the public, 
Roman Catholic, and French-language systems that agree to 
work with faculties in preparing student teachers. In such 
designated "professional development schools," staff from 
faculties and from the schools would be jointly responsible 
for planning the program and for guiding student teachers 
through their learning; 

64. That school staff with responsibility for student teachers 
be selected jointly by the faculty of education and the school 
principal, and that they participate in a significant and well- 
designed preparation program themselves, to ensure that 
they have a fully developed understanding of the process of 
learning to teach, and a shared understanding of the skills, 
knowledge, competencies, and values that beginning teachers 
should have; 

65. That school staff supervising student teachers have 
significant input into recommendations for certification; 

66. That common undergraduate prerequisites be established 
for entry to pre-service teacher preparation programs, with 
decisions about specific prerequisites to be made by the 
College of Teachers, with input from faculties of education 
and school boards; 

67. That faculties of arts and science be encouraged to work 
with faculties of education to develop suitable undergradu- 
ate courses, where these do not exist, in subjects that are 
prerequisites for entry to faculties of education; 

68. That the consecutive program for teacher education be 
extended to two years, and that one year be added to the 
concurrent program, and that the Bachelor of Education 
degree be awarded on successful completion of the two-year 
program or, in the case of the concurrent program, on 
completion of the equivalent of the two-year education 

69. That the current practice-teaching requisite of 40 days be 
replaced by a requirement that student teachers spend at 
least that much time observing and working in designated 

"professional development schools" during the first year of 
the B.Ed, program, and that they spend a substantial portion 
(at least three months) of the second year working in 
schools, under the supervision of school staff. As well, a 
similar requirement for students in concurrent programs 
should be established over the length t»t the pre-service 

70. That faculties of education recommend to the CA)llege of 
Teachers that those who have been awarded B.Ed, degrees be 
given a provisional Ontario Teaching Certificate; 

71. That the Ontario Teaching Certificate be made perma- 
nent on completion of one year's teaching in Ontario, on the 
recommendation of a qualified principal or supervisory offi- 
cer. However, this certification process would he quite 
distinct from the employing board's decision concerning 
probationary and permanent contracts; 

72. That the College of Teachers develop a set of criteria for 
certifying staff for school readiness programs, and that 
whatever preparation and certification requirements are 
adopted, teachers in early childhood education programs 
have qualifications equivalent to other teachers, and be 
equal in status; 

73. That the College of Teachers consider how to recognize 
staff members who arc currently licensed as early childhood 
educators or certified primary teachers and who will be 
affected by the establishment of school readiness programs 
for three-year-olds in publicly funded schools; 

74. That school boards be required to provide appropriate 
and sustained professional support to all first-year teachers, 
to case their entry into full-time teaching; 

75. That mandatory professional development be required 
for all educators m the publicly funded school system, with 
continuing certification every five years, dependent on both 
satisfactory performance and participation in professional 
development recognized by the College of Teachers; 

76. That the Ministry of Education and Training, school 
boards, and federations, in collaboration with the ('ollegc of 
Teachers, investigate and encourage various ways of provid- 
ing opportunities for professional renewal for teachers and 
Khool admini-strators; 


For Vm Lov« o( Le«m«n( 

77. That all school boards make information available to the 
public about their performance appraisal systems, using 
newsletters or other means, so that students, parents, 
teachers, and the public are aware of the basis of perfor- 
mance appraisal and the guidelines being followed; 

78. That all school board performance appraisal systems 
include provision for systematically and regularly seeking 
input from students and parents in regard to teaching, class- 
room, and school atmosphere, and to related matters about 
which they may have concerns or suggestions; 

79. That beginning teachers have an opportunity to get help- 
ful performance feedback from colleagues other than the 
principal or vice-principal, understanding that such infor- 
mation will not be used for decisions about permanent 
contracts. Designated mentor teachers - or in secondary 
schools, department heads - could provide this assistance; 

80. That the College of Teachers, the Ministry, and school 
boards emphasize that principals are accountable for satis- 
factory teacher performance in their schools, and that super- 
visory officers are responsible for ensuring that principals 
take appropriate action in dealing with teachers whose 
performance is not satisfactory; 

81. That the Ministry, teachers' federations, and school 
boards reach agreement on any changes required to ensure 
that policies and practices related to dismissal effectively 
balance the rights of teachers and the rights of students; 

82. That an M.Ed, degree be a requirement for appointment 
to the position of vice-principal or principal; 

83. That the provincial courses to prepare candidates to 
become principals continue, but that these courses be regu- 
larly evaluated, starting immediately, by an external review 
team, composed of practising principals, supervisory offi- 
cers, academics in the field of educational administration, 
and at least one member from outside Ontario. The review 
should be rigorous, to assess how successfully the course 
addresses the skills and knowledge required, as well as the 
needs of the system. Continuation of any courses would 
depend on a satisfactory evaluation; 

84. That school boards create a variety of structured experi- 
ences through which aspiring and junior administrators can 

learn leadership skills. Such experiences would include 
internships or job shadowing, exchanges outside the educa- 
tion field, secondments to a number of different educational 
settings, and organized rotation of vice-principals to differ- 
ent schools; 

85. That appointment to the position of principal or vice- 
principal be for a five-year term, continuation of the 
appointment to depend on evidence of participation in, and 
successful completion of, professional development 
programs satisfactory to the employing school board, and on 
satisfactory performance; 

86. That in light of recent and proposed changes in the 
nature and organization of secondary school programs: 

a) the role of department head be reviewed, with a view 
to reducing the number of department heads where 

b) responsibilities of department heads include supervi- 
sion and evaluation of teachers in their departments; 

c) appropriate professional development be provided for 
department heads; 

87. That school boards review the responsibilities of supervi- 
sory officers in light of the changes in governance and orga- 
nization recommended in this report, with a view to reduc- 
ing the number of supervisory officers as appropriate, as 
current incumbents retire, and, if necessary, changing 
responsibilities assigned to supervisory officers, as organiza- 
tional needs change; 

88. That the Supervisory Officer Qualification Programs 
continue, but be regularly evaluated, starting immediately, 
by an independent review team, which would include super- 
visory officers and academics in educational administration, 
as well as some members from outside Ontario. The contin- 
uation of programs should depend on a satisfactory evalua- 
tion from this team; 

89. That requirements for admission to the Supervisory 
Officer Qualifications Program be adjusted, to make it possi- 
ble for school boards to appoint administrators from outside 
Ontario as supervisory officers; 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Recommendations to the Total Report 

90. That schiwl boards provide current and aspiring supervi- 
sory officers with increased opportunities Jor varied experi- 
ences, both in and outside the educational system, including 
exchange programs with government and business; 

91. That newly appointed supervisory officers be given a 
minimum ot 15 days release time during their first year in 
the position, for participation in structured professional 
development activities such as: 

a) working with other supervisory officers to increase 
their understanding of their new roles; 

b) taking part in a study group or series of workshops 
with other newly appointed supervisory officers; 

92. That supervisory officers be appointed for a five-year 
term, with a continuation of the appointment dependent on 
successful participation in professional development 
recognized by the employing board, and on satisfactory 

Chapter 13: Learning , Teaching and 
Information Technology 

The Commission recommends: 

93. That the Ministry be responsible for overseeing the 
increased and effective use of information technology in the 
province's schools, and that its role include 

a) determining the extent and nature of the computer- 
related resources now in use in schools across Ontario; 

b) functioning as an information clearing house for these 
resources, assuring that all boards are privy to such 
information, and preventing unnecessary duplication 
of effort; 

c) facilitating alliances among the Ministry, school 
boards, hardware and software firms, and the private 

dl developing common standards jointly with system 
partners, for producing and acquiring technology; 

e) developing license protocols that support multiple 
remote users accessing centrally held software in a 
local area network (LAN) or wide area network 
(WAN) structure; and 

f) co-ordinating efforts, including research and special 
projects, to refine effective educational assessment 

94. That school boards in co-operation with the Ministry, 
the private sector, universities, and colleges, initiate a 
number of high-profile and diverse projects on school 
computers and learning, to include a major infusion of 
computer hardware and software. I hese projects should 
reflect the province's diversity, include a distinct and 
comprehensive evaluation component, and be used for 
professional development, software design, and policy 

95. That the Minister approach colleagues in other 
provinces, through the (Council of Ministers of Education 
of Canada, to establish a national network of projects on 
computers and learning, which can inform teaching and 
learning from sea to sea; 

96. That the proposed College of Teachers require faculties 
of education to make knowledge and skills in the 
educational use of information technology an integral part 
of the curriculum for all new teachers; 

97. That teachers be provided with, and partKip.ile in, 
professional development that will equip them with the 
knowledge and skills they need to make appropriate use 
of information technology in the classroom, and that 
acquisition of such knowledge become a condition of 

98. That the Ministry of Education and Training and the 
Ministry of Economic Development and Iradc, working 
through learning consortiums and existing federal govern- 
ment programs, co-ordinate efforts with the Ontario busi- 
ness community to distribute surplus computers through 
Ontario school board.s, and that, as more computers are 
introduced into the .school system, priority be given to 
equipping schools serving low-income .imi Iramo Ontarian 

99. That the Ministry the budget allocated for 
purchasing software on behalf of school boards in Ontario, 
and that it increase boards' flexibility in using funds to 


For ttw Uw* Of LMminc 

permit leasing or other cost-sharing arrangements, in addi- 
tion to purchasing, in acquiring information technology 

100. That computer software and all other electronic 
resources used in education be treated as teaching materials 
for the purpose of Circular 14 assessment (for quality, 
balance, bias, etc.); 

101. That the Ministry, with the advice of educators in the 
field, identify priority areas in which Canadian content and 
perspective are now lacking; 

102. That the Ministry exercise leadership with the Council 
of Ministers of Education of Canada to initiate a program 
promoting production of high-quality Canadian educational 
software by Canadian companies and other appropriate 
bodies, such as school boards, universities, and colleges; 

103. That the Government of Ontario, working with school 
boards and other appropriate agencies, commit itself to 
ensuring that every classroom in every publicly funded 
school in Ontario is connected to at least one local computer 
network and that, in turn, this network is connected to a 
provincial network, a national network, and the Internet; 

104. That school boards, in co-operation with government 
ministries and appropriate agencies, establish in neighbour- 
hoods where personal computer access is less likely to be 
prevalent community computing centres, possibly in school 
buildings or in public libraries, and provide on-going fund- 
ing for hardware, software, and staffing; 

105. That the Ministry support boards in pilot projects that 
extend the opportunity for learners to access funded 
programs and equipment outside the defined school day; 

106. That the Government of Ontario advocate that public 
facilities, such as public libraries and schools, and such non- 
profit groups as "freenets," be given guaranteed access to the 
facilities of the electronic highway at an affordable cost 
(preferably free for users of these facilities); 

107. That the Ministry proceed to upgrade Contact North 
from an audio to an interactive video network. 

Chapter 14: Community Education 

The Commission recommends: 

108. That the Ministry of Education and Training mandate 
that each school in Ontario establish a school-community 
council, with membership drawn from the following sectors: 

- parents 

- students (from Grade 7 on) 

- teachers 

- representatives from local religious and 
ethnic communities 

- service providers (government and non-government) 

- municipal government(s) 

- service clubs and organizations 

- business sectors; 

109. That each school principal devise an action plan for the 
establishment and implementation of the school-community 

110. That school boards provide support to principals to 
establish and maintain school-community councils and that 
the boards monitor the councils' progress and indicate the 
progress in their annual reports; 

111. That the Ministry of Education and Training, teachers' 
federations, and school boards take whatever actions are 
necessary to ensure that community liaison staff persons are 
sufficiently available to assist principals in strengthening 
school-community linkages. These staff, who would not be 
certified teachers, would be responsible for helping to imple- 
ment decisions and initiatives of the school-community 
councils as well as other school-community initiatives; 

112. That the Premier assign responsibility for reforming 
children's services to a senior Minister, in addition to his/her 
regular portfolio; and that this senior Minister be supported 
by an Interministerial Committee of Ministers responsible 
for children's services; and that 

a) the Committee be assisted by permanent staff; 

b) the Committee include the systematic review and revi- 
sion of 

- service approaches taken 

- quality of services provided 

- funding mechanisms 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Recommendations to the Total Report 

- Icgulation 

- regional organization of authority 

- provincial structures; 

c) the Committee estabhsh, through the regional offices 
of the MET, a leadership and co-ordinating plan 
between the school boards and the other local 
providers of services to develop and help implement 
the mechanisms necessary to support the work of 
school-community councils. 

1 13. That the provincial government review legislative and 
related impediments, and that they develop a policy frame- 
work for collaboration to facilitate partnerships between 
community and schools; 

1 14. That the Interministerial Committee of Ministers, 
under the senior minister responsible, as its first task set a 
sustainable timeline for implemcntatinp community part- 
nership, policies, and mechanisms, with specific points for 
reporting and disseminating the results of the efforts. 

Chapter 15: Constitutional Issues 

The Commission recommends: 

115. That section 136, which restricts preferential hiring in 
the Roman Catholic school system, be removed from the 
Education Act; 

1 16. That, with reference to the role of the Roman Catholic 
education system, the Ministry of Education and Training 
ensure appropriate and influential representation from the 
Roman Catholic education system at all levels of its profes- 
sional and managerial staff, up to and including that of 
Assistant Deputy Minister; and that the Minister establish a 
Roman Catholic Education Policy and Programs Team or 
branch in the Ministry; 

117. That the Ministry of Education and Training and the 
faculties of education establish a pre-service credit course in 
the foundations of Roman Catholic education, and that this 
course be available at all faculties of education in Ontario; 

1 18. That the religious education courses currently offered at 
faculties of education receive full credit status and be made 
part of the regular academic program: 

1 19. That, with reference to the admission of non-righthold- 
ers to French-language schools: 

a) the Minister of Education and Training give the 
CEFFO a mandate in consultation with school boards, 
to propose and ensure the adoption of uniform crite- 
ria for the admission of "non-rightholders" or their 

b) the Ministry of hdiajtion and Training require 
school boards to assume responsibility for making 
information about these criteria available to the 
relevant communities, particularly ethno-cultural 

c) the composition of committees to admit non- 
rightholders or their children include one or more 
Franco-Ontarian parents and one or more parents 
from ethno-cultural communities; 

120. That the Ontario Ministry of Education and Training 
give the Conseil dc I'education et de la formation Iranco- 
ontariennes (CEFFO) the mandate to recommend to the 
Ministry, as soon as possible and on the basis of existing 
documents, school governance model(s) by and for 
francophones, encompassing education from preschool to 
the end of secondary school without, however, seeking to 
define structures that arc administratively symmetrical to 
those of the English-language system; and that the govern- 
ment, through the Ontario Ministry of Education and Train- 
ing, approve and diligently implement the recommendations 
submitted by the CEFFO with respect to school governance 
by and for francophones; 

121. That funding by the Ministry of Education and Train- 
ing automatically mcludc among its calculation of grants 
and weighting factors, for all French-language instructional 
units, the budgetary supplements required to allow these 
units to offer, according to the needs identified by the 

a) accelerated language retrieval programs (designed for 
recovery, actualization, and skill and deveU)pment); 

b) the necessary animation cullurcllc in classes and 

For Vtt La^ o( Uamtnf 

122. That for the early childhood education programs (chil- 
dren age 3 to 5), one of our key recommendations in Chap- 
ter 7, the provincial government give priority funding to 
French -language instructional units over every other school; 

123. That rather than having the two levels of government 
work independently of each other, and in order to avoid 
duplication, the Government of Canada and the Govern- 
ment of Ontario jointly fund for use in both on-reserve 
schools and schools under provincial jurisdiction, the devel- 
opment of curriculum guidelines and resource materials that 
more accurately reflect the history of Canada's aboriginal 
people and their contribution to Canada's literature, culture, 
history, and values, and in other areas to be incorporated 
throughout the curriculum; 

124. That the Governments of Canada and Ontario jointly 
fund the development of assessment and teaching strategies 
that are more sensitive to the learning styles identified by 
aboriginal educators; 

125. That the federal and provincial governments work with 
Native education authorities and the First Nations to 
provide better support to students who must live away from 
their communities to obtain elementary and/or secondary 

126. That the federal government review its method of fund- 
ing education for Native students in on-reserve schools to 
ensure there are adequate funds to provide any necessary 
special programs to support aboriginal education and for 
professional support of teachers; 

127. That the province include in its requirements for pre- 
service and in-service teacher education a component relat- 
ed to teaching aboriginal students and teaching about 
aboriginal issues to both Native and non-Native students; 

128. That the federal government, which has responsibility 
in this field, give top priority to ensuring the availability of 
good telecommunications throughout Ontario in order to 
support education through the use of interactive video and 
computer networking; 

129. That both the federal and provincial governments 
provide resources to support the development of courses, 
initially video- and CD-ROM-based, that would use interac- 
tive technology when an adequate telecommunication infra- 
structure is in place; 

130. That the federal government provide assistance to 
aboriginal peoples to develop language teaching resources 
co-operatively with communities that use the same 
languages, in other provinces and in the United States; 

131. That the province, in co-operation with First Nations 
communities and school boards, develop guidelines for 
permitting the use of Native languages as languages of 
instruction, where teachers and teaching resources are 

132. That the provincial and federal governments continue 
their programs to develop resource materials that support 
the teaching of Native languages and culture for teacher in- 
service and for classroom use in on- and off-reserve schools, 
providing such materials are made available to other boards 
and schools; 

133. That the Ministry and the representatives of the First 
Nations review the Declaration of Political Intent proposal 
on Native trustee representation, taking into account possi- 
ble changes in overall board structures that could follow the 
issue of this report, and that at the earliest opportunity the 
parties implement the agreement that results; 

134. That the federal and provincial governments continue 
negotiations that lead to full self-governance of education by 
the First Nations; 

135. That the province develop a different way of dealing 
with band-operated elementary and secondary schools than 
it now has. Such a method would: 

a) recognize that they are publicly funded schools of a 
First Nation, governed by a duly constituted education 
authority; and 

b) permit more reciprocity and co-operation with 
provincial school boards. 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Recommendations to the Total Report 

Chapter 16: Equity Considerations 

Chapter 17: Organizing education 

The Commission recommends; 

136. That the Ministry of Education and Training always 
have an Assistant Deputy Minister responsible, in addition 
to other duties, for advocacy on behalf of anglophone, 
francophone, ethno-cultural and racial minorities; 

137. That trustees, educators, and support staff be provided 
with professional development in anti-racism education; 

138. That the performance management process for supcrvi 
scry officers, principals, and teachers specifically include 
measurable outcomes related directly to anti-racism policies 
and plans of the .Ministry and the school boards; 

139. That, for the purposes of the anti-racism and ethno 
cultural equity provisions of Bill 21, the Ministry of F.duca- 
tion and Training require boards and schools to seek input 
from parents and community members in implementing 
and monitoring the plans. This process should be linked to 
the overall school and board accountability mechanisms; 

140. That the Ministry and school boards systematically 
review and monitor teaching materials of all types (texts, 
reading materials, videos, software, etc.). as well as teaching 
practices, educational programs (curriculum), and assess- 
ment tools to ensure that they are free of racism and meet 
the spirit and letter of anti-racism policies; 

141. That in jurisdictions with large numbers of black 
students, school boards, academic authorities, faculties of 
education, and representatives of the black community 
collaborate to establish demonstration schools and inno- 
vative programs based on best practices in bringing about 
academic success for black students; 

142. That whenever there are indications of collective under 
achievement in any particular group of students, school 
boards ensure that teachers and principals have the neces- 
sary strategies and human and financial resources to help 
these students improve. 

The Commission recommends: 

143. That all boards have at least one student member, enti- 
tled to vote on all board matters, subject to the usual 
conflict-of-interest and legal requirements; 

144. That student councils be given the responsibility for 
organizing students' views on all aspects of school life, and 
for transmitting these views to teachers and principals with 
responses sent back to students in a systematic way, and that 
thcv provide advice to student trustees; 

145. That the .Minister of Hducation and Training establish a 
Student and Youth Council, to advise on all educational 
matters, to seek further ways to involve students in decisions 
that affect their lives, and to sponsor research about what 
students can do to improve learning in schools; 

146. That the Ministry organize a collaborative process for 
developing a Students' Charter of Rights and Responsibili- 
ties, and that the process include a significant role for 
students. The essential elements of such a charter must 
include a description of the kind of information a student is 
entitled to receive, the programs and services to which a 
student is entitled, the responsibilities a student is expected 
to accept, the role that students are entitled to play in the 
decisions made in the system, and the recourse available if 
students feel that their rights have not been upheld; 

147. That students be involved in developing and regularly 
reviewing codes of behaviour and other selected policies and 
procedures that flow from the Students' Charter of Rights 
and Responsibilities at both board and school levels. These 
policies and procedures may not take away from the rights 
and responsibilities specified in the charter; 

148. That information about the students' charter and all 
policies and procedures that directly affect students be made 
available to all students in a way most students can readily 

149. That the Ministry phase in a policy requiring school 
hoards to turn over an increasingly significant portion of the 
school budget to principals, on the t<mdilion that the school 
have a school grov^th plan; that this plan be monitored by 
the board; that teachers participate in decisionmaking 
concerning curriculum. a.ssessment, professional develop- 


For th« Lo«* or tMming 

merit, and staffing; and that the school demonstrate how it 
reaches out to students, parents, and the community; 

150. That a Parents' Charter of Rights and Responsibilities 
be developed at the provincial level as a result of collabora- 
tion among parents, teachers, administrators, and political 

151. That parents be involved in developing student codes of 
behaviour, and other policies and procedures that flow from 
the Students' and Parents' Charter of Rights and Responsi- 
bilities at both board and school levels; 

152. That information about the students' and parents' char- 
ters and all policies and procedures that directly affect 
students and parents be readily available to parents; 

153. That all schools in Ontario be accountable for demon- 
strating the ways in which they have strengthened parents' 
involvement in their children's school learning; 

154. That the Minister of Education and Training, in consul- 
tation with the provincial trustees' associations, review and 
revise the legislation and regulations governing education, in 
order to clarify the policy-making, as distinct from the oper- 
ational, responsibilities of school board trustees; 

155. That the Ministry set a scale of honoraria for trustees, 
with a maximum of $20,000 per annum; 

156. That following the proposed shift to the provincial 
government of the responsibility for determining the fund- 
ing of education, the two-tiered governance structure of the 
public schools in Metropolitan Toronto be phased out, with 
the Metropolitan Toronto School Board being replaced by an 
administrative consortium of school boards in the Metro- 
politan Toronto area; 

157. That the Ministry clearly set out its leadership and 
management roles, especially in relation to school boards, 
teacher federations, and faculties of education, and that it 
develop a plan for more complete communication with all 
those interested in elementary and secondary education; 

158. That, in order to maximize their influence within the 
Ministry, assistant deputy ministers representing particular 
constituencies be placed in charge of the portfolio of issues 
related to their respective constituencies, as well as being 

responsible for other important dossiers related to education 
for all Ontarians; 

Chapter 18: Funding 

The Commission recommends: 

159. That equal per-pupil funding across the province, as 
well as additional money needed by some school boards for 
true equity, be decided at the provincial level, and that the 
province ensure that funds be properly allocated; 

160. That boards be allowed to raise a further sum, no 
greater than 10 percent of their provincially determined 
budget, from residential assessment only; 

161. That all residential property owners be required to 
direct their taxes to the school system they are entitled to 
and wish to support, and that undirected taxes be pooled 
and distributed on a per-pupil basis; 

162. That the Ministry of Education and Training first 
decide what it considers to be an adequate educational 
program for the province, and then determine the cost of 
delivering this program in various areas of the province, 
taking into account different student needs and varying 
community characteristics, such as geography, poverty rates, 
and language, that affect education costs. 

Chapter 19: The Accountability of the System 

The Commission recommends: 

163. That the government establish an Office of Learning 
Assessment and Accountability, reporting to the Legislature. 
Its first responsibility would be the Grades 3 and 1 1 system- 
wide, every-student assessments (Cf Rec. 51); 

164. That the Office of Learning Assessment and Account- 
ability also be responsible for developing indicators of 
system performance, to be used at the board and provincial 

165. That the Office of Learning Assessment and Account- 
ability, working with education stakeholders, also establish 
guidelines for the content of annual reports prepared by 
school boards and by the Minister of Education and Train- 
ing. Further, we recommend that: 

Vol. IV Making It Happen Recommendations to the Total Report 

a) thcvr reports be published and be freely and widely Chapter 20: Implamenting the Reforms 

available in schools and community lucatiuns; ^^ „ 

The Commisbiof! fetomineiKJb. 

b) the Ministry of Education and Training ensure that all 167. That an Implementation Commission be established to 
school boards be informed of guidelines for the oversee the implementation of the recommendations made 
reports, and that they follow those guidelines; by the Royal Commission on Learning. 

166. That the work and mandate of the Office of Learning 
Asseument and Accountability be reviewed in five years. 

For ttw Low of Uamtni 


For the Love of 
Learning: Appendices 
An Introduction 

In these six appendices, we gratefully 
acknowledge the contributions of a broad range 
of people who were instrumental in helping to 
shape this report. 

Their passion and commitment to publicly funded 
education cannot be reflected in mere lists. 

Still, we believe that to name them is to honour 
them: the educators, parents, citizen groups, and 
others who made oral and written submissions, 
the students and youth we spoke with in our 
youth-outreach strategy, the individuals who 
shared their specialized expertise, the scholars 
who wrote papers on the more vexing problems 
before us, and the many educators and students 
who welcomed us to dozens of schools during 
our travels over the autumn and winter roads 
of Ontario. 

Appendix A lists groups and individuals who made 
their views known - who made oral or written 
submissions - to the Commission. We were 
astonished and delighted by the number of Ontarians who 
took the time to either come to the public hearings or 
submit a written brief (and in many cases, both). 
Presentations were made by educators, parents, citizen 
groups, and others. We heard from communities based on 
geography, religion, culture, language, and interest. Student 
submitters are listed in Appendix B, not in Appendix A. 

Appendix B identifies all students and other young 
people who talked with the Commission as part of our 
youth-outreach strategy, both individually and through 
youth organizations. As part ,of the Commission's efforts to 
consult with young people, outreach activities were 
organized across Ontario. In addition to encouraging 
student participation in the public hearings, we sought the 
views of young people who were not in school. Sessions were 
held in shopping malls, detention centres, community 
centres, and other agencies. The presentations at public 
hearings and the non-school sites visited during the youth 
outreach program are listed. 

Appendix C lists those who, in response to requests from 
the Commission, contributed their expertise to our work. 
The range of their contributions is impressive - university 
professors and other researchers talked and wrote about 
their research; practising educators reflected on their 
experience and what implications there might be for policy; 
those who had conducted other inquiries into education and 
related issues, in Ontario and elsewhere, generously shared 

their perspectives. We have indicated those who are from 
outside Ontario. We also consulted, in an official capacity, 
representatives from the Ministry of Education and Training 
and others from provincial government. In other cases, 
provincial employees provided necessary background 
information to inform our work. The report benefited from 
the efforts of all these people, but they bear no responsibiity 
for any weaknesses it might have. We apologize to any who 
have inadvertently been omitted from our list. 

Appendix D gives the schedule for the most publicly 
visible facet of the Commission's work, the public hearings. 
Over a period of three months in the fall of 1993, the 
Commission sat in school auditoriums across the province, 
hearing from hundreds upon hundreds of Ontarians who 
took the opportunity to make their views known. 

In Appendix E, we name the schools visited by 
Commissioners during the course of the deliberations. 
Commissioners spent anywhere from an afternoon to several 
days in each school, hearing the views of students, staff, and 

Appendix F provides the titles of the background papers 
prepared for the Commission under contract. These papers 
will be made available to the academic community, and to 
any others interested in reviewing them, in two volumes, one 
for English-language papers, the other for French-language 
papers. In most cases, these papers summarize and review 
research in a particular area, and outline policy implications 
of the research. 

Finally, brief biographies of the five Commissioners, 
Monique Begin, Gerald Caplan, Manisha Bharti, Avis Glaze, 
and Dennis Murphy, are given in Appendix G. 

Vol. IV Appendices 

Appendix A: Submitters 

Anvxnc wi^iny u> Jk:>.ru the 
tubmiuioiu and mnrds u( ihr 
Ri»~4l (!otnmtMH>n un learning 
ihuuld t.untact the Rrvordi 
ManagrmenI L'nit ur (he 
Freedom oC lnfunnatu>n and 
Privacy Oflke of ihe Ministry of 
Education and Training. The 
records will be retained there for 
three years and then 
periTvanently stored at the 
Archives of Ontario. 

Abbott. Beverly/ Abbott. Murray 

Abongiival Women Solidarity of 

Abthcz. Charles, Toronto 

Acad^mie b Pin^de, Comity de 
parents BFC Borden 

Acheson, Gis^, Navan 

Advrman. Robert H., Guelph 

Action Centre for Social Justice 

Actrve Living AlliatKe of 
Ontario, Toronto 

Ad Hoc (u>mminee of the V.I. P. 
(Values, InfluciKes & Peers) 

Adam Scott (>>llegute 
Vocational Institute. stiKlcnts, 

Adamv Karen, RuhmonJ flitl 

Addison, Bill 

Addison PuMk School. Addison 
School CxNnmittee. Additon 

Administrators of Medium-sued 
PuMk LibrarvTA ,.f ( >nijr... 

Aduh BasK IdiKalHin 
AiMKialioti nf Hamihon- 

Adult Day School of St. loiephV 
Scullard Hall. Sorth Bay 

Advanced Coronary Treatment 
Foundation/Ottawa (general 
Hospital, Base Hospital Program, 

Ackema, (Mrs.) M. W.. Agtncourt 

African Canadian Organization, 

African Heritage Educators' 

Ageda, Belinda/Campbell, 
Brenda/Hanson, Tom 

Aggarwal, Saryu/Dunlnp, 

Agincourt Collegiate, Music 
Parents' Association, Agincourt 

Aldrich, Ray 

Aldridge. Norma Jean, Simcot 

Alexander Henry High School 

Alexander Kuska Parent Group 

Algoma District Municipal 

Algonquin College of Applied 
Arts & Technology. School of 
Businevs. Retail students. Septan 

Algonquin College of Applied 
Arts & Technology. Academic 


Allan, Marilyn 

Allan. Richard I 

Allen. Betty 

Allen. H.. WiltowdaU 

Allergy & Environmental Health 
Association/Parents for 
F.ducation without Pollution. 

Alliance for Fxlucational Kcnrwal 

Alliance of Trinidad & Tobago 
Alumni. 5ciirborouj;/i 

Alpha-Toronto, Toronto 

Ambs, Dale 

Amenta, Salvatorc A., Hon MitU 

Amyutte, Mireille/Cot<. 

Anderson, Percy/Brown, 
Riel/Gasparclli, Rosanna 

Andr<, Deborah, .Sf. George- 

Anglican Church of Canada, 
Ecclesiastical Province of 
Ontario, London 

Anishinabek C^irccr Centre 

Annett, loannc, Bolhwell 

Anstey, Sandra, Toronto 

Anti-Racist Multicultural 
Fxlucators' Network of Ontario 
{ AM f. HO), Kitchener 

Alternative Parent Participating 
Ixindon Elementary (APPLE) 
Program, Ijondon 

Applied Scholastics Canada, 

Apse, Inta, Oxford Mills 

Archdiocese of Ottawa. Ollawu 

Ana, Rata 

Armenian, Aiken. Scarborough 

Armstrong, G. Grant, Trenton 

Armstrong, S. W., Ingletide 

Arnold, ludy, Ijimbelh 

Arnold, Ixona, KIcKrrrow 

Arnold, Marie, Shelhurnr 

Art (iailery of Ontario, Toronto 

Arts Education Council of 
Ontario, North York 

Ash, Larry 

Ashroff, Khazeena/Mohammad, 
Kalima, Mininauga 

Aslanidis, Christos, Scarborough 

AsNcnibl^ dcs centres cuhurcls 
dc I'Ontario, Vanier 

Association canadirnnr frani;aise 
dc {'Ontario - regional 
Hamilton, Hamilton 

Assixiation canadienne-fran^aise 
dc I'Ontario - Huronie, 

Association canadienne-fran^ise 
de I'Ontario du grand Sudbury/ 
Alliance pour ics colleges 
francophones de I'Ontario 

Ass<Kiation canadiennc-fran^aise 
dc I'Ontario, Vanier 

AsscKiation canadienne-fran^aise 
de I'Ontario, Conscil regional de 

Association canadicnne-fran^aise 
dc I'Ontario, R^ionalc de la 
communaut^ urbainc dc 

Association canadicnnc-fran^aisc 
dc rOnlario, (!^nscil r^ional 
dcs Milles-lles, Kingston 

Ass<Kiation canadiennc-fran^iie 
dc I'Ontario, Oinseil r^ional 
Ottawa-Cjrieton, Vanier 

Association de parents de I'toilc 
Monseigneur dc l^val 

AtuKialion dcs agcnies et des 
agents dc supervuion franco 
onlaricns (ASFO) 

For Vm L0M o< Laammg 

Association des Chefs, 
enseignantes et enseignants de 
commerce de I'Ontario, Sudbury 

Association des directeurs des 
d^partements d'etudes £ran<;:aises 
des universites de I'Ontario, 

Association des directrices et des 
directeurs d'ecole et de service 
du secondaire d'Ottawa-Carleton 
(ADSOC), Ottawa 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants responsables de 
sports inter-scolaires (SPORT 
CfiPOC), Vanier 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
unite secondaire de Kirkland 
Lake, Kirkland Lake 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
unite Kiridand Lake- 
Timiskaming, New Liskeard 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
section secondaire publique 
(Niagara Sud) 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
unite Timmins elementaire 
separee, Timmins 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
unite Sudbury separee, Sudbury 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
secteur secondaire publique, 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
unite Rive-Nord secondaire 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
unite Renfrew secondaire, 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
Essex elementaire catholique, 


Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens 
d'Ottawa-Carleton (CSLF, 
Section catholique, Palier 
elementaire), Ottawa 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
unite Lambton secondaire 
catholique, Sarnia 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
unite Wellingto, Guelph 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
unite elementaire publique 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
unite secondaire catholique 
Ottawa-Carleton, Comite de 
perfectionnement professionnel, 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
unite regionale, Nipissing 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco-ontariens, 
unite Stormont, Dundas et 
Glengarry secondaire 

Association des enseignantes et 
des enseignants franco- 
ontariens, unite Nipissing 
secondaire. Sturgeon Falls 

Association des francophones du 
Nord-Ouest de I'Ontario, 
Thunder Bay 

Association for Bright Children, 
Bruce County Chapter, 


Association for Bright Children, 
Markham Chapter 

Association for Bright Children 
of Ontario, Toronto 

Association for Bright Children, 
North York Chapter 

Association for Bright Children, 
Ottawa Region 

Association for Bright Children, 
Renfrew County Chapter, Deep 

Association for Choices in 
Learning, Ottawa 

Association for Media & 
Technology in Education in 
Canada (AMTEC), Ottawa 

Association for Media Literacy, 

Association Foyer-Jeunesse 

Association franc^aise des conseils 
scolaires de I'Ontario, Region 
no. 1 (est), Ottawa 

Association fran(;aise des conseils 
scolaires de I'Ontario, Region 
no. 4 

Association fran(;aise des conseils 
scolaires de I'Ontario 

Association franco-ontarienne 
des conseils d'ecoles catholiques, 

Association franco-ontarienne 
en education technologique 

Association francophone des 
conseilleres et des conseillers 
pedagogiques de I'Ontario, 

Association interculturelle 
franco-ontarienne, Toronto 

Association nationale des 
editeurs de livres, Montreal 

Association of Career Centres in 
Education Settings, Etobicoke 

Association of Chief 
Psychologists with Ontario 
School Boards 

Association of Colleges of 
Applied Arts & Technology, 

Association of Educational 
Research Officers of Ontario 

Association of Iroquois & 
Allied Indians, London 

Association of Peel Secondary 
School Teacher-Librarians, 

Association ontarienne de 
I'education alternative. Sturgeon 

Association ontaroise des 
responsables en animation 
culturelle, Unionville 

Association regionale de parents 
de Prescott-Russell, Russell 

Atell, Mary Anne S., Toronto 

Atfield, Louise, Deep River 

Atfield, Michael D., Deep River 

Atikokan Board of Education, 

Vol. IV Appendices 

Aiikulun Hoin« & Publh: S*:htH>l 
AiMXMtion. Alikpkan 

Atikokan Public Libfary. 
Rr^ing Plu» Progrwn. Attkokan 

Alikukan Women Tcathcn' 
Auoculion. Mikijiitn 

Aikin. lohn 

Alkinson, ludy. Afox 

AlwatCT. R. C Off<n*u 

Auchiiuchie, Gwcn. Brantfonl 

Aurura Publii Ubriry Board. 

Autum Society Onurio, 

Autism Society Onuria 
Hamihon Wentworth Chapter/ 
liKludc Our Children. OunJas 

Autism Society Ontario, Metro 
Toronto (liapter. Eiotneokt 

Aylan- Parker. Ted. (MUtUmia 

AMem. Iffat, Markham 

B'Nai Briih Canada. League for 
Human Rights. [Mfwntyiew 

Baphaw, lean. HunlmlU 

Rahlicda. Robert A., Newmarket 

Baier. Mardelle. Brantford 

Bailey, N.. fViinjfrvi/t 

Baily. lohn M.. Don MiUs 

Baird. Ketth/Baird. Florence. 

Bamociy, Maruu Toronto 

B«kcr. Oiflbrd. St. CMthartnn 

Baker. L S.. OrM*.. 

Baker, John E-. Prterborouth 

Baker. Waher 

Bank, leannc. Brampton 

Banks, lean Marie. Hamilton 

Barbeau. Edward I., Toronto 

Barel. Conny. Komokix 

Barker. Kathryn Chang. Onati-n 

Barker, Paul. London 

Barker. Sandra. Elobkoke 

Barnes. Margaret L/Barnes, leff. 

Baron. Patricia K.. Ancaster 

Barrette, Louiselle, Orleans 

Barne Eastview Secondary 
School. OAC Phviical Education 
CJass, Barrie 

Baster, lohn, Belleville 

Bates, lohn 

Baxter, (Dr.) Stephen. 

Baxter. Carol. Fergus 

Bay Area ArU Cxillectivr. 

Bay Wellness Centre. North Bay 

Baylen, Hcrmine, Toronto 

Bayvirw Glen Church, Thomhill 

Bayview Public School. Bayview 
School (^immunity Ouncil 

Bayview Public School. Parents' 
Advisory (>»mmittce 

Bazylinski. I. L. Pefferlaw 

Beal. Pmny 

Beaton, Brian. Suuw Ivokoui 

Beatsnn. Barbara, Waterloo 

Beauchamp, hliane 

Beauchamp. Michcl/Forgues. 
Oicar/Prevnst. f roficr 

Beaudry. Emile/Daigle. Brigitte 

Bedggood. Susan 

Beer, Charles 

Behrcr, Unet 

Bclanger, William A., Ottawa 

B^langcr. Nancy/Bergcvin. 
PalrickyUmoureux. lacques 

Bell, Donald B.. Kanaia 

Bell. Ron. Kitchener 

Bellau. Wallace 

Bencze, |. Larry 

Bennett. (Dr.) Paul, Thomhill 

Bennett, Leslie )., Pike Bay 

Bennett. Mary. Pickering 

Benoit. Beth. Hamilton 

Bentlcy, Nancy 

Bergauer-Free. Christiannc 

Berger-Pluvoise. Maric-los^. 

Bergeron, Ron 

Bergcvin-Holock, Rose. Nepean 

Bergson, Sheldon. Thomhill 

Bernard Betel Centre for 
Creative Living 

Bernard, leanne. Hamilton 

Bernier. Mark V.. Scarborough 

Bernofsky. Linda. Thomhill 

Berrigan. C. I., Whitby 

Btruht, Robert, A;<uc 

Beswick, Michael, Toronto 

Bethel Pentecostal Church. 

Bethell, Steve 

Bo'cridge. Geri 

Beyak. lason. Fort Frances 

Bhardwaj, V. Sagar. Sarnia 

Bicker, Gary. Toronto 

Hieiniilcr. Andrew/ 
Mcichcnbaum. Donald 

Billing. Helen F./Batty. Helen P.. 

Bird. Mike. F.tohicoke 

Birnie, 1. D./Birnic, Mildred, 

Birta. Dana. Markham 

Bishop Francis Allen School. 
Parent FUlucation c:*immittee, 

Bishop, ludith. Hamilton 

Bisichops. lohn. Sudbury 

Black Action Defence Committee 

Black Educators' Working 
Group, North York 

Black Parents' C^immunity 
Group of Hamilton 

Blake. H. T (Ted). Thunder Bay 

Blatiel, Marilyn, Ottawa 

Blaxall. lanel. London 

Bled. Cynthia. Ottawa 

Bloch- Hansen. Peter, Toronto 

Bloes. Roy 

Bloor Collegiate Institute, 
History Department 

Bloxsidgc, Nallie. Burgestxnlle 

Board of E<ducalion for the City 
of Toronto. Special F^ucalion 
Department, romrtfo 

For Vm Low o( L«amln( 

Board of Education for the City 
of Toronto, Student Affairs 
Committee/Toronto Association 
of Student Councils 

Board of Education for the City 
of Toronto, Special Education 
Advisory Committee, Toronto 

Board of Education for the City 
of Toronto, Parent Involvement 
Committee, Toronto 

Board of Education for the City 
of York, York 

Board of Education for the City 
of Toronto, Youth Alienation 

Board of Education for the City 
of Toronto, Working to Learn 
Project, Toronto 

Board of Education for the City 
of Toronto, Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual 
Board Employees Group 

Board of Education for the City 
of Hamilton 

Board of Education for the City 
of Etobicoke, Etobicoke 

Board of Education for the City 
of Toronto, NDP Trustees, 

Board of Education for the City 
of Hamilton, Social Work 

Board of Education for the City 
of London 

Board of Education for the City 
of Toronto, Toronto 

Board of Trade of Metropolitan 
Toronto, Toronto 

Boardwatch, Brockville 

Bokya-Lokumo, Monique, 

Boldt, Victor, North Bay 

Bond, (Ms.) G., Scarborough 

Boone, John 

Boots, Deborah, Mississauga 

Bordeleau, Louis-Gabriel 

Borg, Betty, Peterborough 

Borovilos, John, Scarborough 

Bosman, Ed, Moorefield 

Boston, Joyce, Kirkland Lake 

Bosveld, Beverly John, London 

Bouchette, Murray, Sarnia 

Bourgeois, Pierre 

Bourns, (Dr.) R. E., Georgetown 

Bowley, R. E., Peterborough 

Boxen, Gloria, Richmond Hill 

Boyagoda, Ivor, Oshawa 

Boyne River Natural Science 
School/Albion Hills 
Conservation Field Centre/Cedar 
Glen Outdoor Education 
Centre/Etobicoke Outdoor 
Education Centre/Mono Cliffs 
Outdoor Education Centre/Pine 
River Outdoor Education 
Centre/Sheldon Centre for 
Outdoor Education 

Boys' and Girls' Clubs of 
Ontario, Provincial Youth 
Council, Hamilton 

Bradley, T. Juanita 

Branchflovkfer, Jane, Bolton 

Brands, (Mr. & Mrs.) M., 

Brault, Nicole L., Mississauga 

Bray, B., Wahmipitae 

Brechun, Henry/Brechun, 

Brennan, Dan 

Brewster, Janet, Guelph 

Bridlevifood Community 
Elementary School, Parent 
Teachers' Association, Kanata 

Brien, Robert, Oakville 

Bright, Donna 

Brill, Mark/Tarn, Katrina 

Brillinger, Marc, Sutton West 

Brittain, Sharon, Peterborough 

Broadview Community & School 
Association, Ottawa 

Brock University, St. Catharines 

Brock University, Faculty of 

Brock University, Faculty of 
Education, EDUC 8F10 Pre- 
Service students, St. Catharines 

Brockville & District Association 
for Community Involvement, 
Education Committee, Brockville 

Brooks, Barry 

Brooks, Betty, Loring 

Brooks, Jennifer, Oakville 

Broussard, W. A., Ottawa 

Brown, (Dr.) Marilyn, Hamilton 

Brown, Greg 

Brown, Karen, Kanata 

Brown, Lorna M. /Brown, 
Michael, Peterborough 

Brown, Robin, Port Robinson 

Brown, Sherry, Ajax 

Brown, Verna/Brown, Jessie, 
St. Catharines 

Bruen, Trevor 

Bruner, Ronald Douglas, 

Bryan, Lanna Kay, Pickering 

Buchanan, William, Woodstock 

Buck, Karen, Toronto 

Buckley, Michael, Casselman 

Budden, L. ]. 

Bureau conseil en equite et en 
integration communaute ethno- 
culturel francophone 

Bureau des regroupements des 
artistes visuels de I'Ontario 
(BRAVO), Vanier 

Burgess, Angela, Russell 

Burghardt, Richard J., 

Burke, Patricia, Kingsville 

Burlington Chamber of 
Commerce, Business & 
Education Issues Committee, 

Burlington Public Library/ 
Halton Hills Public Library/ 
Oakville Public Library/Milton 
Public Library 

Burniston, Barry E., North Bay 

Burns, Ken/Burns, Trudy, Alliston 

Burns, Trudy J., Alliston 

Burton, William J., Ottawa 

Burwell, Barbara, Toronto 

Business & Professional Woman's 
Club of Windsor 

CD. Farquharson Junior Public 
School, students, Agincourt 

Vol. IV Appendices 

Creating Lifetime Attiiu<i« - 
Student Safety (CLA-S-S.) 
AJvitory Committee. Industrial 
Accident Prevention Auocution. 

Calvin ChrisUan School Society 

Cambrian College of Applied 
Arts & Technology 

Cambridge Street School. 
Rucnti' Advisory Committee, 

Cambridge Youth ServKes 

Cameron, Benoit. Kinpton 

Cameron. Gary, Ou^Uau 

Cameron Heights C.ollegute 
liulitute. Phyucal Exlucation 
Staff, KiuhentT 

Cameron, llm, Bmnlford 

Cameron. Wendy 

Campbell. (Capt.) Douglas K.. 

Campbell. Demsc/Rodiway, 

Campbell, lohn. Port Colbome 

Campbell. Rose. Leamington 

Campbell. Slerhng 

Can-Am Indun Friendship 
Ontre. Cxmimunitv Fducjiion 

Canada. Office f>t ihc 
CommiMMiner of Official 
Langtii. .vjnatdet 

langvK ';r<nni 

Canadtan AOuncc of Black 
Educator* I Ontario i. Toronto 

Canadian Association for Health, 
ftiywcal Education ft Recreation. 
Quality (>aity Phrucal Fxlu. V 
Program. G40Mcafrr 

Canadian Association for Health, 
Physical Education & Recreation, 

Canadian Assoculiun of 
Monlessori Teachers. Etobuokt 

Canadian Association of 
University Teachers, Ottawa 

Canadian Book Publishers' 
Cxiuncil, School (iroup, Toronto 

Canadian Braille Authority, 

Canadian Centre for Italian 
Culture & Education 

Canadian Ckingress for Learning 
Opportunities for Women 

Canadian Council of Montessori 
Administrators, Burlington 

Canadian Ethnocullural Council, 

Caiudian Federation of 
Independent Business, 

Canadian Federation of 
University Women, Mississauga, 
Education Committee, 

Canadun Federation of 
University Women, Ontario 
(xiuncil, Ottawa 

(^nadun Guidance & 
Counselling Association, Oltawn 

(.anadun Hearing Society, 

Canadian Historical Assocution, 
North York 

Canadian Home ft School A 
Parent -Teacher Federation, 

'anadian Hunger FouiMlalKin. 

Canadian Institute for Conflict 
Resolution, Educational 
Initiatives, OrtaH'u 

Onadian-ltalian Business & 
Professional Association of 
Toronto, Toronto 

(Canadian National Institute for 
the Blind, Ottawa 

CaoJiiun Parents tor French 
(Ontario), Toronto 

Canadian Vocational 
Association, Ottawa 

Canadian Youth Foundation, 

Canadians Against Violence 
Everywhere Advocating its 
Education Committee 

Canterbury High School, 
Parents' Advisory Committee 

Cantin, Pierre, Or/Ainj 

CUpela, Ann K. 

CUrleton Board of F^ucatinn, 

(jricton Cxiuncil of 
Parcnt/School Associations, 

Carleton Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Ncpcan 

(^rleton I'nivrr^itv Rank & File 

Cjrmichacl. Ann. Krtnptyille 

Carousel Players 

Carpenter, |an 

' arr-Rraini, Margaret, I indtay 

' arr, C. W. N., Toronto 

(^rvin, Fred 

Carty, larrcl, Mrhalff 

Casas, (Professor) Francois R. 

Cascade Theatre 

Case, ( Dr. ) Winslow Aubre)' 
Sealcy, Sudbury 

Cash, Paul, Ruhmond Hill 

Casseriy, Donna, Norfh Bay 

Cathedral High School, 
Wilma's Place, Hamilton 

Catholic Business Pers<jns of 
London 8( Middlesex 

Catholic Principals' Council of 
Ontario, Ottawa Unit 

Catholic Principals' Council of 

Catholic Principals' Council of 
Stormont, Dundas & Glengarry 

Otholic Religious Education 
Consultants of Ontario, Wetland 

Catholic School Chaplains of 
Ontario, Waterloo 

(^thnlic Women's League of 
Canada, Ontario Provincial 
Council, London 

Cattani, Don 

C^wcth, Nathan, Pelerhorough 

( jyenne, C^nil 

Caiabon, Benoit, Ottawa 

Centennial ■67/North 
Fxlwardshurg Public Schools. 
Sch<M>l Oimmittee, Spencerville 

Central Algoma Board of 

Ontral Algoma Catholic 

Onlral Ontario Computer 
Ass<Kiation, Hrllrville 

For th« Low o( LMming 

Central Park Senior Public 
School, Grade 7 & 8 students, 

Centre culturel Frontenac de 
Kingston, Kingston 

Le Centre d'alphabetisation Moi, 
j'apprends du comte de Russell 

Centre de ressources familial 

Centre franco-ontarien de 
ressources pedagogiques, Vanier 

Centre Jules-Leger, 
Regroupement de parents 
francophones pour les 

Centre Wellington Principals, 

Cerisano, Stanley 

Cestnik, Lisa, Toronto 

Chabot, Anne 

Chamber of Commerce of 
Kitchener & Waterloo, Education 
& Training 
Committee, Kitchener 

Chan, May 

Chang, Suzi/Persichilli, Pat 

Change Your Future Program 

Channen, (Dr.) Eric W., Windsor 

Chapleau Board of 
Education/Chapleau Roman 
Catholic Separate School 
Board/Hornepayne Board of 
Education/Michipicoten Board 
of Education/Michipicoten 
Roman Catholic Separate School 

Charette, Gerald 

Chase, Lisa A. 

Chasty, Margaret 

Chatham & District Chamber of 
Commerce, Education 
Committee, Chatham 

Cheater, Maxine, Cambridge 

Checkeris, Ernie, Sudbury 

Chedoke-McMaster Hospitals, 
Child & Family Centre, Hamilton 

Cheng, Cindy, Toronto 

Cherry, Diana, Waterloo 

Cheskey, Edward, Waterloo 

Child Poverty Action Group, 
Ottawa-Carleton Chapter, 

Childnature Schoolhouse, 

Children's Achievement Centre, 

Children's Aid Society of 
Metropolitan Toronto 

Chin, Grace-Marie, Unionville 

Chinese Lingual-Cultural Centre 
of Canada, Toronto 

Chong, E., London 

Choquet, Joyce 

Christian Education Committee, 

Christian Parents' Association, 
Rainy River, Rainy River 

Christie, Janice 

Christoff, (Mrs.) J., Ottawa 

Chumak, Alex, Toronto 

Churchill, M., Simcoe 

Circosta, Graz, East York 

Cirkovic, Marele, Toronto 

Cisse, Vilma, Weston 

Cite collegiale, Ottawa 

Citizens for Fair Taxes, Nepean 

Citizens United for Responsible 
Education (CURE), Ottawa 
Chapter, Stittsville 

City of Hamilton, Department of 
Culture & Recreation/Arts & the 
Cities, Hamilton 

City of North York, Public 
Health Department, North York 

City of Ottawa, Mayor's Task 
Force on Child Hunger, Ottawa 

City of Toronto, Toronto Young 
People's Advisory Board 

Clark, (Dr.) Roger Allan, 

Clark, Bruce 

Clawson, William, Sarnia 

Cleator, Diane 

Clemens, Cindy, Port Colborne 

Clifford Bowey School, Ottawa 

Cline, John 

Cloutier, Joanne, Cochrane 

Club Richelieu de Hamilton, 

Coalition for Children, Families 
& Communities/Sparrow Lake 
Alliance, Toronto 

Coalition for Education Reform 

Coalition for Lesbian & Gay 
Rights in Ontario, Toronto 

Coalition for Student Nutrition, 

Coalition for the Arts & 
Education, Toronto 

Coalition of Ontario Agencies 
for School Health Education, 

Coates, Linda 

Coburn, Richard W. (Dick), 

Cochrane High School, Project 

Colaiezzi, Lyle, Moose Factory 

Coles, David, Owen Sound 

Coll, Philip, Guelph 

CoUict, Warren, Thornhill 

Collier, Ashley, Kincardine 

Collins, Monica, Sudbury 

Combley, Heather, Merrickville 

Comerford, Thomas/Comerford, 
Marie, Toronto 

Comite regional de Test de 
I'Ontario, Francjais langue 
seconde, Ottawa 

Committee Against Racial 
Discrimination, Hamilton 

Committee for National Literacy 

Committee of Concerned 
Citizens in Education, Toronto 

Community Action Group for 
Quality Daily Physical Education 

Community Active Living, 
Lambton Committee 

Community-Based Trainers of 
the Region of Waterloo and the 
Counties of Perth & Wellington, 

Community Child Abuse 
Council of Hamilton- 
Wentworth, Hamilton 

Community Living London, 

Community Living, Stormont 

Vol. IV Appendices 


our Sdwoit I (VirrboriHifih 

County). LakefitU 

CoiKrnicd Rntdcnts of 

CiorKrriKid Tupiym' (jroup, 

Congms oi BUck Women of 
Canada, York Region Ouplcr 

Conneil & i\>iuford l>uirict 
School Am Board, PtckU Lake 

ConncUey, Milo M., Toronto 

Cornell d'«du«.alion de Nugarj 
Sud, Section de langue Iranvaue 

Conteil d'<ducation du district 
de Michipicoim. Section de 
languc tran^aue. Wawtt 

Conicil de I'Mucaiion 
cathoJique pour les 
francophones de 

Cornell de I'^ucalion 
d'tspanoia. Section de langue 
frat^aiie. EspanoUt 

Consei] de I'^ducation or u viiir 
de London, Section de langue 
fran^ue. LotUton 

C.on«al de t'^ucation de la ville 
de f lamiltnn. Sectmn de langue 
franfaue, Hamilton 

Cxnucil de I'tducation de 
Nipwun^ Section de langue 
fran^aite. Sorth fhty 

(.lomcil de I'^lucalion de Prcl. 
Comitt comuliatif de langtie 

CofMcil 4k I'fducaiion dc Sauli 
Sir. Mane. Comity comullalif dc 
Unfuc frwHauc 

^ il Jr Teducaiiun de 
^^KllHJr\. Section de langue 
fransaise. Sudbury 

Con>eil dc I'^ucalion du cumte 
dc Simcoc, Section dc langue 

Con>eil dc I'educalion du comK 
de l^mbtcin. Section dc langue 

C^onteil de I'cducatiun du coml^ 
de Kronlcnac, Section dc langue 
fran^ aise, Kingston 

C!on>cil dc5 K'oln catholiquc^ dc 
U>ndon ct du coml^ dc 
Middlesex, Section dc langue 

Cunseil de» ^oles catholiqucs dc 
IHalton, Section de langue 
franvaise, Burlington 

(>>nseil des ^olo catholiqucs 
dn comt^ de Stormont, Dunda^ 
& (llcngarry. Section dc langue 
franf aiie. Cornwall 

Oinseil dc5 ^ol« catholiqucs du 
(irand Tornnio, Section dc 
langue fran^aiie 

(>)nseil des 6:oles catholiqucs 
ronuincs de Windsor. Section dc 
langue fran^aise. Wiiuttor 

(.onseii des ^oles calhollquc* 
t^ar^es de la r^ion dc 
Waterloo. Section de langue 

Onieil des ^oles fran^aucs dc 
la communaul^ urbaine dc 
Toronto (CEKIUT). Don Mills 

Coiucil des feolcs itTpartn 
calholiques du district dc 
Timniins, Section dc langue 
fraiHaiie. Timminj 

t ^oniieil des *colcs s^par^es 
catholiqucs du district de 
Sudbury. Section dc langue 
fran^aise. Sudbury 

Conseil des ^olcs s^par^es 
catholiqucs du district dc Sault 
Stc. Mane. Section dc langue 
fran^aise, Sault Ste. Mane 

C^inscil des ^coles s^par^es 
catholiqucs du district de 
Nipissing, Education parallf-K 
North Bay 

Conscil des ico\ci s*par*es 
catholiqucs du district dc 
Timmins, Section majoritaire dc 
langue fran^ise, Timmins 

Conseil des ^colcs s^par^cs 
catholiqucs rotnaincs dc 
Dufferin ct Peel, Section dc 
langue franf aise, Mississauga 

Conseil des ^oles s^par^rs 
catholiqucs romaines du district 
dc Qichranc, Iroquois Falls, 
Klack River- Matheson 

("onseii des ^oles s^ar^es 
catholiques de Hamilton- 
Wcntworth, Section de langue 
fran^aise, Hamilton 

(xinscil des ^nles s^ar^es 
^ .ilholiqucs romaines du comtt 
iJc Welland, Section de langue 
fran^aise, Welland 

C3onscil des ^olcs s^ar^es 
catholiqucs du district dc 
I jkehead. Section dc la langue 

Onseil des ^olcs »^ar<Jes 
catholiqucs romaines du comt^ 
de Simcoe. Section dc langue 
fran^aise. Barnr 

Cx)n»eil des ^olcs t^ar^es 
catholiqucs de la r^on dc York, 
Section de langue franfiite 

Conseil des Kolcs s^par^es 
catholiqucs dc la region dc 
Durham, Section dc langue 
franvaise, Oshawa 

(utnscii des ^olcs s^par^cs 
ijlhiiliqucs dc Kent, Section dc 
langue fran<,aise 

Conseil des 6colcs s^par^es 
catholiqucs du district dc Hearst, 

I. onseii des ^olcs s<!'par^ 
catholiqucs dc langue franvaise 
dc PrcscotI Russell LOngnal 

Conseil des icolcs s^ar^es 
catholiques des comt^ dc 
Frontcnac-Lennox & Addington. 
Section dc langue fran^aise, 

Conseil des ^olcs s^ar^cs 
catholiques du comt^ de 
l,ambton. Section dc langue 

Conscil des ccolcs s^par^es 
catholiques du comt^ dc Lincoln, 
Section de langue fran^aise 

Conseil des ^olcs s^par^es 
catholiques du comtd d'Estex, 
Section de langue fran^aise, 

Conseil des ^oles s^arto dc 
Wellington. Section dc langue 
frani;aise, Ciuelph 

Conseil des ^oles s^ar^es du 
district de Michipicotcn. Section 
dc langue franvaisc 

Conseil ontarien sur la 
formation du pcrMinncI 
cnscignanl. (.omild consultatif 
dc langue fran^iK, Toronto 

( Jinseil scolairc dc la Rive Nord. 
Section dc langue fran^aite 

Forth* LoMotLMminc 

Conseil scolaire de langue 
fraiK^aise d'Ottawa-Carleton, 
Section catholique, Association 
des directeurs et des directrices 
d'^cole et de service de 
relementaire d'Ottawa-Carleton 

Conseil scolaire de langue 
fran<;aise d'Ottawa-Carleton, 
Section catholique, Gloucester 

Conseil scolaire de langue 
fran<;aise d'Ottawa-Carleton, 
Section publique 

Conseil scolaire de langue 
fran(;aise d'Ottawa-Carleton, 
Section catholique, parents, 

Constantineau, Rose-Anne, 

Association of Primary 

Contact North, Management 
Committee, Sudbury 

Continuing Education 
Schoolboard Administrators, 
Sault Ste. Marie 

Convey, George 

Cook, Roger R., Lindsay 

Cooke, G. Robin, Delhi 

Cooke, Therese 
Cooke, William, Guelph 

Cooper, Beth 

Cooper, Caroline 

Cooper, Noel/Cooper, Patricia, 
Richmond Hill 

Cooper, Pam, Bruce Mines 

Cooper, Roy V., Kanata 

Cooperative des services 
educatifs du Nord de I'Ontario 

Copley, Norman, Hamilton 

Corindia-LaCivita, Nancy, 

Corkett, David/Corkett, Darlene, 

Cormenu, Jean-Marie 

Cornish, Rob A., Ajax 

Cornwell, (Mrs.) B. R. 

Corporation of Little Trinity 
Church, Toronto 

Corporation of the City of 
Toronto, Personnel Services 
Division, Outreach Recruitment 
Section, Toronto 

Corson, David, Toronto 

Corson, David/Cummins, 
Jim/Heller, Monica/Labrie, 
Normand, Toronto 

Council for Exceptional 
Children, Ontario, Gloucester 

Council for Exceptional 
Children, Chapter 503, Sudbury, 

Council for Exceptional 
Children, Ontario Division for 
the Physically Handicapped, 


Council of African 
Organizations in Ontario, 

Council of Christian Reformed 
Churches in Canada, Burlington 

Council of Community School 
Associations for Peterborough 

Council of Directors of 
Education, Mississauga 

Council of Drama in Education, 

Council of Ontario Deans of 

Council of Ontario Separate 

Council of Ontario Universities, 

Council on Human Rights & 
Race Relations, Toronto 

Cousins, Jackie 

Cowan, Harvey J., Springford 

Cowper-Smith, G. Blair, Toronto 

Coxwell, Roy R., London 

Craig, Betty Ann, Ajax 

Craig, Doug 

Craig, Kathryn, Waterloo 

Crawford, Shelly 

Creating Hope and a New 
Generation of Equality 

Crease, H. "Skid" 
ECONEXUS, Orangeville 

Crechiola, Ruth, Millgrove 

Creech, Cheryl 

Cremasco, Karin, Guelph 

Crestview Elementary School 

Croft, Beverley, Windsor 

Crooks, Sarah Merrick, Castleton 

Cropp, D. T., Kingston 

Cross, Dolores E., Chicago 

Crysler, Robert, Collingwood 

CuUey, Catherine 

Gumming, Bonnie 

Cummings, Sherry 

Cunniffe, F. Vida, Aylmer 

Cunningham, Barbara, Windsor 

Cunningham, David N., London 

Cunningham, Mary, New 

Curie, Diana, Ajax 

Curley, Rita, Ottawa 

Currie, Stanley, Ottawa 

D'Amore, Lou, Etobicoke 

D'Heureux, Ellen/Singh, 
Patricia/Zimmer, Andrea, St. 

D'Orazio, Eugenio, Toronto 

Daenzer, (Dr.) Patricia M., 

Daigle, Ronald, Nepean 

Dale, Margo, Sault Ste. Marie 

Daly, Jim, Cambridge 

Daly, Susan, Scarborough 

Dancey, Ron, Oshawa 

Dare, Malkin 

Davey, Pat, Deep River 

Davidge, Ken W., Hamilton 

Davidson, (Dr) Alan S., 

Davidson, Diana 

Davidson, John H., Stoney Creek 

Davies, Heather, Mississauga 

Davies, Penny, Mississauga 

Davis, Eleanor 

Davis, Kim Sadler, Sault Ste. 

Davis, Maureen 

Davis, Tom, Markham 

Vol. IV Appendices 

D«y, CandK'c/Tjvior. 
AiMlm/Sinurd, Raymumlc 

Day, Yvonnr. dc LiKa. Vince, 
St Calhanna 

Dc BasMcoun, Mary 

[Van, Ghi, Burhnpon 

Deanery of Eucs County, 

Draihe. Susan H., Micm 

Deer Park Ratepayrrt' Group 
Inc., Toronto 

DeUney. Mkhad 

Delome, lean 

Demeter. Anne Rom, Hamilton 

Denlow Pubik School, Parents 
Group, North York 

Denyv Laurent 

Deorksen, Kem 

DePooter. Kim/Gumsey, 
Karen/ lovanovKh, 
DavidAVUIUnu, Sieve, 
St. Cathannt} 

DeRoov Henry 

DnRochcs, Nicole, Chebea 

DeutichkanadiKher Ki>n|(reu 
( German -Onadian (xin^rcM), 

Dcvmbh, Oem, London 

DiCcnso, Manaa 

Di Cocco. Caroline, 
B^tptit GfW€ 

Di Fonzo, loc. Starhorough 

Di MaKio. Camillo 

DKk.Mttzi Ixe 

DickiiMan. Trudy, Gudlpfc 

DiMarco, (Mn.) Sirkka. RaJaU 

[iimitrie, David, Windsor 

Dinner, Karen, Toronto 

Diocese of Peterborough, 

Diocese calholique d'Alexandru- 
C^omwall. Cornwall 

Diplock, lessica/Lang, 
Kristina/Parton, David 

Dirks. Christine 

Dixon, Peter 

Dixon, R. Ci. ( [)csl, Toronto 

Dobell, lane 

Dobson, lennifer, Toronto 

Dodgson, Susan Mary, 

Dodgson, Yvonne, Chhawa 

Dolea, Mina-Eugen, Toronto 

Domenico, Mark/Miyata, Cathy 

Donato, Helen 

Donnelly, Carol, London 

Dorion, Basile, Peneianguuhene 

Doncht, ( Dr. ) Axel. Ottawa 

Doucette, Dean 

Douglas. Derek/Douglas, Donna, 

Dowell, Christina, Parry Sound 

Dowic, lanice, Belleville 

Down Syndrome Association of 
Metropolitan Toronto, Education 
C>>mmittce. Toronto 

Dawn Syndrome Association 
of Ontario 

Down Syndrome Associatuin of 
Ontario, Naliorul Capital 
Rcfion, Ottawa 

Doyle, Helen, Toronto 

Doyle, Mary Rose, Kingston 

Doyon, Nicolas 

Drolel, Estelle, Nepean 

Drouin, Pierre. OrUans 

Drover, Annie 

Drydcn Board of Fducation, 

Dryden, Veronica 

Dubeau, Marjorie, Perkinsfield 

Dubois, Diane 

DufTerin County Board of 
Education, Orangeville 

DufTerin -Peel Roman Catholic 
Separate School (kiard, Teacher- 
Librarians, Elementary Panel, 

Duffcrin-Peel Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Student 
Senate, Mississauga 

DuRcrin-Pcel Roman ( Jlholn. 
Separate School Board 

DufTerin -Peel Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board. 
Association of Principals & Vice- 
Pnncipals, EJemenlary Schools, 

Dunn.Vikki, Ballon 

Dunrankin Drive Public School 

Duquette, Cieorges, Sudbury 

Durham Board of Education 

Durham Board of Education, 
Area 2 Administrators 

Durham Board of Education. 
Area 2 Teachers 

Durham Board of Education, 
Health & Physical (-.ducation 
Department. Whilby 

Durham Board of Education, 
Supervisory Officers 

Durham Catholic Principals'/ 
Vice- Principals' Association 

Durham C>)llcge of Applied Arts 

6 Technology, Pre-Employmcnt 
Program students, Oshawa 

Durham Elementary School 
Administrators, Oshan-a 

Durham Geography Heads' 
Association, Cannington 

Durham Region Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board. Special 
E.ducation Advisory Committee 

Durham Region Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board. 
Secondary School Cjouncil 

Durham Region Roman Catholic 
Separate SchtK)l Board 

Durham Regional Catholic 
Parent Teacher Association, 

Durham West Parent (>)uncil, 

Durksen, Peter, hergus 

Dyck, Nelson, Sutton West 

Eadie, (Dr.) Susan |., Toronto 

Ejdie, C^rol, Newmarket 

Eagle River Public School, Grade 

7 & tt students, pMgle Riirr 

Earl, (Dr.)LomaM 

F.arlscourt Child & Family 
Ontre, Toronto 

Early Literacy learning, 

For Ow LoiM Of LMmmg 

East York Board of Education, 
East York 

East York Home & School 

East York Principals' Association 

Eastern Ontario Co-operative 
Education Curriculum Advisory 

Eastern Ontario Medical 
Association, Child Welfare 

Eastern Ontario Staff 
Development Network, Kingston 

Eastern Ontario Technological 
Education Council 

Easton, Barry, Kenora 

Easton, Carolyn, Kenora 

Ecole secondaire Georges-F- 
Vanier, Conseil des eleves 

Ecole Cadieux, Association de 
parents et d'enseignant(e)s, 

Ecole des Voyageurs, Association 
parents-enseignants, Orleans 

Ecole elementaire Horizon- 
Jeunesse, Cornwall 

Ecole elementaire publique 
leanne-Sauve, Association des 
parents, Orleans 

Ecole Gaston -Vincent, 
Association des parents, Ottawa 

Ecole Immaculee-Conception, 
Personnel enseignant, Ignace 

Ecole Lamoureux/Ecole Ste. 
Marguerite Bourgeoys, 
Association des parents, Ottawa 

Ecole Monseigneur-de-Laval, 
Comite des parents, Hamilton 

Ecole Monseigneur-Remi- 
Gaulin, Association de parents, 

Ecole publique Carrefour 
Jeunesse, Comite de parents, 

Ecole publique de la Riviere 
Castor, Comite de parents- 
enseignants, Russell 

Ecole publique Nouvel Horizon, 
Comite de parents, Hawkesbury 

Ecole publique Nouvel Horizon, 
Personnel, Hawkesbury 

Ecole Sainte-Marguerite 
Bourgeoys, Association de 
parents, Merrickville 

Ecole secondaire catholique 
Marie- Rivier, Conseil etudiants 

Ecole secondaire Etienne Brule, 
etudiants. North York 

Ecole secondaire Garneau, 
Association des parents et 

Ecole secondaire I'Essor, eleves 

Ecole secondaire Macdonald- 
Cartier, Association generale des 

Ecole secondaire Mgr. Bruy^re, 
Conseil des eleves, London 

Ecole secondaire publique De La 
Salle, Association parents-eleves- 

Ecole secondaire regionale 
Glengarry, eleves 

Ecole St-Jean d'Embrun, 
Association parents-enseignants, 

Ecole Ste-Jeanne-d'Arc, Comite 
d'education, Brampton 

Ecoles Frdre Andre et Mgr 
Bruyfere, Associations de parents, 

Ecumenical Study Commission 
on Public Education, London 

Ecumenical Support Committee 
for Refugees, Education Sub- 
Committee, Hamilton 

Educational Centre for Aging & 
Health/Northern Education 
Centre for Aging & Health, 

Educational Computing 
Organization of Ontario, Essex 

Educational Computing 
Organization of Ontario, Special 
Interest Group, Elementary 
(ECOO - SIGLEM), Drumbo 

Educational Media Producers' & 
Distributors' Association of 
Canada, Toronto 

Educators of the Gifted in 
Ontario (EGO), Dublin 

Educators' Association for 
Quality Education, Thornhill 

Edwards, John F. 

Elamad, Fozieh, Markham 

Elbanna, Gamal A. 

Elementary & Secondary 
Teacher-Librarians, Ottawa & 
Carleton Boards of 
Education/Queenswood Public 
School, School Advisory 
Council, Orleans 

Elgin County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board 

Elgin-St. Thomas Health Unit, 
Healthy Schools Program, 
St. Thomas 

Ellis, Bill, Kanata 

Ellis, R. S., Pickering 

Ellis, Robert E., Corbyville 

Emberley, Peter 

Engell, Anne K., Collingwood 

English Language Arts Network 

Environment Canada, 
Environmental Citizenship 
Directorate, Ottawa 


Erent, (Ms.) J. H., Etobicoke 

ESL/ESD Resource Group of 

Essex County Parents for Quality 

Essex County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Religious 
Studies Department Heads 

Essex County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Junior & 
Senior Kindergarten Association, 

Essex County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Essex 

Essex County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, English 
Principals' Association 

Ethnocultural Council of 
London, London 

Etobicoke Board of Education, 
Adult & Continuing Education 
Department, Etobicoke 

Etobicoke Board of Education, 
Mathematics Department 

Etobicoke Chamber of 
Commerce, Technology 
Development Group, Etobicoke 

Evans, Peter J. A., Nepean 

Everitt, Katherine, Chatham 

Vol. IV Appendices 

Evo)r, Anrvi/MjcPhcnon. Donna, 

Eyiotbon, Bewriy. Thunder Bay 

Eyre. (Dr.) Dean P. OrroMa 

Families for Religious Equality in 

Faunily Lilmcy Interest Group, 

Fanshawre College of Applied 
Aru & Technology, (x>ntinuing 
Education Advisory Committee, 

Fanthawe College of Applied 
Arts & Technology, Futum 
Program IraiiKev Simroe 

FanUu«»e College of Applied 
Aru & Technology. London 

Farber. Kelly, Thomhill 

Fana, Tito/Faru, Isabel 

Famworih, Manlyn, Brampton 

Farrar, Bcmice Lever, 
Richmond HtU 

Farrell, )ohn, Starborough 

FafTow, David 

Father Brcsuni Catholic High 
School, AthlctK CouiKil. 

Father Henry Can Secondary 
Schcxil. Student Cx>unci], 

Father |ohn Redmond High 
School. Sludent Council, 

Faukovic, M.. Toronto 

Federation of CJlhulic Parent - 
Teacher Assoculions of Unlariii. 
Windsor/Euex Regional 
CouncilFederation of Cathuli>. 
Parent -Teacher Associations of 
Ontario, London 

Federation of Chinese Canadians 
in Scarborough, Scarborough 

Federation of Sikh Societies of 
( anada, Ottawa 

Federation of Tnnidad 8t Tobago 
1 'r.Mni/jtions of Ontario, 

Federation of Women Teachers' 
AvuKialions of Ontario, Anti- 
Kacisi F^ucaiion Committee, 

Federation of Women Teachers' 
AsstK'iations of Ontario 

FM^ration des aln<(e)s 
francophones de I 'Ontario, 
Region du Moycn- 
Nord/('oalition sur 
I'analphab^tismr chez les 
aln^(e)> franco-ontaricns 

FM^ration des a\nis 
francophones de I 'Ontario 

F^^ration des asscKiations de 
parents francophones de 

F^d^ralion des caisscs populaires 
de I'Onlario, OrtdHti 

F^d^ation des ^l^ves du 
tecondaire franco-oniarien 
(FF^K)), V'flfiier 

Ftd^ration des enseignantes ri 
dct enscignants des <cola 
wtondairrs de I'Ontario, C^miic 
de langue fran^aise 

Fedrock. Debra, Pant 

Fciao. Carole/(>as, Ian 

Ferguson, Robert, Septan 

herron, Monique/Barton, Mary 

Feuervcrger, Cirace, Toronto 

Fiddes, Ciraham R., Norrfi York 

Filopovich, Ifka 

Fink, Dean. Amaner 

Finlay, Barry, Oakville 

Finley, Helen S., Kingston 

Finn, Maureen, Kingston 

I SI Woodbridge Girl Guides, 

Fish, Ann Marie, Richmond Hill 

Fish, Patrick 

Fitzgerald, ). Terry, Point Edward 

Fitzgerald, Mary, BowmanviUe 

Fitzsimmons, Tom 

Flamborough Chamber of 
(^mmercc, Waterdown 

Flear, Sandra, Toronto 

Fleming, Leslie 

Fletcher, lohn C, Kitchener 

Fletcher, Susan, Orfuiva 

FIcurcn, Peter/Fleuren, Idith, 

Fleurie, Des I., Fort Frances 

Fligg, Mel, Barrte 

Flood, (Ms.) L A., \Villo\t-dale 

Florescu, Viorica, Kanala 

Mono, Marnie, BurUngton 

llynn, |. Kathleen, Mtstissauga 

Flynn, Maureen. Ottawa 

Fondation ARTES, Conteil 
d'administration, Ottawa 

Fonds canadien du film ct de la 
vid6> ind^pendants, Orratvu 

Foote, lack, CampbelUroft 

Force, Dora, Woodstock 

Forest Manor Public School, 

Forster, (Dr.) David R., Maple 

Forsyth-Sells, Lee Ann 

Fort Frances- Rainy River Board 
of Education, Education 
Cx>mmittce, Fori Frances 

Fort Frances-Rainy River Board 
of Education, ftirf Frances 

Forum for Higher Education in 
the Public Inlcrcsl/Our 

Forum on Responsible 
Education (FORE) 

Foster, lason/Russell, Robert 

Foundation for the Advancement 
of Aboriginal Youth, Toronto 

Fournier, Natalie/Burry, Julie 

Frame, (Mr.) A. G.. Samia 

Frame, I. D., Exeter 

Frankland (immunity Sch<x>l, 
Parent-StafT Association, Toronto 

Franluon, A. Gregory, Kingston 

Fransham, Richard, Gloucester 

Fraser, Cathy 

Fraser, Sheila G., Sauli Sle. Mane 

Freedman, (Dr. ) |«e. Red Peer 

Frew, Alexander F. Peep Risrr 

Fromeni, Phil, Nepean 

Frommer, loan Barbara. Ottawa 

For lit* Lovw of Uamint 

Frontenac County Board of 
EducationFrontenac County 
Board of Education, Special 
Education Advisory Committee, 

Frontenac County Board of 
Education, Parent Groups 

Frontenac County Quality Daily 
Physical Education Action Team 

Frontenac County Women 
Teachers' Association/Ontario 
Public School Teachers' 
Federation, Frontenac 
District/ Association of 
Elementary School 
Administrators of Frontenac 

Frontenac-Lennox & Addington 
County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Special 
Assignment-Learning Resources 
Committee, Kingston 

Frontenac-Lennox & Addington 
County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Kingston 

Frontier College, Toronto 

Frudd, Susan, Ajax 

Fulford, Celine M., Aurora 

Fung, Ellen, Witlowdale 

Furey, Patrick, Port Elgin 

Furlong, Edward, Rosseau 

Fuykschot, Cornelia, Gananoque 

Gaensbauer, loan, Peterborough 

Galardi, Sharon 

Galliene, Christina, Whitby 

Gallivan, Robert J., Thornhill 

Garbutt, W. Terry 

Gardner, John R., Toronto 

Gardos, Paris Cameron, 
TorontoGarrett, Marjorie 
Mallory, Prescott 

Garton, Wilma A., Ottawa 

Garvin, Nora, Thornhill 

Gaudaur, Charles/Gaudaur, 
Darlene, Perth 

Gaudet, Claudette G., Orleans 

Gaul, John A., Hamilton 

Cause, M., Parry Sound 

Gavin, Frank 

Gedeon, (Dr.) Steven A., Toronto 

General Motors of Canada 

George Brovv-n College of 
Applied Arts & Technology, 
Committee on Special 
Needs/Ontario Articulation 
Network, Toronto 

George Brown College of 
Applied Arts & Technology, 

George, Rina E., Markham 

Georgian College of Applied Arts 
& Technology, Academic 
Management Team, Barrie 

Gerin-Lajoie, Diane 

German-Canadian Congress, 
Ontario Chapter, Toronto 

Gerner, Malcolm, Dundas 

Gervais, Robert 

Get Involved in Volunteer Efforts 
Program (G.I.V.E.), North Bay 

Giannandrea, C, Mississauga 

Gibb, Dave 

Gibbs, Keith, Gloucester 

Gibson, Sandi, Windsor 

Giesbrecht, Brenda 

Gigg, Ed 

Gilbertson, Diane, Guelph 

Gill, (Dr.) Stephen, Cornwall 

Gilmour, Brad W., Ottawa 

Ginou, Alex 

Girard, April, Atikokan 

Girls & Women in Sport Liaison 
Committee, Nepean 

Giroux, Dominic, Gloucester 

Given, R. Wayne, Guelph 

Givens, C. R., Barrie 

Glen Cairn Community 
Resource Centre, Stay In School 
Program, London 

Glendon, Margaret 

Glenforest Secondary School, 
OAC English Students, 

Glengarry District High School, 
Parent-Teacher Committee 

Glueheisen, Jonathan 

Godin, Gaetan 

Gold, (Dr) loseph 

Golden Avenue Public School, 
Parent Advisory Committee, 
South Porcupine 

Goldstein, Dian, Willowdale 

Goldstein, Paul, Toronto 

Golish, Kenneth/Golish, Pamela, 

Gollert, Norman D. 

Gollinger, Robert G., Prescott 

Gontier, Hazel, Toronto 

Gorbold, Donna, Etobicoke 

Gordon, Pamela, Kemptville 

Gorrie, Donna, Meaford 

Gouin, Gisele 

Goulet, Andre, Orleans 

Grace, (Dr.) Noelle, Toronto 

Graham, Alda, Monkland 

Graham, Ralph, London 

Grand Council Treaty #3 

Grand River Collegiate Institute, 
Student Executive, Kitchener 

Granger, Jean-Claude, Orleans 

Granger, Matthieu/Davey, 

Grant, loanne. North York 

Gray, Dianne, Windsor 

Gray, Linden, Beeton 

Greater Metro Co-operative 
Education Association, 

Greater Metropolitan Toronto 
Co-ordinators of Music, 

Greater Peterborough Chamber 
of Commerce, Peterborough 

Greater Welland/Pelham 
Chamber of Commerce, 
Education Committee 

Green, Martin 

Greer, Anne, Thornhill 

Gregorini, Lucy, Lively 

Grey Bruce Community 
Industrial Training Advisory 
Committee Inc., Owen Sound 

Grey County Board of 
Education, Markdale 

Gribben, John, Weston 

Griffiths, William R., 
St. Catharines 

Vol. IV Appendices 

( irulloli, U>uuc, SuJbury 

Gnibcr. Hdcn D., Unomi 

Gueiph-WeUington Auocution 
(or Community Livmg. 
EJucalKin ('ommmec, Huelph 

Guettj, Antoki 

Guiiun, Sandra. RtchmonJ Hill 

Gunner, Marni« 

GupU, M^ Starbonnigh 

Gurdiral. Tania. MarUuim 

Gutman, Mory/Gulman. 
C:a(hcrinc. Ruhmond HiU 

Giuik. Pauline, Powassan 

Habi. Ludi, OakvtlU 

Hach^, Denu/Bousonnrault. 

Haddon. Michael A., Mustssauga 

Hagar, Aubrey, Guelph 

Hahn, Sybille B.. Tonmio 

({albentadt. Alan 

HaU. Beatrice L, Thombury 

Hall. Beverly L. Sioux Lookout 

Hall. Clirutiitc/Trcasure. 
Stephen, Aurora 

Halpern. Gerald. Onawa 

Halion Auoctation for Young 
Children. Burlington 

Haiion Board of Education. 
Special Education Advisory 
Committee, Burlinpon 

Halion C^Mincil of Home & 
School AMociation*. Oakville 

Halton Industry Education 
(iouncil. Carter Onirc. 

Mallon Roman i jlh»li>. Vp.iralr 
Schuol Board, Rcligiiin/Family 
Life Subject Council, Burlinpon 

Hamilton & Dislrii.'! Chamber of 
l!«>mmcrce, Hamilton 

Hamilton Community Group, 

Hamilton Council of Home & 
School Associations 

Hamilton Teacher-Librarians 
Association, Hamilton 

Hamilton Township Ratepayers' 
Auociation, Port Hope 

Hamilton-Wentworth Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
St. (Jiarles Adult Continuing 
Education Centre 

Hamilton-Wentworth Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
Secondary School Library Heads, 

Hamilton-Wentworth Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board 

Hamilton-Wentworth Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
Catholic Student Council 
Presidents" Association 

Hamilton-Wentworth Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
Instructional Services 

Hamilton Women Teachers' 
Auocution, Hamilton 

Han, loannc 

Haner, Vonnie, WelletUy 

Hanlin, Ealher, Fonthill 

Hanson, jean, Uvrly 

Hanson, Kathryn S., Ixmdon 

IUrjmt>cr I mire's i^nada, 
National Capital Region, OritiH-u 

Harel, Ziv, Thomhill 

Harris, Betty A., Sriffsvi/le 

Harris, Heather. Lindsay 

Hams, Margaret 

Harrison, Mary W./Harrison. 
Anthony ]., Markham 

Harrison, Tony/Harrison, Mary, 

Harvey, M. Elaine, Kingston 

Hastings & Prince Edward 
(Uiunty Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board 

Hastings County Board of 

Hastings Women Teachers' 
Association, Belleville 

Haswcll, Kathleen, Brampton 

Hatch, Wilfred T, Brantford 

Hawken, lill, Ottawa 

Hay, Roger L., Sarnia 

Head, Tammie L. 

Heart & Stroke Foundation of 
Ontario, Toronto 

Hedman, Jack, Fort Frances 

Heighington, G., Scarborough 

Hcil, Marcy, St. Catharines 

Hrlirnic-C^nadian Federation of 

Helmcr, loan, Oshawa 

Hclmus, Bill. Hemmert. R.. 

Henderson, Hugh, Kingston 

Henley. FJfrcda, Toronto 

Hennessy. Peter. FJginburg 

llrnnings, Dean/Matt, Dave 

Mcrdmiller, Mary, Waterloo 

Heritage Renfrew Home 
Children Committee, Renfrew 

Herster, Doris, St. Catharines 

Hewitt, (Dr.) jean 

Hcydorn, Bernard 1., Newmarket 

Heyns, (Mr & Mrs.) Arie, 

Hibbert. Terrence G. S., Toronto 

Higgins, David A., Barrie 

High, Steven 

Highland Secondary School, 
Alternative Education Program 

Hill, Danuta, Caledon East 

Hill, Frances E., Newmarket 

Hill, Nancy 

Hillesheim, Susan 

Histed, Roberta, L'Orignal 

Hobbs, Anne/Bean, loann. 

Hi>bbs, Ian A./Hobbs, Roseanne 

Hochner, Sydney V., Brantford 

Hodgins, Alex A., Kapuskasing 

Hodgkinson, E., Peterborough 

Hogan, Brian E. 

Hogarth, Marlene, Thunder Bay 

Holland. Cjrmll, Ottan-a 

Holland Marsh District 
Christian School. Board of 
Directors, Newmarkrt 

Hollingsworth, Silvina, Ti^fofito 

Holub.(DT.)B. I, GuWp/i 

For ttw Lov* of LMminc 

Holy Cross Catholic Secondary 

Holy Cross Parent-Teacher 

Holy Family Catholic School, 
Catholic Parent-Teacher 
Association, Ottawa 

Home School Legal Defense 
Association of Canada, 

Honsberger, Lynn, Ottawa 

Honzatko, Barbara J., Keewatin 

Hook, (Dr.) Richard, Etobicoke 

Horvath, (Mrs.) H., North York 

Horvath, Louis/Horvath, Maria, 
Don Mills 

Hotte, Denis A./Hotte, Lucille 
M., Gloucester 

Hough, Catherine, Scarborough 

Houghton, Meghan/Barton, 

Howard, Al, Sioux Lookout 

Howe, L., Leamington 

Howell, Evelyn, Burk's Falls 

Howes, Deborrah, Pickering 

Hughes, Karlene, Markham 

Hughes, Susan, Picton 

Hughes, Wendy 

Hugli, Maggie, Oshawa 

Humber College of Applied 
Arts & Technology 

Humberview School, 
Student Group, Bolton 

Humewood Community School, 
Cherrywood Alternative 
Program, Toronto 

Humphries, Mark P./Humphries, 
Deborah M., Tirnmins 

Hundert, Ken, Etobicoke 

Huron County Board of 

Huron County Health Unit 

Huron -Perth County Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 

Huron Women Teachers' 

Huschka, Bob 

Hussain, Glenys 

Huston, Emily, Combermere 

Hutt, Jackie, Lakefield 

Hux, Allan, Toronto 

Hynes, Douglas 

Hynes, William A., Don Milts 

Iga, Julia/Collins, Chris/ Arango, 

Ignatius, Susan, Cornwall 

Imbeault, Jean-Claude 

Immaculate Conception Catholic 
School, Parent Advisory 
Committee, Port Perry 

Immanuel Christian School 

Improving School Discipline 

Independent First Nations' 
Alliance, Sioux Lookout 

Industrial Training Centre for 
Women/Zalco (ITCH/ZALCO) 

Information Technology 
Association of Canada, 
Education Committee, 

Inglis, Norine, Peterborough 

Institute for Enterprise 
Education, St. Catharines 

Institute of Electrical & 
Electronics Engineers, Toronto 
Section, Brampton 

Integration Action Group, 

Integration Action Group, 
London & Area, London 

Integration Action Group, 
Sudbury Chapter 

Inter-Franco scolaire du Sud de 

Interfaculty Council of 
Technological Education 

Interfaith Advisory Group on 
Religious Education, London 

International Network of 
Performing & Visual Arts 
Schools, Niagara-on-the-Lake 

Irons, Aileen, Curve Lake 

Islamic Co-ordinating Council 
of Imams, Toronto 

Islamic Schools Federation of 
Ontario, Ottawa 

Izatt, John, Thunder Bay 

lackman, Richard, Ottawa 

Jackson, John A., Scarborough 

Jackson, Norah 

Jacques, Celine 

Jahn-Cartwright, Cindy, 
Port Elgin 

Jakes, Howard, Kingston 

Jamaican Canadian Association, 

James, Jan-Elizabeth, 
Sault Ste. Marie 

Janes, Paul, Watford 

Janhunen, Eric/Janhunen, 
Virginia, Sarnia 

Janssen, (Mr.) G., Orangeville 

Janzen, WaUy 

Jardine, Lorraine, London 

Jefford, Art 

Jefkins, Ron 

Jelenic, Venanzio, Cambridge 

Jellie, Hugh, Waterloo 

Jemmott, Marva M., Toronto 

Jesuit Refugee Service Canada, 

Joblin, Fred, Parry Sound 

Joffe, Marion 

Joffe, N./Joffe, Marion, Thornhill 

John Brooks Community 
Foundation & Scholarship Fund, 
Youth Council, Toronto 

John F. Ross High School, 

John Howard Society of Durban 
Region, Oshawa 

John Wanless Parents' 

Johnson, Cheryl D., Cambridge 

Johnson, Ginette, Kingston 

Johnson, Kathleen M. 

Johnson, Margaret, Chesterville 

Johnston, K./Leatham, 
R./McAndless, D./McClenaghan, 

Johnston, Lorna M., Ancaster 

Johnston, Marilyn, Stittsville 

Johnston, Susan, Ottawa 

Vol. IV Appendices 

loiKv Bjrtxr* 1.. WootlvilU 

luncs. Carl, ThorM 

loncv Doroihy, LoruUm 

loncv Ciwm S., Etohttoke 

lono, Lduri«. Brampton 

\one%, Limla, B<i(>i 

lonn, Pat, Smii/brd 

lothi. Mar^garct 

Joyce, Dan, Peterborough 

loyce, Sturon, Sewmarket 

Kabli, laisy, Murti^m 

KaethlcT, Alfred. Sioux Lookout 

Kaiura, Gail. Hamilton 

Kalin. Myrr, Gloucester 

Kamal. Gamal 

Kammerer. Fredenka, 
Mount Hopf 

Karimuddin. Ahmcr'forrctt. 
Matt/Ttc. Andrcw/lani. Bharti 

lUaaam. Shdina. Sorth York 

Kavanagh. Barry F.. ThomhiU 

Kavanagh. Sun, Kinpton 

Kawarlha World Imuo Centre 

%xM. WUJum. MIevilU 

Keating. (Dr.) Daniel P.. Toronto 

Keewaytinook Okimakanak 
TnKal Clnuncil. Sioux Lookout 

Keith. PatricM R., Toronto 

KcOjr. P. Grcyory/Bame*. Qivc. 

Kemi • '«f 

Ar' 'logy. B«Mc 


KriiJall. harry. Sorth Hay 

Kendall, lohn D.. Si'<>r()orouj;/i 

Kennedy, Bruce, CtimhnJge 

Kennedy, Dave/Kennedy, Pam. 

Kenner (Collegiate & Vocational 
Institute, Technical Service 
Studio Department 

Kenora & District Chamber <'t 

Kenora Board of 
Education/Kenora District 
Roman Catholic Separate Sch(K>l 
Board, Kenora 

Kenora District Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board/Ontario 
F.nglish Catholic Teachers' 
Association, Kenora District, 

Kenora- Kccwatin & District 
Labour Council, Kenora 

Kenora Women Teachers' 

Kent County Board of Fxlucation 

Kent CUiunty Women Teachers' 

Keown. Howie, Dundas 

Keown, Pam. r>uruhu 

Kerr. Bernard D.. Misstsuiuga 

Keuentini. Salda. Brampton 

Ket waroo- Nanoo, 
Leona/Dcchaiuay. Nodinc 


Khan. Anne. Sarnia 

Killaloc Public School. Home & 
School AMociation. KUIalot 

King Edward School, students 

Kingsbury, Linda. Orr<tHti 

Kingston & District Ass<xution 
for Community Living, Board ot 
Directors, Kmgston 

Kingston Area School to 
Employment Council. Kingston 

Kingston District Chamber of 
tU>mmcrce. Kingston 

Kingston Lmploymeni St Youth 

Kingston, Frontcnac and Lennox 
and Addington Health Unit 

Kingston Literacy, students. 

Kingston Public Library. Board. 

Kingston Township Industrial 
Landowners' Association. 

Kinoshameg, James L, 

Kirkland Lake (Collegiate & 
Vocational Institute 

Kirsh. Fran, Richmond Hill 

Kitchener-Waterloo Association 
for Community Living. 
Integrated F.ducation 1j*I' lor. r 

Kitchener- Waterloo Association 
for txjmmunity Living, Kilthrner 

Kitchener-Waterloo F.nglish 

Kitchener- Waterloo Symphony 

Klein. Pierre M. 

KnilK Anna. Waterloo 

Knill. Paul 

Kollaard. (ieorge. Bowmanyillr 

kondor, (Dr.) C!eorge A.. 
I'h under Hay 

Koski, Beverley, Bngden 

Kostantin, Walter, Kenora 

Kostiuk. Andrew/Kostiuk. IXiris, 

Kolras, Danicllc/Marynick. Kas 

Kovnats, Tom, U'ififti;>ejj 

Kowulchuk. William. Huntsville 

Kraft, David, roronfo 

Kraftcheck, Ijurie. Zuruh 

Kraus. Mary 

Krciner-l>ey, Heidi 

Kretschman, Uwc 

Kronick, Dorecn. Torofiw 

Kutac. (Mr.) 

L' Association de parents et 
instituleurs catholiques 
francophones de Sudbury. 

Ijbate. ludy, Vtnemount 

1 jberge, Susan. Brampton 

Ijcavera. Donna 

Lachapelle. Ren< H., Onllui 

Uird. Mctiasa/Bradlcy. Stacy 

I jke Superior Board of 
Fducalion, Marathon 

I jkehead Association (or 

< .4>mmunity Living, Education 

I ask Force 

Ijkehead Board ..I Iduulion. 
Til under Ray 

I jkehead R<iard of Fducalion. 
Adult Education Centre 

For tha Lov« of L«amin( 

Lakehead Board of Education, 
School Improvement Council, 
Thunder Bay 

Lakehead Board of Education, 
Special Education Advisory 
Committee, Thunder Bay 

Lakehead Council of Home & 
School Associations/Ontario 
Federation of Home & School 
Associations Inc., Region A West 

Lakehead District Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
Thunder Bay 

Lakehead District Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
Special Education Advisory 

Lakehead Environmental Youth 

Lakewood Intermediate School, 

Lalas, Miroslaw, Aurora 

Lalonde, Melissa/Bertrand, 
Sebastien/Pare, Dominique/ 
Bourdon, losianne 

Lalonde, Tanya/Pineault, 

Lamarche, A. J. M. (Art), Kanata 

Lambrou, Linda/Belle-Isle, Guy 

Lambton County Board of 

Lambton County Principals' 
Association, Sombra 

Lambton County Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board 

Lambton Health Unit 

Lanark, Leeds & Grenville 
County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, 
Smith Falls 

Lanark, Leeds & Grenville 
County Roman Cathohc 
Separate School Board, 
Principals & Vice-Principals, 

Lander, Jean, Osgoode 

Langen, Roger, Toronto 

Laprairie, Dinah 

Laramee, lulien, St-Albert 

Larocque, Louise, Chelmsford 

Laryea, Edwin 

Laubach Literacy Ontario Inc., 

Laurila, Edith, Scarborough 

Laverty, Matthew/Beardy, 
Tracy/Maud, Amanda/Trout, 
Norma Jean/Moran, 
Dan/Hovifard, Sonya/Hoppe, 

Law, lames A., North Bay 

Lawrence Park Collegiate, 
Curriculum Committee, Toronto 

Lawrence, Virginia, Mississauga 

Lawson, George, Thornhill 

Le Clerc, Pierre 

Lea, Joseph William, Etobicoke 


Learning Consortium, Toronto 

Learning Consortium Summer 
Institute, Participant Group 
1993, Scarborough 

Learning Disabilities Association 
of Chatham-Kent, Chatham 

Learning Disabilities Association 
of Cornwall & the United, 
CountiesLeaming Disabilities 
Association of Hamilton- 
Wentworth, Hamilton 

Learning Disabilities Association 
of Kingston, Kingston 

Learning Disabilities Association 
of Ontario, Toronto 

Learning Disabilities Association 
of Ottawa-Carleton 

Learning Disabilities Association 
of Peterborough, Peterborough 

Learning Disabilities Association 
of Sault Ste. Marie 

Learning Disabilities Association 
of South Niagara 

Learning Disabilities Association 
of St. Catharines, St. Catharines 

Learning Disabilities Association 
of Thunder Bay, Ad Hoc 

Learning Disabilities Association 
of Windsor & Essex County 

Learning Disabilities Association, 
Oshawa Chapter, Oshawa 

Learning Disabilities Association 
of London-Middlesex 

Learning for a Sustainable 
Future, Ottawa 

Learnxs Foundation, Toronto 

Leary, Daniella, Mississauga 

Leblanc, Melanie 

Leclerc, Wilbrod, Ottawa 

Lee, Mary 

Leeds & Grenville County Board 
of Education, Counties School 
Committee, Brockville 

Leeds & Grenville County 
Board of Education, Brockville 

Lefebvre, Lise, Iroquois Falls 

Leger, Heather/Leger, Rosaire, 

Lehman, Hugh/Lehman, 
Barbara, Guelph 

Lehtiniemi, L., Ottawa 

Lenaghan, Lome Albert, Toledo 

Lennox & Addington Family & 
Children's Services, Board of 
Directors, Napanee 

Lennox & Addington Women 
Teachers' Association, Napanee 

Lesbian & Gay Youth of Toronto, 

Lessard, Marc 

Levac, Claude, St-Isidore 

Levin, Sanford, London 

Lewis, Michael, Elliot Lake 

Lin, Jason C. 

Lincoln County Board of 

Lincoln County Board of 
Education, Team Arts/Lakebreeze 
Public School 

Lincoln County Catholic 
Principals' Association 

Lincoln County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board 

Lincoln County School of 
Performing Arts, 

Lincoln County Women 
Teachers' Association 

Linden School 

Lindner, Christine, Kettleby 

Lindsay, Joni 

Linklater, M. E. (Peggy)/Rigg, 

Linney, Grant, Georgetown 

Lipinski, (Mr.) T, Oakville 

Vol. IV Appendices 

Li^K^r CoUcfpjIc ln%tilutc, Parent 
Ailvutiry Committee 

Link. Phillip P.. Toronto 

Little Red Reading Society 

Link Red Theatre. Tonmio 

Link. Roy, Kingilon 

LiiAtM, .\Urc, Toronto 

Locken, ludy, Gloucester 

Logan. Beatrice. Samut 

Logan. Dora Taylor. Ptrry SounJ 

Loggu. Mike/NcNiece, Malt 

Uindon & District Academy 
of MedKine, London 

London & Middlesex County 
Roman Catholic School Board 

London & Middlesex Cx>unty 
Roman OlholK School Board, 
Adult & (>>ntinuing Education, 

Ijtndon & .Middlesex Cx>unly 
Roman Catholic School Board. 
Special Education Advisory 

l^ndon & Middlesex County 
Roman CUiholic Secondary 
Schools. Student Council Prime 

London Chamber of Commerce 

London Cxiuncil for Adult 

London CouikiI for Adult 
Education. Literacy Committee 

Ijondon Council of F^L Families 
Ixmdon Counal of Home ft 


London Crou-l ullurjl Irjrnrr 
C'enirc, LonJon 

l^ndon Elementary Public 
SchtMil Adminislralurs' 

London Home Educators. 

London Local Planning 
Committee. School-to- Work 
Sub-committee, London 

London -Middlesex Taxpayers' 
Coalition. Education Committee 

Ixindon Public Library Board 

London Regional Catholic 
Parent -Teacher Associations 

London Science Educators' 

London Waldorf School 

London Women Teachers' 
Association. London 

Long, lames R., Kingston 

Long, Thea. Rodney 

Loraine. Nancy Threan. 

Loraine. Trish. Toronto 

l^oranger, Pierre, Kockland 

Lord. lohn/Hulchison, Pegx^ 

Lordan. Meredith. FJohicokr 

U>rento, l^avid. Renfrew 

Lorenz. Robert. Sudbury 

Love, Maureen. Downsview 

Lovcgrovc. Fiona 

Ixnwc. Dan 

Ixiwc, Susan 

Ixiwrrison. ]m\r. iwiiKn 

lover, Bcn/l oyer, (iluru, \irnui 

Lucas, Helen, Richmond Hill 

Luis, Derek 

l.unci, Ruth A., Scarborough 

Lurie, Tania, Thornhill 

1 u/a. William S.. Scarborough 

Lyman, Bonnie, Ottawa 

Lyons. Simonc. Scarborough 

M. F. McHugh School, 
Parents' Group, Ottawa 

Macdonald, Hu 

Macdonald, Kim, Branlford 

Macdonald. Marthe 

Dorothy/Simons. William M., 

MacDonald. David 

MacDonald, Linda K., 

MacDonald. K. MacDonald, 

Macfarlane, Clyde, Kingston 

MacGrcgor, Colin, CMmbridge 

Mackay, Rory, Gananoque 

MacKendrick. Mo. Surrey 

Mackcn7ie, Dave 

Mackenzie, Gordon, Nipigon 

MacLean. William N., Hunisville 

Maclxllan, (Mrs.) S.. .Sioux 

MacLeod, Douglas G. 

Macnaughtnn. Richard/ 
Macnaughton, l><irolhy/ 
McNeely, lane/McNeely. Robert, 
Saull Sie Mane 

Macrae, (.jiul, iiuflpti 

Mader, Anne, J>frii»/iri>)' 

Madore, lordic/Meeking, Charles 

Maged, Hussein, Orleans 

Magic des iellres, Vanirr 

Maiden, ludith, Niagara Falls 

Majic, Charlotte, Port Hope 

Maki, Bob, Oahille 

Malcolm. M. Ruth, Don Mills 

Malikail, j. S., Ottawa 

Malloy, Ruth A.. Toronto 

Maloney, Gretta, 
.Sf. Andrews West 

Mansfield, Bcate, Belleville 

Manthci, Rcnale I., Hamilton 

Manuel, Kendra 

Manzl, Helmut F.. Oakville 

Maple View Fxlucation 
Mennonite (Church, Education 
(ximmittee, GadshiU 

Marath«, FJinath V.. 
Sf. (Mtharines 

Marcottc, Margot, Pelawawa 

Mark, Hugh W., Ottawa 

Mark, Ken 

Mark, Ken/lohnson, 
Dawne/Shapiro, Isaac/Huggin. 

Markham Ad Hoc Oimmittee 
for Race & Klhnocultural Fx]uity. 

Marks. Elysta. Toronto 

Marlcau, Gilles, Orient 

Marquardi, FJeonor. Atikokan 

For ttw Lov« of Learning 

Marquardt, Susanne, 
Thunder Bay 

Marquis, Vincent 

Marshall, (Mr.) W. T., Kingston 

Marshall, Lisa, Ottawa 

Marshall, Nancy 

Martel, Marie-Josee, Ottawa 

Martin, Barbara 

Martin, Danika/Giroux, 

Martin, Judy, Pickering 

Martin, Lawrence 

Martin, Rosalind, Mississauga 

Martino, Loreen, Don Mills 

Martinoski, Michelle, Markham 

Marx, David, Weston 

Mascotto, Bill, Geraldton 

Masny, Diana/Lajoie, Mario 

Mason, David G. 

Mathematics, Science & 
Technology Education Group, 


Mather, Bruce 

Mathwani, (Dr.) Shirish H., 
St. John's 

Matrican Learning Systems Ltd., 

Matson, Dianne, Thunder Bay 

Maudsley, Donald B., Toronto 

Mawson, Cathy/Mawson, Mark, 

May, Fred, Bolton 

May, Ruth, Bolton 

Mayes, Shirley, Barrie 

Mazmanian, Raffi N., Fonthill 

McCaffrey, Jack/Hicks, Lome, 

McCaskill, (Mrs.) A., Dalkeith 

McColl, J. Stewart 

McCormick, Betty, Maxville 

McCuaig, Jim, Thunder Bay 

McCusker, Thomas 

McDiarmid, Garnet L., 
Port Colborne 

McDonald, Carol, Scarborough 

McDonald, John R, Amherstburg 

McDougall, Scott A., Newmarket 

McElgunn, Barbara, West Hill 

McElhone, Wayne 

McEwen, Tracie 

McFadden, John, Toronto 

McGann, Kathie 

McGee, Wayne L., Oakville 

McGill, G. H., Ncpean 

McGregor- Hunter, Susan, 

McGregor-Morris, Elaine, St. 

McGuinty, Greg 

McHugh, Kim 

Mclntyre, Edith, Peterborough 

Mclntyre, Keith 

Mclntyre, Sally M., Kars 

McKellar, Donald A. 

McKenna, Joan, Toronto 

McKenzie, Duke 

McKeown, Hugh 

McKinnon, Lynn, Hillsburgh 

McKinnon, Madeline, Madoc 

McLarty, Peter 

McMaster University, Hamilton 

McMaster University Students' 
Union Inc., Hamilton 

McMillan, John., Scarborough 

McMiUen, Beth, Scarborough 

McNabb Park Elementary 
School, Home & School 

McNair, Lyle 

McNairn, (Mrs.) Ken, 
White Lake 

McPhee, Betty, Scarborough 

McRandall, Roderic A., Bancroft 

Meaghan, (Professor) Diane 


Medwin, Bob 

Menard, Monique, Ottawa 

Mercier, Lori 

Metro Principals' Council, Adult 
Day School Credit Programs 

Metro Renaissance, Scarborough 

Metro Special Education 
Advisory Committee (SEAC) 
Networking Committee, 
North York 

Metro Toronto Secondary 
Teachers' Organization, Toronto 

Metropolitan Separate 
School Board, Toronto 

Metropolitan Toronto 
Association for Community 
Living, Education Committee, 

Metropolitan Toronto Police, 


Metropolitan Toronto Principals' 
Council, Toronto 

Metropolitan Toronto School 
Board/Etobicoke Board of 
Education/Scarborough Board of 
Education/Board of Education 
for the City of Toronto 

Metz, Robert 

Meyer, (Dr.) John R. 

Meyers, Beverly J., Campbellford 

Meyers, Mary, Toronto 

Mezouri, Ahmed, Toronto 

Michaud, Pierre 

Miclash, Frank 

Middlesex County Board of 

Middlesex Women Teachers' 
Association/Ontario Public 
School Teachers' Federation, 
Middlesex District 

Miguil, Samatar, North York 

Mikrovica, Darlene 

Miles, Michael C, Orillia 

Millar, Donna 

Millen, David, Ottawa 

Miller, (Rev.) Jim, Wallaceburg 

Miller, Jack 

Miller, Jasper J., Toronto 

Miller, Joan, Deep River 

Miller, Judith, Ottawa 

Miller, Maria, Toronto 

Miller, Walter C, Brooklin 

MiUs, Dale, Vankleek Hill 

Mills, Nicole, Cornwall 

Mills, Stephen J., Mississauga 

Milne, Kenneth, Guelph 

Milnes, John E., Cornwall 

Vol. IV Appendices 

Mtncrv Pofolhy, Niagant MU 

Minulik PuMk School 

Minutik School Suff 

Mintatry of Culture. Tourism 
and Recrraiion. Torvnio 

Minutry of (lullurc, Tourum 
an«l Rrcrnlion, The Librarm 
and Community Iniormalinn 
Branch, Toronto 

Ministry of Education & 
Training, Eastern Ontario 
Rcpon, fSl. Curriculum 
Advisory Committee. Ntptan 

Ministry of Education & 
Training Advisory (^uikiI 
of Special Education 

Minoque. Sherry 

Minry,, Scarborough 

Mississauga Aru (^uncil, 

Mississauga Board of Trade, 
Education & Training 
Committee, Musiuauga 

Mississauga. .Mayor's Youth 
Advisory ( j>mmittec. Ad Hoc 
Onnmittee on Education. 

Mitchell. Frances, RKhmond Hill 

Mitchell, Richard. Iroifuots Falb 

Mobile Business Start -Up 
Program, Sonh York 

Modem languages fxnincil, 

•■r. Parent Advisory 

Mohammed. Tracy, S4arkluim 

V(on«igfK>r Eraser College, 
•tiMlcnt*. Toronto 

Mcintgomery, ( Dr. ) William R. 
H., Smithville 

Montpcllier. Ryan 

Moon, Peter. Toronto 

Moore. Tom. Collmgwood 

Moose Crce Education Authority 

MiMite Factory Home and 
School Working (j^mmitiee 

Morello, ( IJr. ) Murray 

Morgan. (Dr.) Griffith A. V., 

Morgan, lonathan, Kcmptvtlle 

Morison School, Parent -Teacher 
Group, Deep River 

.Morley, Minou. Ottawa 

Morrell. (Sr.) Kay, Toronto 

Morrison. Kenneth L, 
Thunder Bay 

Morrison. Sheila. Toronto 

Morro, Sheila. 5c<irfiorou;/i 

Morse, Alison/Heath, Sharen, 

Mortley, Marlene, Hillburgh 

Moscley-Williams. Betty, 
North Bay 

Moss, J. Gerry, Port Elgin 

Motiar, Ahmed, Thomhill 

Mrosovsky. N., Toronto 

Muir, WillUm A., Woodtto, k 

Muller, Norman. Toronto 

Mulligan. (Rev.) lames T. 

' Council of 
' um 

Muhicullural History Socict. 
of Ontario, Toronto 

Munn, Eric 

Munro, Julia 

Munro. William/Munro, janel, 

Murphy-Massc, Patricia. 

Murray- Ijwrencc, Alana, I'htiley 

Murray, Roy V. 

Muslim Educational Institute 
of Ontario, Unionville 

Muslim Network for Education 
& Research, North York 

Mussard, Trudy 

Musselman, Ken, Elora 

Myers, John, Toronto 

Nadeau, Andr*, Caprfol 

Nagra, Manroop, Markham 

Nair,A.S. (Krishna) 

Nakogee, Karen, Moose Factory 

Nathoo, Zahra/Visnani, Fcnrana 

National Access Awarencs* Week, 
Provincial Education 
Subcommittee, Toronto 

National Capital Alliance on 
Race Relations. Ollttwii 

National ('ongrcss of Italian 
Canadians, Ontario Region, 

National Oiuncil of Canadian 
I ilipinn Associations, (ireatcr 
Toronto Region. Toronto 

Nelsjin, Fiona, Toronto 

Network for F.ducalion 
Without Pollution, Toronto 

Ncuman. Carolyn, A»H'r»i<if»»'iWr 

New Tecumseh & Area Arts 
( 4>uncil, AlUtton 

Newman. Eleanor. Smith Fallt 

Newman. Tracy, Brampton 

Newmarket Chamber of. 

Niagara O>alition for F^ucation 
Reform, Niagara-on-lhelMke 

Niagara Falls Chamber of 
Commerce, Education 
Committee. Niagara halls 

Niagara South Board of 
Education, Welland 

Niagara South Women Teachers' 
A.sstM.iation, Port (.olborne 

Niagara Symphony Association, 
Education Cx)mmitlee, 
St. Catharmes 

Nicholls, Gordon, (Mmbndge 

Niels, Richard |. E. 

Nielsen, D., Barrie 

Nipigon-Red Rock Board of 
Education, Red Rock 

Nipissing Board of Education 

Nipissing Board of FUJucation 

Nipissing (^immunity School, 
students. North Bay 

Nipissing District Roman 
C:atholic Separate v1iim>1 Hojrd. 
FSL, Programs 

Nipissing University. Faculty of 

Nipissing Women Teachers' 
AsscKialion. North Bay 

Nippel, Bill. Kitchener 

Nishnawbe Aski \jimn 
Thunder Bay 

Nishri. Ruth. Willowdale 

Nixon, Deborah/lgnatieff, 

For th« Lo«» o( Lccmmg 

Nokee Kwe Adult Education 
Centre, Chatham 

Nolet, Lise 

Norfolk Board of 
Regional Health Department, 
Healthy Lifestyles Committee, 

Norfolk Women Teachers' 
Association, Simcoe 

Norkum, Joan, Caledon East 

North Bay and District 
Association for Community 

North Bay Immigrant Support 
Services, North Bay 

North of Superior District 
Roman Catholic Separate School 
Board, Special Education 
Program, Terrace Bay 

North York Board of Education, 
North York 

North York Board of Education, 
Special Education Advisory 
Committee, North York 

North York Board of Education, 
Secondary School Principals 

North York Inter-Agency & 
Community Council, North York 

North York Parent Assembly, 

North York Principals' 
Association, North York 

North York Women Teachers' 
Association, Thornhill 

Northern Nishnawbe Education 
Council, Sioux Lookout 

Northlea Public School, Home & 
School Association 

Northumberland & Newcastle 
Board of Education 

Northumberland & Newcastle 
Board of Education, Outreach 

Northumberland Christian 
School Society, Cobourg 

Board of Education, Cobourg 

Nowak, Mary, Kitchener 

Nowlan, David M., Toronto 

O'Connell, (Dr.) Colin/Schultz,, 


O'Dwyer, Gary 

O'Farrell, Lawrence, Kingston 

O'Leary, Denyse, East York 

O'Mahony, Siobhan, LaSalle 

O'Shea, M. Isabella, Wolfe Island 

O'Sullivan, Patrick/O'Sullivan, 
Sandra, Sudbury 

Obeda, Marian, London 

Oertel, Patricia, Dundas 

Association for the Advancement 
of Visual Media (OFA), Etobicoke 

Office provincial de I'education 
de la foi catholique de I'Ontario, 

Officer, Donald R., Gloucester 

Ogden, Steve, Aylmer 

Ojibway Tribal Family Services, 

Okonkwo, Clem, Scarborough 

Oliver, Rosemary, Scarborough 

Olmsted, Bob, Orangevilie 

Olsen, Lynda, Belleville 

Ontario Ad Hoc Committee on 
Juvenile Delinquency & Crime, 

Ontario Advisory Council on 
Disability Issues, Toronto 

Ontario Advisory Council on 
Women's Issues/Conseil 
consultatif de I'Ontario sur la 
condition feminine, Toronto 

Ontario Alliance of Christian 

Schools, Ancaster 

Ontario Arts Council, Toronto 

Ontario Association for Child 
Care in Education, North York 

Ontario Association for 
Community Living, North York 

Ontario Association for 
Continuing Education, London 

Ontario Association for 
Counselling & Attendance 

Ontario Association for 
Counselling & Attendance 
Services/Sault Ste. Marie Board 
of Education, Attendance 

Ontario Association for 
Geographic & Environmental 
Education, London 

Ontario Association for 
Mathematics Education/Ontario 
Mathematic Co-ordinators' 

Ontario Association for 
Supervision and Curriculum 
Development, Kitchener 

Ontario Association for the 
Supervision of Physical & Health 
Education, St. Catharines 

Ontario Association of Adult & 
Continuing Education School 
Board Administrators 

Ontario Association of Catholic 
School Students' Council 

Ontario Association of Deans 
of Education, London 

Ontario Association of 
Junior Educators, Stratford 

Ontario Association of 
Professional Social Workers, 
School Social Work Committee, 

Ontario Association of 
Professional Social Workers/ 
Ontario Association of Speech/ 
Language Pathologists & 
Psychological Association, 

Ontario Association of School 
Business Officials, Toronto 

Ontario Association of Speech- 
Language Pathologists & 
Audiologists, School Speech- 
Language Pathologists' 
Committee, Scarborough 

Ontario Association of Speech 
Language Pathologists & 
Audiologists, Wellington- 
Dufferin Regional Chapter 

Ontario Association of Speech 
Language Pathologists & 
Audiologists, Hamilton Regional 
Group, Stoney Creek 

Ontario Association of Teachers 
of Italian 

Ontario Association of the Deaf, 

Ontario Association of Youth 
Employment Centres 

Vol, IV Appendices 

'iiiTator t 
' ' \iJoculion 

ol BuuiWM FdtK'aliun 
Dtrtcton/Onuriu Astocuium ol 
BuancM Ethicaior'i Co- 

OnunoCilholic Supcrvivirv 
Offken' AstocUtion 

Onlario (^tholw Suprrvuury 
OtTicm' Auoculion. Am 2 
Meeting Pankiptnts, WiUowtUiit 

OnUrio Chainber of Commrrcc 

Ontario Classkal Auociation. 

Onlxiio Co-opcralive Education 
Aiiociation, Concord 

Onlano Coaiition of Children 
& Youth, Toronto 

Ontaru) (.onfederation of 
L'nivmily Fatully Auociationt. 
Tor on 10 

Ontario (.<»nfcTcnce of 
CaihoiK BuhofH 

Ontario Council for Children 
with Behavioural Ouorden 

Onlano Council of French as a 
Second language Consultancy 

Ontario CourKil of Regents for 
CoUegn of Applied Arts & 

Onurw Council of Sikhs. 

Onlano Cuhural Society 

Ontario DyilcxM Aitocialion. 

Oniwio Educational Leadenhip 
CenlT' "Wn of 

OntA- • f.Ki 

l>nijrio Hcmcniary (^tholic 
Irachrrt' AsstKiatiun, Brant 

Ontario Elementary (^iholic 
Irachers' Assocution. Nipiuing 

Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association, I >t(>iwj 

Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' Asu>cialion, North ol 
Superior Unit/Onlario English 
(Catholic Teachers' AsMK'iation, 
Mornepjyne-Michipicolcn Unit, 

Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' AsstKiation, 
Metrnp«)litan Toronio 
EJemenlary Unit 

Oniario English Catholic 
Teachers' AsMKiation, Oxford 
tjiuniy Unit/Oxford County 
Roman (Utholic Separate School 
Board. Woodstock 

Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association. Niagara 
Secondary Unit 

Oniario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association, Windsor 
Elementary Unit 

Onlano Fjiglish Catholic 
Teachers' Association. Toronio 
Secondary Unit. Religious Affairs 
C^mmiltec, Scarborough 

i^h Catholic 
•- ijiion. Wetland 
Unit. \^rUan,i 

Ontario English ( atholii. 
Teachers' Associalion, Toronio 
Secondary Unit 

Ontario English C^lholk 
Teachers' Aatociation. York Unit, 

Ontario English l^atholic 
Teachers' AsMKiation, Stormont, 
Dundas & Glengarry Unit, 

Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association, Windsor 
Secondary Unit 

Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association, Lambton 
Unit, Samm 

Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association, Drydcn- 
Sioux l.ookout Unit, 
Sioux Lookout 

Ontario English (.atholic 
Teachers' Association, UufTerin- 
Peei Elementary Unit, 

Oniario English Catholic 
Teachers' Associalion, Carleton 

Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association, Brock 
Secondary Unit, St. Calhanna 

Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association 

Oniario English Catholic 
Teachers' Associalion, DufTerin- 
Peel, Secondary Unit 

Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association. Durham 
UnilOnlario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association, lanark, 
Leeds fk ( irenvillc Unit/ 
AsMKialion des enseignanles el 
des enseignants franco-ontarien* 
- (>iml6k de l,anark, Ixeds & 

Onlann English Cjlholic 
Teachers' AsMKialion. Wellington 

Ontario English (^iholic 
Teachers' AsstKiation, Hamilton 
Secondary Unit. Hamilton 

Ontario English (.atholic 
Teachers' AsstKiation, Erontenac- 
Lennox & Addington Unit, 

Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association, Lincoln 

Ontario English Catholic 
I'eachers' AsstKiation, London- 
Middlesex Unit 

Ontario English (^tholic 
1'cachers' AsstKiation, Sudbury 
Elementary Unit, Sudbury 

Oniario English CUlholic 
Teachers' AsstKiation. Eisex Unit, 

Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association, Sault Sle. 
Marie Unit. .S<iu/r .S(e. Mane 

Oniario Family Studies/Home 
Economic Educators' 
AsstKiation, Guelph 

Ontario Federation of Home & 
School Associations, Inc., 

Ontario Federation of Home & 
School Associations, Regit>n I, 
C/inr^omOntario Federation of 
Home and SchrmI Associations, 
Inc., TtifortrtJ 

Ontario Federation of 
Independent Schtvils, Ottawa 

Ontario Federation of Labour, 
I km Millt 

Onlano Federation of School 
Athletic AswKiations. Barrif 

Ontario Federation of 
Symphony Orchestras. Sudbury 

For tt«« LOM o< LMmtnc 

Ontario Foundation for 
Educator Exchanges, North York 

Ontario Guidance Co- 
ordinators' Association, 

Ontario Historical Society 

Ontario History & Social Science 
Teachers' Association 

Ontario History Consultants' 
Association/Ontario Geography 
Consultants' Association, 

Ontario Literacy Coalition, 

Ontario March of Dimes, 

Ontario Medical Association, 
Committee on Child Welfare 

Ontario Modern Language 
Teachers' Association, Toronto 

Ontario Moral/Values Education 
Association, Scarborough 

Ontario Multi-Faith Coalition 
for Equity in Education, 

Ontario Museum Association, 

Ontario Music Educators' 
Association, Brockville 

Ontario Native Women's 
Association, Thunder Bay 

Ontario Peer Helpers' 
Association, Brockville 

Ontario Physical & Health 
Education Association/ 
University of Ottawa Heart 
Institute, Nepean 

Ontario Prevention 

Ontario Principals' Association, 

Ontario Psychological 
Association, Section on 
Psychology in Education 

Ontario Public Library 

Ontario Public School Boards' 
Association, Toronto 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, Lincoln 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, Hamilton District, 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, Durham District, 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation Toronto 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, Stormont, Dundas 
and Glengarry District 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, Victoria District, 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, York Region 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, Peterborough 
District, Peterborough 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, North York District, 
North York 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, Ottawa District 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, Toronto District, 


Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, Frontenac District, 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, London & Oxford 
County Districts 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, Thunder Bay 
District/Ontario English 
Catholic Teachers' Association, 
Thunder Bay, Elementary 
Unit/Ontario English Catholic 
Teachers' Association, Thunder 
Bay District, Secondary 
Unit/Ontario Secondary School 
Teachers' Federation, Thunder 
Bay District/Lakehead Women 
Teachers' Association, 
Thunder Bay 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, Sault Ste. Marie 
District, Sault Ste. Marie 

Ontario Public School Teachers' 
Federation, North Bay District 

Ontario Public Supervisory 
Officials' Association, Belleville 

Ontario Public Supervisory 
Officials' Association, 
Southwestern, Ontario Region 

Ontario School Board Reform 

Network, Thornhill 

Ontario School Counsellors' 

Ontario School Library 
Association, Toronto 

Ontario Science Centre, 
Don Mills 

Ontario Secondary School 
Principals' Council, Central 
Region, Scarborough 

Ontario Secondary School 
Principals' Council 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, 
Northeastern Region 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, Western 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, 
Northeastern Region 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, London 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, Western 
Region, Sarnia Cabinet 
Members, Sarnia 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, Central 
Metro-West Region, Tliornhill 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, 
Northeastern Region 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, Eastern- 
South Region 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, Eastern- 
South Region 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachers' Federation, District 7, 
Niagara South, Welland 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachers' Federation, District 8 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachers' Federation, District 48 
(Dufferin), Orangeville 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachers' Federation, District 56 
(North Shore), EHioflflite 

Vol. IV Appendices 

iiUf* VhtH>l 
\rjiion, Dulrict 42. 
UuuuL. iuiinh Falts 

Ontario SccofMUry School 
Trachm' Folcraiion. Thunticr 
Bay Dtvuton 

OnUrio Secondary School 
Trachm' Fedrration, Red Lake 
DutrKl. fUti Lake 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachm' Federation, Nipigon- 
Rcd Rock Ptviuon. Local 29, 

Ontario Secondary School 
Trachen' Federation, Kirkland 
Lake I>ivi»ion of Dutrici 32. 
Kirkland Ijtke 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachen' Federation. Dutricts t 

Ontario Secottdiry School 
Teachen' Federation, District 2 1 

Ontario Secondary School 
Trachen' Federation, District 10. 
Profcuional Students' Support 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachen' Federation. District 20. 
Frontcftac, Kinpion 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachen' Federation, District 18, 
Secondary School Teachen' 
Federation. Disinci 49. 
North umberbnd & Newcastle/ 
^ hool 
[hstrict 50. 
Vta.ti<rkt- i Uliburlun 

I 10. 

RcgiLrn at PccU MiuuMiuga 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachen' Federation. Toronto 

Onuriii Scvoiiiljry Vhinil 
Tcaihcfi' Federation 

Onianu Secondary School 
Teachen' Federation, District 27. 
Simciie, Biirrif 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachen' Federation, District 26 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachen' Federation. District 1 7. 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachen' Federation, 
Pntfeuional Student Services 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachers' Federation, Maniloulin 
Secondary School West Bay, 
Mamloulin liland 

Ontario Secondary School 
Tcjihcn' Federation, District M). 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachers' Federation, District 31, 
Su4yfrur>Ontario Secondary 
School Teachen' Federation, 
District 24. Waterloo 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachen' Federation, District - 

Ontario Secondary School 
Teachen' Federation, District 51, 
East York. Toronto 

Ontario Separate School 
Trustees' Association. Toronto 

Ontario Separate School 
Trustees' Association. ToriwK. 

Ontario Separate School 
Trustees' Association. Toronto 

Ontario Separate Supervisory 
BusincM Official Asaocialion 

Ontario Society for FducalHin 
Through Art. Mi»nuiufii 

Dnurio S«Kicty lor hducjiion 
I'hruugh Art 

Ontario Teachen' Federation. 

Ontario Technical Directors' 
Association, AUanburg 

Ontario Technological Education 
Co-ordinators' Council 

Ontario Tourism Education 
C^ouncil. Board of Directors. 

Ontario Traffic Conference 
Safety & Education (Committee, 

Ontario Training & Adjustment 

Ontario. Inlcrministerial 
Committee on Gender Equity in 
Education & Training, Toronto 

Ontario, Ministry of Citizenship, 
Ontario Anti- Racism Secretariat, 

Ontario, Ministry of (;ulturc. 
Tourism & Recreation, 
Recreation Division, Toronto 

Ontario, Ministry of Culture, 
lourism & Recreation. Toronto 

Ontario. Ministry of Fxlucation 
& Training. Office of Bilingual/ 
Bicultural Education for Deaf 
(Children. Milton 

Ontario, Planning & 
Implementation Commission, 

' <nlario. Workplace Health & 
Safety Agency, Toronto 

Orangeville District Secondaty 
Sch(K>l. .Modern languages & 
Associates I>epartment, 

Organization lor Quality 
FUlucation, Hastings- Prince 
Edward (Aiunties 
C'hapter/Sidncy Township Rate- 
Payers' AssiKiation 

Organization for Quality 
Education. I jmblon Qiunty 

Organization for Quality in 
Education. Waterloo Chapter 

Organization for Quality of 

Organization of Canadian 
Symphony Musicians 

Organization of Parents of Black 

Organization of Parents of Black 
Children (OPBC). 
TorofiMOrganization of Spanish- 
Speaking Educators of 
Ontario/Hispanic Council. 
Education Committee/Spanish- 
Speaking Parents' Liaison 
(^immiltec. Toronto 

Oriole Park School, Curriculum 


Orrctt, I June 

Orton, /Dr. I Maureen |.. loronto 

Osborne. Helen. Bancroft 

Oshawa & District Association 
for Community Living. 
F^ducalion Oimmiltee. Ofhawa 

Oshawa Taxpayen' Cxialition. 

Ottawa Board nt Mucation, 

Ottawa Board of FJucation 
Ratepayers' Association. Ottawa 

Hti Vm Unw of Learning 

Ottawa Board of Education, 
Adult High School, Teachers, 

Ottawa Board of Education, 
Alternative Schools Advisory 

Ottawa Board of Education, Arts 
Advisory Committee 

Ottawa Board of Education, 
Computers Helping the 
Instructional Program Advisory 
Committee, Ottawa 

Ottawa Board of Education, 
Continuing Education 
Department, Ottawa 

Ottawa Board of Education, 
Joint Council of Elementary & 
Secondary School Advisory 

Ottawa-Carleton Coalition for 
Literacy, Ottawa 

Ottawa-Carleton ESL Support 
Coalition, Ottawa 

Ottawa-Carleton Immigrant 
Services Organization, Ottawa 

Ottawa-Carleton Inner-City 
Education Association, Ottawa 

Ottawa-Carleton Learning 
Foundation, Kanata 

Ottawa-Carleton School Day 
Nursery Inc., Ottawa 

Ottawa Christian School 
Association, Ottawa 

Ottawa Elementary Principals' 
Association, Ottawa 

Ottawa ESL Community, Ottawa 

Ottawa Roman Catholic Separate 
School Board, Parent Advisory 
Committee, Ottawa 

Ottawa Roman Catholic Separate 
School Board, Ottawa 

Our Lady of Fatima School, 
Parent-Teacher Advisory Group 

Our Schools/Our Selves, 
Editorial Board, Toronto 

Outward Bound 

Overland Adult Learning Centre, 
Advisory Committee, Don Mills 

Owen, David, Catnnore 

Page, Irene 

Pai, Dinesh, Kanata 

Palestine House, Mississauga 

Palmer, B. A., Sarnia 

Panar, (Dr.) Joshua, North York 

Panel on Learning (Shaw Cable 
TV), St Thomas 

Pangle, Lorraine Smith, Toronto 

Pankiw, Olga, Etobicoke 

Pape Adolescent Resource Centre 

Papineau, L./St. Cyr, 
Paul/Bordeleau, Andre 

Parents & Citizens for Christian 
Education, Simcoe 

Parents Against Teachers' Strikes 
(RA.T.S.), Sarnia 

Parents Against Violence 

Parents Assisting Students to 
Succeed (PASS), Burlington 

Parents, Families & Friends of 
Lesbians & Gays (P-FLAG) 

Parents for a Christian Public 
School, Waterloo 

Parents Improving Education in 
Peel, Brampton 

Parents in Action, Newmarket 

Parents In Action 

Parents of Project 90 

Park Street Collegiate Institute, 
Teaching staff, Orillia 

Park, Sue 

Parmar, Sudha, Markham 

Parry Sound High School, 
students. Parry Sound 

Partners in Change Pilot Project 

Partners Initiating Quality 
Educational Directives 
(PIQUED), Gloucester 

Partnership in Education 

Patel, Shetal, Markham 

Patel, Vinodchandra J., 


Paterson, Josh/Clermont, 
Gabrielle/Barthel, Katharine 

Pathansen, Helen 

Pathyil, Joseph, Mississauga 

Patterson, John W., Ottawa 

Patterson, Renton H., Pembroke 

Paul, (Sister) M. Catherine, 
Sauk Ste. Marie 

Pawliszyn, Barbara 

Pawlowski, Carol, North Bay 

Payne, D. H., Markham 

Payne, Stephen C. 

Peace, Donna/Peace, Walter 

Peel Board of Education, 


Peel Educators' Association 

Peel Family Studies' Association, 


Peel Multicultural Council, 

Peel Physical & Health Education 
Heads' Association, Brampton 

Peer Power Centre, London 

Pelletier, (Dr.) J. Wick, Toronto 

Pelletier, Marise 

Pelletier, Natasha 

Peninsula Association of 
Supervisory Music Personnel, 

Pentney, Ian, Thunder Bay 

People Working for a Positive 
Future, Toronto 

Pepper, Lianne/Grant, Jonathan, 

Percy, John R., Mississauga 

Perdue, Dorothy, Indian River 

Performing Arts Organization 
Network for Education 

Performing Arts Organization 
Network for Education 
{PAONE), Stratford 

Periwinkle Project, North York 

Perkovich, John, Burlington 

Perras, Raymond R., Orleans 

Perry, Phyllis, Nepean 

Personnel de I'ecole Frere Andre 

Personnel in Positions of 
Additional Responsibility for the 
Fort Frances-Rainy River Board 
of Education/Positions of Added 
Responsibility Association, Fort 

Perth County Board of 
Education, Stratford 

Vol. IV Appendices 

FVrth Woin«i Tri«;h«»' 
Auoculion. UlratforJ 

i^rtrr. Danid 

iVtcrboruugh County Board of 

Peterborough County Board of 
Education. Family Studin 
Subfcvt CoutKil, Pttrrborough 

Peterborough County-City 
Heahh Unit. Pnerborough 

Prtrrborough County Women 
Teacher*' AuociationA'ictoria 
County Women Teachers" 
AsMxution Peter bo rough, 
V'tctoru, Northumberland & 
Newcastle Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, 

Prtenon, Carol. Bellevtlle 

Pctenon, Carol Louise, Harwood 

Pctiquan, Francine 

Pctunon, Rod, Windsor 

Philip, M. Nourbe»e/ 
Chamberlain. Paul, Toronw 

Phillips. William |., Toronto 

Pickering Public Library Board. 

Piercy, Btodwm, GUnteeiter 

Piitis,Glcn. Dundtu 

Piker. Mfry, Ktnpton 

PiUbld ScwcU, Leonora/Sewell, 
(Rev.) E. ITDavis, lohn/Scoit. 
Nancy, St CUrtharma 

Pine Tree Nalrvr Centre of Brani. 

Pine glo w School. Parent 
Covnmtttec. K^rwm 


Pitman, Connie 

Pituiko, Katherine, Windsor 

Ptzzey. Kathryn, Halibunon 

Planned Parenthood of Toronto, 

Planned ParenlhixHi l>nljrio, 

Plover Mills Home & School 
Association, Thorndale 

Plumiey, K. D., Samm 

Ftoirier, Catherine, Windsor 

Poirier, E. Andr*, Cuelph 

Polconzie. Edward/ Pokonzie, 
Paulette Integration Action 
Group, Sudbury Chapter 

Pokomy, Amy, Perth 

Police Community Advisory 

Pollard, Dave, Agincourt 

Pongray, Michael 

Porco, Nancy 

Portengen, Michael/Crate, 
Kari/Pulia, Siomonn 

Porter, Ruth, ft>rf Hope 

Portuguese-Canadian National 

PostriM. lohn F., Spencerville 

Ptttok. Dave 

Potvin, Bernard A. 

Pratt, David, Kingston 

Prendergasl. Stephen. Ijondan 

PrentKe, Debbie, Brampton 

Presbyterian Church in Canada. 
InterSynod Committee on 
Prrvate & Public F^ducation in 
Ontario. Pudtnch 

Prescott-Kussell C!ounly Board of 
FUlucdtiun. English Language 
Seclion/Conseil dc I'educjliun 
dc Prcscott- Russell. Section de 
languc franv'disc Hawkesbury 
Prescolt- Russell County Roman 
Catholic English -Language 
Separate School Board Rockland 

Prcscott -Russell Reading 
Program, Vankleek Hill 

Prcscott -Russell Women 
Teachers' Association 

Presswalla, Shaila, Toronto 

Prince Edward Cxjunty Board of 

Prince, Stephen Lawrence, 

Pringlc, Bruce/Pringle, loycc. 
Oxford Station 

Pritchard, Eric, Hamilton 

Professional Engineers Ontario 

Professional Engineers Ontario, 
York Chapter 

Professional Engineers Ontario, 
Niagara Chapter, Thorold 

Professional Engineers Ontario, 
North Bay Chapter 

Professional Engineers Ontario, 
Timiskaming Chapter 

Professional Student Services 
Personnel, North York Board of 
Education. Ontario Secondary 
School Teachers' Federation, 
District 1 13, Nforr/i York 

Program Council East, Marathon 

Project 2000 Committee of 
Victoria County, Lindsay 

Proicci Hope. St. Catharines 

Pronger. R. C., Euex 

Provincial Alliance for the 
Fxlucation-Work Connections 
(EWC) Project. Toronto 

Provincial C^)uncil of Women of 
Ontario, l^ndon 

Pupo, Sam, Woodbrtdge 

Purchase, ( Dr. ) John E., 

Putkowski, Sharon, Brantford 

Quality Daily Physical Education 
Cximmittee of Scarborough, 

Quality Education Network, 
Richmond Hill 

Quality Education Network of 
Peel, Brampton 

Qualiiy Education Network, 
Hamilton (Chapter 

Queen's University, Kingston 

Queen's University, FactJty of 
Flducalion, Student Teacher 
F^ucalional Plan (STEP) 

Queen's University, Faculty of 
Education, Principals' Cx>urse 

Quinct, Fflix. Ottawa 

Quinlan. Stephen E.. North York 

Quintc-St. Lawrence IxKal 
Apprenticeship Committee for 
the Electrical Trade, Kingston 

R. Samuel Mclaughlin Centre 
for (~>cn>nlological Health 
Research. Faculty of Health 
Sciences. McMaslcr I'nis-ersity. 

R. D. Scott. Richmnnd Hill 

R. H. King Academy, students. 

For ttw Low of Laaming 

Rachlis, (Dr.) Lome M., Ottawa 

Racine, Lorraine/Racine, Annick, 


Radcliffe, (Dr.) John G., Toronto 

Raes, Ron/Raes, Deborah, Sarnia 

Raging Independent Student 
Educational Group (RISE) 

Rajsic, Susan, Orillia 

Ramsay, David 

Randon, Gaida K., Toronto 

Rands, Joy, Napanee 

Raphael, (Dr.) Dennis, Toronto 

Rapp, (Dr.) Doris J., Buffalo 

Rasenberg, Chris, Cloyne 

Rasmussen, Anita, London 

Rasokas, Peter, Simcoe 

Rassemblement pour I'education 
pubhque en frani^ais, Ottawa 

Raston, H. A., Toronto 

Rathan, David, Scarborough 

Rawcliffe, David R, Thornhill 

Rawls, Don, Wingham 

Ray, (Dr.) Ajit Kumar, Gloucester 

Raymond, Mary R, Etobicoke 

Rayner, E., Brampton 

REAL Women of Durham, 

Red Lake Board of Education, 
Red Lake 

Red Lake Indian Friendship 
Centre, Red Lake 

Reddam, Ronald J., Essex 

Redeemer College, Ancaster 

Reeve, Jill, Don Mills 

Regina Street Public School, 
Parent Advisory, Ottawa 

Regional Multicultural Youth 
Council, Thunder Bay 

Regional Municipality of 
Department of Public Health 
Services, Hamilton 

Regiopolis/Notre-Dame Catholic 
High School, parents & friends, 

Registered Nurses' Association of 

Regroupement des associations 
de parents des ecoles publiques 

Regroupement des groupes 
francophones d'alphabetisation 
populaire de I'Ontario 

Rehoboth Reformed School 
Society at Norwich 

Reichman, Karl H., Brechin 

Reidel, (Dr.) G., Ottawa 

Reimer, Mark, Kitchener 

Reinsborough, Arleen, Oakville 

Reiss, Evelyn, Thornhill 

Renfrew County Board of 
Education, Pembroke 

Renfrew County Board of 
Education, Curriculum 

Renfrew County Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board 

Repetski, Michael 

Reseau de formation et de 
programmation du Nord-Est, 
North Bay 

Reseau des femmes du Sud de 
rOntario, Comite d'intervention 
de la region de York, 
Richmond Hill 

Reseau ontarien des services de 
garde francophones, Mississauga 

Reynolds, John P. 

Reynolds, Sadie M., Belleville 

Rhody, Brian, Kincardine 

Richard, Tina/Belanger, David 

Richmond Hill Chamber of 

Rickard, June, Belleville 

Rideau District High School, 
School Committee, Elgin 

Rideau Public School, Parent's 
Advisory Council, Kingston 

Rideau Valley Home Educators' 

Riley, Helen, Toronto 

Rimmer, Alan 

Ritondo, Edward, Fonthill 

Rivers, Dustin 

Rizvi, Acia, Markham 

Rizzo, Ryan 

Robb, Brian, Sheffield 

Robb, Kenneth D., Fonthill 

Robert E. Wilson Public School, 

Robineau-Rank, Gaetane, 


Robinson, Paul, Toronto 

Rockland Home & School 

Association, Rockland 

Rockwood, Dorothy S., 

Rodd, Catherine, Toronto 

Rodd, Jane, Guelph 

Rogerson, Pat, Sudbury 

Rolph Road Elementary School, 
Home & School Association 

Romain, Andrew, Ottawa 

Roodnick, Brian 

Gisela/Broderick, Bill, 

Roper, Dawn 

Rose, Carl T., Thunder Bay 

Rose, Clyde, St. John's 

Rose, Eraser D., Trenton 

Rosen, JoAnne, Uxbridge 

Rothwell-Osnabruck District 
High School, staff, Ingleside 

Rotino, Lucien, Woodbridge 

Roulet, R. Geoffrey, Kingston 

Rowe, Roger, Toronto 

Rowland, Jan 

Rowlands, (Mayor) June, Toronto 

Roy, Patty, Kakabeka Falls 

Royal Astronomical Society of 
Canada, Toronto 

Royal Commonwealth Society, 
Toronto Branch, Youth & 
Education Committee, Islington 

Royal Military College of 
Canada, Kingston 

Rozeluk, Sharon 

Rudolph, Katja 

Russell, Jesse 

Russell, Kathleen, 
Sault Ste. Marie 

Vol. IV Appendices 

Rim«U. KalhWen A.. 
.<Miu/( Su. Mane 

RuucU. Rulh. Kitchener 

Rulhertortl. Naulie, 
VankUtk mi 

Ruuika, Kay, Branlfoni 

Ryan. Elkm B.. Hamilton 

Ryan, Tom 

Rymon l\)lyiechnic Univcnity, 
l>cpi. of C^oniinuing Education, 
Program m Intcrgcncrational 
EdiKation, roronloRyrnon 
(H>lylechnK University, School of 
Earty Childhood Education. 

Saari, Eunice 

Saanmaki, iVter, Scarborough 

Sabourm. DominiqueAVaito, 

Sacher, Rodney/Sacher, 
Marianne (and family) 

Safe School Task Force. Toronto 

Sagastizado, Xiomari 

Sage, Margaret 

Saint dare of Assist School. 

S«int fttrick Catholic Secondary 
School. Parent -Teacher 
Asaociation. Toronto 

Sakzar. Fdii M.. Reuiair 

Sandcrt, Theme 

Scndmon. Christine, Gome 

Sandmofv, loan 

rSaiKls, NaiKy 

S«mty Lake Education 
Amhority/Thomas Fiddler 
Memorial School. Sandy Lake 

Saraga. HeleneySaraga. Mair, 

Sault College of Applied Arts & 
Technology, Special Needs Office 

Sault Ste. Marie Board of 
Education, Secondary School 
Core French Teachers languages' 
Subject Committee, 
Sault Ste. Mane 

Sault Ste. Marie Board of 
Education, Co-operative 
Education Program, 
,S<jm/i Ste. \farte 

Sault Ste. Marie Board of 
Education, Special Education 
Advisory Committee. 
Sault Ste. Mane 

Sault Ste. Marie Board of 

Sault Ste. Marie Chamber of 
Commerce, Sault Ste. Mane 

Sault Ste. Marie District Roman 
Catholic Separate SchiKtl Board, 
English Language Section, 
Sault Ste. Marie 

Sault Ste. Marie Public School 
Principals' Association 

Sault Ste. Marie Women 
Teachers' AsMKiation, 
.S<jii/f Ste Mane 

Saunders, [). 

Saunders Secondary 5>chool, 
Advisory Committee 

Saunders. Terry 

Savory, Kathleen. Toronto 

Sawdon, Brian 

Saiby, Grc^ry 

Scahill, Duna. Othawa 

Scarborough Black Educators 

Sv.jrtHiriiugh liojrd ot 
Education, l>rpjrtnient Heads ol 
History & Contemporary 
Studies, Sc<ir(>orou|;'i 

Scarborough Board of 
Education, Partners in 
leadership Council 

Scarborough Board of 
Education, Secondary School 
Principals' Association 

Scarborough Board of 
Education, Supervisory Officers' 

Scarborough Centre for 
Alternative Studies 

Scarborough Ellcsmere 
Community Meeting/David 
Warner, Toronto 

Scarborough Needs Accountable 
Politicians (S.N.A.R) 

Scarborough Secondary SchoiiU' 
Athletic Association. Agtncouri 

Scarborough Village Public 
School, Parent Croup 

Scarborough Women Teachers' 
Association. Scarborough 

Scarborourgh (ieography Heads 
Association, Scarborough 

Scase, (Mrs.) Irene, Sharon 

Schiff, Allan, Toronto 

Schinkel, Lori, Caledon 

Schmalz, Kathleen, Guelph 

Schmidt, Royal D./Schmidt, 
loycc. Scarborough 

Schneider, Vicky, Wingham 

Scholtz. (Mr & Mrs.) Matthew. 

School Board Sector Working 

Science & Technology in 
Education Alliance Etobicoke 
Science Co-ordinators' & 
Consultants' AssiKialion of 

Science Teachers' Association of 

Scoii. I). Lynn, Dunrobm 

Scott, losir. OrruH-d 

Scott, Ray, Alluton 

Scott, Walter, Cambridge 

Seaway Arts (Council. (^>rnw<i// 

Sebenas. Ron 

Scrdanncc. Hilda/Yanez, Giselle 

Sccpcrsad. Rolian, Miirkham 

Segal. Dorothy, Siouffville 

Seigel, Orl. Thunder Bay 

Self- Directed Studies Literacy 

Shalaby, Kamal S., Toronto 

Shanlin, Norman T, Orleans 

Shapton, Robert, Claledon 

Sharen. Robert M.. Grand Bend 

Shar|>c. Karen. (A)Uingwood 

Shaw. (Dr.)PaulI.. Odivil/e 

Shaw Festival Theatre 
Shaw, (iretchen, Ottawa 

Shaw. Steven 

Shay. lean. OrriiH-d 

Sheffield Area Bussing 

Shepard. Boxriy. Ancaiter 

Sheppard. Linda. Toronto 

Sheprak. Sam. Harrow 


For ttw I.OVW tX Laammg 

Sheridan College of Applied Arts 
& Technology, Oakville 

Sheridan College of Applied Arts 
& Technology, Brampton 
Campus, Critical Thinking and 
Problem Solving (TKP 1 100) 
students, Ancaster 

Sheridan, Dr. Stephen/Sheridan, 
EUie, Toronto 

Sherkin, Loni, Thornhill 

Shields, lohn, Ottawa 

Shilhan, Caroline 

Short, Sandra, Orleans 

Shortt, Ken 

Shuster, Judy 

Sim, Herman, Markham 

Simcoe County Board of 
Education, Special Education 
Advisory Committee, Midhurst 

Simcoe County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Barrie 

Simcoe County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Special 
Education Advisory Committee, 

Simcoe County Women 
Teachers' Association, Barrie 

Simner, Marvin L., London 

Simonsen, Peter, Ajax 

Simpson, Olive M., Lucan 

Sims, D., Dalkeith 

Singh, Himani, Thornhill 

Sionov, Roshel 

Sir Adam Beck Junior School, 
Home & School Association, 

Sir Sandford Fleming College of 
Applied Arts & Technology, 

Sitch, Bert, Kakabeka Falls 

Skeoch, Alan, Mississauga 

Skillen, Ruth 

Skrypuch, Marsha, Brantford 

Slavin, A. J., Peterborough 

Sly, William H., Arnprior 

Small, George (Jr.) 

Smalldon, John L., Elmira 

Smedick, (Dr.) Lois 

Smeenk, Brian P., Toronto 

Smith, A. Bruce, Mississauga 

Smith, Barbara J./Fawcett, Don, 

Smith, Bryan T, Woodstock 

Smith, Doug, Kitchener 

Smith, E. Suzanne, Kingston 

Smith, Grange, Toronto 

Smith, Howard A., Kingston 

Smith, J. S. H., Ennismore 

Smith, Jennifer L., Toronto 

Smith, Larry H. S./Smith, 
Delores, Barrie 

Smith, Philip J. Powel, Ottawa 

Smylie, Erin 

Smyth, Joseph, St. Catharines 

Snyder, (Dr.) Donna 

Snyder, Helen, Cambridge 

Snyder, Helen M., Cambridge 

Soady-Easton, H., North York 

Sobchuk, Helene, Iroquois Falls 

Socha, H. Norman, Waterloo 

Social Planning Council of 
Niagara Falls, Junior Social 
Planning Council, Niagara Falls 

Societe Internationale du 
Programme de Diminution des 
Tensions Inc., Longueuil 

Somers-Beebe, Maureen 

Somerville, (Mrs.) J. E., 

Sorab, Mehru, Thornhill 

Sorel, Gerry 

South Asian Teachers' 

South Central Ontario 
International Languages 
Administrators, Elementary 

South Grenville District High 
School, Parent Advisory 
Committee, Prescott 

Southgate, J. Robin, Wallaceburg 

Spade, Lizabelle, Sioux Lookout 

Spaling, Harry/Spaling, Trudy, 

Sparks, Louise, Fort Erie 

Special Interest Group for 
Telecommunications, Toronto 

Spence, David W./Spence, 
Pamela D., Pickering 

Spiller, (Dr.) Aidan E., London 

Spina Bifida & Hydrocephalus 
Association of Ontario, Toronto 

Sri Guru Singh Sabha Canada 
(Malton), Mississauga 

Srigley, Len, Scarborough 

St-Jean, Daniel, Hamner 

St. Jean de Brebeuf School, 

St-Laurent, Mouna, Orleans 

St. Aloysius School, Parent 
Advisory Council, Stratford 

St. Anthony's Catholic School, 
Education Community, 
Chalk River 

St. Casimir's Catholic School, 
Parent-Teachers' Association, 
Round Lake 

St. Catharines Association for 
Community Living 

St. Clair College of Applied Arts 
& Technology 

St. Germain, Kathleen, Sudbury 

St. James School, Eganville 

St. James School, Parent 
Advisory Council, Windsor 

St. Jean de Brebeuf Secondary 
School, Parents' Association 

St. Jerome School, Parent 
Education Committee/St. Jerome 
School, Student Council 

St. John Catholic High School, 
etudiant(e)s de FLS, Perth 

St. John, Richard 

St. John, RichardAVhittaker, 

St. Joseph's Elementary School 

St. Joseph's School, Catholic 
Parent-Teacher Association, 

St. Lawrence College of Applied 
Arts & Technology, Board of 

St. Lawrence High School, 
Student Council 

St. Leonard Catholic School, 

St. Louis, Ron 

St. Luke Elementary School, 
Parent Teacher Committee 

St. Luke Separate School, School 

Vol. IV Appendices 

St. Martin of Toun SefMratc 
School. Whtniey 

St. Mary VSt. Thomas More 
School, Parent -Teacher 
Auoculiun. Weil Lome 

St. Michad't College School 

St. Norbert Separate School, 
Parent -Teacher Aisocialion, 
Nr;rr>i Vort 

St. Patnck'i Catholic Secondary 
School, itudents, Tonmlo 

St. Paul's Sccofxiary School, 

St. Prter Canisius School 

St. I^cter School Community 

St. Peter's Secondary School, 
Mudiant(e)s d'un cours 
d'immenion de comp^cnce 

St. RKhard School, Committee 
on Learning. Musissauga 

S(. Seitastien Separate School, 
Catholic Parent Teacher 
Aiaociation, Toronto 

Si. Stephen's Youth Employment 
CouiudUng Centre, Staff, 

Suck. David. Arthur 

Suff OSkials' AstocUtion of 
North York. WiUowdaU 

Sufford. loc 

SUfflford Collegiate Institute 

Stance. Ursula. North B4tf 

Suple», Richard 

Starr, (Dr.) Sandra. Pusiinc/i 

Suruchcr. Kathleen. flWJr Rntr 

Steele, lame*, Ottawa 

Stem, I. A., Catedon East 

Stephens, Ronald, Windsor 

Sterback, David, Toronto 

Stevanus, Linda/Stevanus, Dale, 

Stevens, Carol Lyn 

Stevenson, Howie 

Stewart, Catherine 

Stewart, Cheryl, Bolton 

Stidscn, Catherine Berry, Cayuga 

Stinson, lefTery, Toronto 

Stirtzinger, (Dr.) Ruth, Toronto 

Stocker, Maureen, Toronto 

Stokman, Marjorie/Stokman, 
Tony, Guelph 

Stone, Nancy, Thorold 

Stoney Creek Adult High School 
& Learning Centre, students, 

Stormont, Dundas & Glengarry 
Board of Education 

Stormont, Dundas & Cilengarry 
Board of Education. Secondary 
Principab' Assocution 

Stormont. Dundas & C}lengarry 
Industry- Education (xmncil, 
Fxlucational Opportunities 

Stormont, Dundas & dlengarrv 
Prmcipals' & Vtce-PrincipaU 

Stormont. Dundas & Glengarry 
Women Teachers' Association 

Stott, LaurcTKc, Uniortyille 

Stover. Garry. IngletuU 

StradKrtto, Mm D. Atikokan 

Straight Stitching Pn>ductions, 

Straight Talk Program, Kingtion 

Slrathroy & Area Association for 
Community Living, Strathroy 

Struyk, Christine Wesley 

Sts. Martha & Mary School, 
Parents' Education Committee, 
Subcommiltcc/Sts. Martha & 
Mary School, staff, Mississauga 

Stuart, Winnie, Goderich 

Student School, Toronto 

Students' (Commission, SarriKi 

The Students' Commission, 

Stutt, Tim 

Sudbury & District Chamber 
of Commerce 

Sudbury & District Health Unit, 
Physical Activity Planning 
(kimmittec, Sudbury 

Sudbury & District l.abour 
C^ouncil, Sudbury 

Sudbury Board of Education, 


Sudbury Board of Education, 
Adult (^earning Centre 

Sudbury District Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
English Language Section, 

Sudbury Multicullural/lolk Arts 

Sudbury Women Trachcr*' 
Association, Sudbury 

Sullivan, Edmund, Toronto 

Summitview Public School, 
Parent -Staff AM<KUtifin 

Sumner, |udy A. 

Superannuated Teachers of 
Unlario. District 23, North York 

Superintendents' Curriculum 
Co-operative. Toronto 

Sussmann. Margaret 

Sutherland, Ian, Surnui 

Sutherland, lamie/Morrison, 

Sutton, Elizabeth, Hnghts Grove 

Swainson, ludy, Milton 

Swan, Paul/Lalhani. Hill. 

Swayze, Marct Liivamae, 

Sweeney, Brian. Peterborough 

Swit7jr, C. 

Sylvan learning Systems 

Symc, Gail 

Table f^minisle francophone de 
concerlation provinciale 

Talan, Vesna, Oakville 

Tare. Andy 

Talc, Fay, Norlhbrook 

Taxpayers' (x>alilion Niagara 

Tayler, Felicity, Toronto 

Taylor, (Dr) Larry I., Orleans 

Taylor, (^te/Prue, Kathy, 

Taylor, Cynthia, Hamilton 

Taylor, Florence. Jordan Station 

Taylor, Frank, fcirrrM 

Taylor, John H.. (>/(u«ii 

Taylor. Mary, Lambeth 

foi Vm low of lj»aminc 

Taylor, Peter, Pickering 

Teachers & Parents at Elgin 

Teachers Affiliated with the 
Speech & Drama Programme of 
Trinity College, London, England 

Teachers' Federation of Carieton 

Technological Education Liaison 

Teens Educating Against & 
Confronting Homophobia 
(TEACH), Toronto 

Teitel, Murray I., Toronto 

Teloka, Elaine, Lindsay 

TESL Ontario, Toronto 

Teuwen, Robert 

Tew, Gina, King Kirkland 

TG Magazine, Toronto 

Thain, (Dr.) Mary E. 

Thakur, Reena, Markham 

Thames Secondary School, staff, 

Thatcher, Joan, Chatham 

The Royal Conservatory of 
Music/The RCM Pedagogy 
Institute, Toronto 

Theatre Action, Table sectorielle 
du theatre en milieu scolaire, 

Thomas A. Stewart Secondary 

Thomas A. Stewart Secondary 
School, Student Council/ 
Crestwood Secondary School, 
Student Council/St. Peter's 
Secondary School, Student 
Council/Kenner Collegiate & 
Vocational Institute, Student 
Council/ Adam Scott Collegiate 
& Vocational Institute, Student 

Thomas, B./Thomas, E. 

Thomas, Camille 

Thomas, Lewis L. Downsview 

Thomas, M. A., Toronto 

Thompson, John C. W., Toronto 

Thompson, Kenneth S., Sooke 

Thompson, M. H. /Thompson, 
W. X, Kingston 

Thompson, Melissa, Markham 

Thompson, R. 

Thompson, W. G. B. 

Thomson, Edith E., Wasaga 

Thornhill Secondary School, 
Community Liaison Group, 

Thunder Bay & District Injured 
Workers' Support Group 

Thunder Bay Chamber of 

Thunder Bay Christian School 
Society, Thunder Bay 

Thunder Bay Co-ordinating 
Committee on Family Violence 

Thunder Bay Council on Positive 
Aging, Educational/ 
Intergenerational Committee, 
Thunder Bay 

Thunder Bay Immigrant & 
Visible Minority Women's 
Organization, Thunder Bay 

Thunder Bay Symphony 

Tilk, Olga 

Tillsonburg & District 
Association for Community 
Living, Children's Support 
Services Committee, Tillsonburg 

TUson, David 

Tilson, Herbert, Mississauga 

Timiskaming Board of 
Education, New Liskeard 

Timmins Board of Education 

Timmins Board of Education, 
Special Education Department, 

Timmins District Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
students/Conseil des ecoles 
separees catholiques du district 
de Timmins, etudiants 

Timmins District Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
English Language Section, 

Timmins Learning Centre, 

Timmins Native Friendship 

Timmins Public Library Board, 

Tissot, Georges, Ottawa 

Tobin, Barbara, Kemptville 

Todd-Deschamps, Shirley Kars 

Toffanello, Paul J., 
South Porcupine 

Toivonen, Nicole/Longworth, 
Jocelyn/Newell, Chris/Goode, 
Kevin/Jarvis, Stephanie/Keenan, 
Steve/Hie, Ryan/Nevrton, Dave 

Tomaszewski, Kathy, London 

Toprak, Sema, Etobicoke 

Toronto Area Library/Media Co- 
ordinators' & Consultants' 
Association, Whitby 

Toronto Arts Council, Toronto 

Toronto Attention Deficit 
Disorder (ADD) Parent Support 
Group, Steering Committee, 

Toronto Board of Education, 
Parents' Environmental Action 
Group, Toronto 

Toronto Council of Teachers of 
English/ Association of 
Secondary School Special 
Education Teachers for Toronto, 

Toronto Educator Group, 

Toronto Secondary School 
Principals' Association/Toronto 
Public School Principals' 
Association/Toronto Secondary 
School Vice-Principals' 
Association, Toronto 

Toronto Supervisory Officers' 
Association, Toronto 

Town of Haldimand Public 
Libraries Board, Cayuga 

Township of Johnson 

Township of Plummer 

Tran, Dien N., London 

Tremeer, Don, Seaforth 

Trent Valley Literacy Association 

Vol. IV Appendices 

TkwMon, Liaa/CauUuzzo, Lema 

Trillium School, P»rtn<f» in 
EiliKation, Slilton 

TrumbW. Oara EUen, Sttmia 

Tung Fahev. Sarah Y. W.. 
North York 

Tuplin. Linda. Holland UinJing 

Turcotte. Paacale/Carri^re. 

Turcolte, Pucak/Laporte, 
Manhieu/Cairi^re, Anioine 

Twin. lim/Manilowabi, Shannon 

TwoK. M.. Toronto 

Tyion. Margarrt. OrroHu 

Ubnaco, Rita. Thumier Bay 

Ulrichicn.(Dr.) B. I.. 

Union of Ontario Indunt 

Unionvillc High School, Aru 
Yorii Parents' Advisory 
Committee Study Group 

L'nionvtile ilate|>aym' 
AMOciation. Unionville 

United Oiurth of Canada. 
Co-ordinating Committee of 
Ontario Conferences. Pownmew 

Uniir' inada, North 

Bay I' ifchand 

Soacty bubcommincc, Callander 

United Coloun of Merivaie 

United Way of Greater Toronto 

Uni«er«i< d'Oitjwa. Faculty 
d'^ucatKin, Mudunts et les 
ftudiantei en Formation initialc 

Vnrmuti d'OlUwa. Faculty dcs 
icicnca dc la wnl^. Ottawa 

■•nne. Centre 

Univenit^ Ijurcntirnne, Fcoir 
des iciencn dr {'education 

Univeniiy of Ottawa. Computer 
Science Department, Education 
Commillcc, Ottawa 

University of Ottawa. Faculty of 
Education, students 

University of Ottawa, Faculty of 
Arts, Ad Hoc Committee, Ottawa 

University of Otlawa. Women's 
Studies Programme 

University of Toronto Schools, 

University of Toronto Schools, 
Parents' Association, Toronto 

University of Toronto, 
Continuing Education students 
( Design & Technology. Part II ) 

University of Toronto, Faculty of 
Education with the Future 
Teachers' Club, Toronto 

University of Toronto, Faculty of 
Nursing, Undergraduate 
Admissions Committee. Toronto 

University of Toronto. Faculty of 
F^ucation. Institute of Child 
Study. Toronto 

University of Toronto, Faculty of 

University of Toronto, Faculty of 
Education/University of Toronto, 
Faculty of Library & 
Information Science. Toronto 

University of Toronto. Faculty of 
Education. Course 3161, Section 
52 ft 72 students, Toronto 

University of Western Ontario 

Unnrersity of Western Ontario, 
Ontre for Actnnty flc Ageing. 

University of Windsor, Faculty of 
Education, Course 207 students 

University of Windsor, Faculty of 
Education, {'ommillee for 
Response to the Royal 
Commission, Windtor 

L'pper Canada College, /i>r<>Mf<i 

Urban Alliance on Race 
Relations. Education Committee 

Usselman, Trixie, Ailsa Craig 

Utilities Training Directors' 

Vachon, Roscanna, Ponlypool 

Vailiancourt, Daniel/Marion, 
lean -Luc 

Vallinga, Roy 

Vandermeulen. Catherine 

Van Dyke, (Mrs.) L. Brotlnille 

Van Loon, lames, Mississauga 

Van Vliet, loanne, Queenston 

Vandcn Hoven, |ohn M. 

VandenAkker, lulie/ 
VandenAkker, lohn, Sapanee 

Vandenberghc, Maureen. 

Vanderwagen, loell. Toronto 

Vanderwolf. (Dr.) Case H., 

Vanderwyst. Alba. Etobicoke 

Vangilst. Katrina 

Vayda, Elaine |. 

Venncr. A. K.. Unionville 

Vernon. ( Dr. ) Foster, Heamfvillc 

Vice, Claire, Aneaitcr 

Vickers, Colin. Inglmde 

Victoria County Association for 
Community Living, Lindtay 

Victoria County Board of 
Education, Linduiy 

Victoria County Board of 
Education, Teacher- Librarians' 
Association, Unduly 

Viewmount Christian Academy 

Villa Nova I'arcnl Advisory 

Villanova, Marcello 

VOICE for Hearing Impaired 
('hildren, Toronto 

VOICE for Hearing Impaired 
Children. Ottawa Chapter, 

Voll, Coiutance, Kiuhcner 

von Bezold. Ernest 

Vreeswijk. (Mr. & Mrs.) lohn, 

Waddell. Don 

Wagamese. (^.harlesAVagamese. 

Wagner, (Dr.) lim, St. (Utthannes 

Wahsa Distance Fxlucation 

Waite, Andrew/Waite, Cheryl. 

Waksman -Cooper, Mary, Toronto 

WaIke, Kimberly 

Walker, Deborah Ann, North Bay 

Walker, Glenn A., Wclland 

Wall, Bymn E., Toronto 

Wall. Sarah, Markham 

Walsh, Anne. Wtndior 

Walter & Duncan (Charitable 
Eoundalion, Toronto 

For ttm Low of Ijeammg 

Wand, David, Toronto 

Wansbrough, M. B., Hamilton 

Ward, Richard, City of York 

Ward, Stephen, Grimsby 

Warren, Alan, Toronto 

Warren, Don/Monaghan, 
Dennis, Elgin 

Waterloo County Board of 
Education, Kitchener 

Waterloo County Board of 
Education, Teacher Assistants' 
Association, Kitchener 

Waterloo County Board of 
Education, Student Conference 
Planning Committee 

Waterloo County Board of 
Education, History Heads' 

Waterloo County Board of 
Education, Physical & Health 
Education Subject Association, 

Waterloo County Board of 
Education, Stay-in-School 
Initiatives, Kitchener 

Waterloo County Principals' 

Waterloo County Women 
Teachers' Association 

Waterloo Region Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
Welcoming Centre 

Waterloo Region Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
Co-operative Education 
Department/Waterloo County 
Board of Education, 
Co-operative Education 

Waterloo Region Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board 

Waters, Allan G., Toronto 

Watson-Bonsall, Mary-Anne, 
Port Elgin 

Watson, lim, Etobicoke 

Watson, Ken, Hamilton 

Watt, Rob, Tilbury 

Watt, William R., Nepean 

Weaver, Ruth 

Webb, Gary J., London 

Weeks, Ron C, North Bay 

Weglarz, Mark J. 

Welch-Cutler, Jessie, Weston 

Welch, Manuela/Clutterbuck, 

Welland & District Association 
for Community Living, Welland 

Welland County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, 

Welland County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Program 

Welland County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Dept. of 

Student Services 

Welland County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board 

Welland County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Conflict 
Resolution Committee, Welland 

Wellington County Board of 
Education and Wellington 
County Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, 
Co-operative Education 

Wellington County Board of 
Education, Guelph 

Wellington County Board of 
Education, Race Relations 
Committee, Guelph 

Wellington County Board of 
Education, Professional Student 
Services personnel, Guelph 

Wellington County Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board 

Wellington County Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
Program Department 

Wellington County Task Force 
on Youth Violence, Guelph 

Wellington County Women 
Teachers' Association 

Wentworth County Board of 

Wentworth Women Teachers' 

Werner, Barb, Stratford 

Wesley, Daniel James 

West Humber Collegiate 
Institute, Etobicoke 

Westdale Home & School 
Association, Hamilton 

Western Ontario Region 
Committee for Gifted Learners, 

Western Technical-Commercial 
School, History Department, 

Westside Baptist Church, 

White, Wendell E., Tweed 

Whitehead, LeRoy E., Kingston 

Whitney Public School, Parent- 
Student Association 

Widdop, (Dr.) James H. 

Wierzbicki, Claire 

Wight, Steve, Perth 

Wightman, Mary Jean, Ottawa 

Wilkie, Catherine, Allenford 

Wilkinson, (Mrs.) J. 

Wilkinson, Cyril, Ay/merWilliam 
Lyon Mackenzie Collegiate 
Institute, Parent Advisory 

William R. Kirk School, Parent 
Advisory Committee 

Williams, Carol, Merrickville 

Williams, Jasmine, Ottawa 

Williams, John, Burlington 

Williamson, TashaAVilliamson, 

Wilson, (Dr.) Sybil, 
St. Catharines 

Wilson, Gary 

Wilson, Paul A., East York 

Wilson, R. J., Kingston 

Winder, C. Gordon, London 

Windigo Education Authority, 
Sioux Lookout 

Windsor & District Chamber of 
Commerce, Windsor 

Windsor Board of Education 

Windsor Catholic School 
Principals' Association, Ad Hoc 

Windsor Council of Home & 
School Association 

Windsor-Essex County Active 
Living Coalition 

Windsor-Essex County Health 

Windsor Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Ad Hoc 
Consultant Group, Windsor 

Vol. IV Appendices 

WiiMlsor Roman Calholic 
^irpiralc School Board 

Windtor Roman CatholK 
Scparalc School Boaril. 
Co-opcralivr Fducation 

Wlnilior SchiH'i Pjrcni» 
Auocution, WtnJior 

Windsor Secondary School 
Prinapab' Association 

Windsor Symphony Orchestra 

Wirtdsor Women Teachers' 

Wink, Richard. Pnerborough 

Winston Churchill Collegute 
Institute, Student Group 

Winter. Bruce. Mususauga 

Winter*. Larry. Sftallorytown 

Wise. James W./Wise. Barbara E.. 

Wismer. Gladys, Bame 

Wodlinyrr. ( Dr. ) Michael 

Women Alive, Social Concerns 
Working ( iroup. Barrie 

Women into ApprentKcship. 
Sorth Bay 

Won>en Teachers' Association of 
Ottawa. Orumi 

Women's Employment 
Networking Group, 
St. Cathannes 

Woo, George Woo. Simon. 

Wood, (Dr) Eric 

Wooden. |., Exeler 

Woodlands School. Woodlands 
Musical Arts C^ouncll 

Woodroffe Avenue Public 
School, Parent Advisory 
Education Committee, Orrmvij 

Word Shop. South River 

Workplace Health and Safety 
Agency. Toronto 

Wright, Penny 

Wright. Penny. Brampton 

Wright. Raymond S.. l^ndon 

Wright. Rob. Toronto 

Wright. Timothy, Hannon 

Wylie. Dennis/Chilton. Robert 

Wynne. Kathleen O.. Toronto 

Wyoming Public School. P 
arent Group 

Yardley. Anne/Yardlcy, Dave, 

Yates. Robert. Enn 

York Onire for ("hildren. Youth 
& Families. Richmond Hill 

York Community Services. 

York Region Board of Education 
York Region Board of Education, 
Physical Education Hradt, 
Richmond Hill 

York Region Board of Education. 
History Heads, Aurom 

York Region Catholic Students' 

York Region Roman Catholic 
Separate School Ikiard, 
Secondary School Principals' 

York Region Teacher- Librarian>' 
Association. Newmarket 

York Region Technical Directors' 
Association. Stouffville 

York Technology Association. 
Education Committee 

York University. North York 

York University. Faculty of 
Education Students' Association, 
North York 

York University, Faculty of 
ELducation. T)owns\'iew 

York University, Faculty of 
Education. Fxlucational 
Foundations Cx)urse students, 
North York 

York University, Faculty of 
Fxlucation, Educational 
Foundations Oursc students 

Young, Errol 

Young Men's Christian 
Association of Greater Toronto, 

Young. Paul. Shelburnt 

Young People's Theatre, Toronto 

Young Women's Christian 
Association of Canada (^"WCA 
of Canada) 

Yi>ulh 2(KK) 

Youth in Cjre Connections 
Across Ontario, Toronto 

Youth Involvement Ontario 
Youth Summit ("ommittee of 
World Council for Gifted & 
Talented Children Inc., Toronro 

Youth to Youth Network, Anti- 
Kacism Youth Working (iroup 

Ypma, Simon/Ypma. CUthy, 
Thunder Bay 

Zcssner, Walter W., Toronto 

Zimmerman. Blaine 

Ziraldo. Lynn. Richmond Hill 

Zobel. Alicja M., Peterborough 

Zouganiolis, Helen 

Zypchyn. Karen. Sudbury 

For \h» Lo«« of Lcamtng 

Appendix B: Youth Outreach 

Part 1: Presentations at 
public hearings - Fall 1993 

Student organizations: 

Adam Scott Collegiate Vocational 
Institute students, Peterborough 

Algonquin College of Applied 
Arts & Technology, School of 
Business, Retail students, Nepean 

Barrie Eastview Secondary 
School, OAC Physical Education 
Class, Barrie 

Board of Education for the City 
of Toronto, Student Affairs 
Committee/Toronto Association 
of Student Councils 

Brock University, Faculty of 
Education, Pre-Service students, 
St. Catharines 

CD. Farquharson Junior Public 
School students, Agincourt 

Central Park Senior Public 
School, Grade 7 & 8 students, 

Change Your Future 
Program, Metro Toronto 
Dufferin-Peel Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, Student 
Senate, Mississauga 

Durham College of Applied Arts 

6 Technology, Pre-Employment 
Program students, Oshawa 

Durham Region Roman Catholic 
Separate School Board, 
Secondary School Council 

Eagle River Public School, Grade 

7 & 8 students. Eagle River 

Fanshawe College of Applied 
Arts & Technology, Futures 
Program Trainees, Simcoe 

Father Bressani Catholic High 
School. Athletic Council, 

Father Henry Carr Secondary 
School Student Council, 

Father John Redmond High 
School, Student Council, 

Glenforest Secondary School, 
OAC students, Mississauga 

Grand River Collegiate Institute, 
Student Executive, Kitchener 

Hamilton-Wentworth Roman 
Catholic Separate School Board, 
Catholic Student Council 
Presidents' Association 

Highland Secondary School, 
Alternative Education Program 
students, Cambridge 

Humberview School student 
group, Bolton 

Jarvis Collegiate Institute 
students, Toronto 

Kemptville College of 
Agricultural Technology, Basic 
Language Skills Course students, 

King Edward School students, 

Kingston Literacy .students, 

London & Middlesex County 
Roman Catholic Secondary 
Schools, Student Council Prime 

McMaster University Students' 
Union Inc., Hamilton 

Monsignor Eraser College 
students, Toronto 

Nipissing Community School 
students. North Bay 

Ontario Association of Catholic 
School Students' Council 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, Deputy 
Premier's council 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, Central 
Metro-West Region, Thornhill 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, Western 
West Region 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, London 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, Western 
West Region, Sarnia Cabinet 
Members, Sarnia 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, Eastern- 
South Region 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, North York 

Ontario Secondary School 
Students' Association, 
Northeastern Region 

Parry Sound High School 
students. Parry Sound 

R.H. King Academy, students, 

Raging Independent Student 
Educational Group (RISE), 
Metro Toronto 

Scarborough Centre for 
Alternative Studies students 

Sheridan College, Critical 
Thinking and Problem Solving 
students, Brampton campus 

St-Jean-de-Brebeuf School 
students, Brantford 

St. Jerome School Student 
Council, Mississauga 

St. Joseph High School students, 
North Bay 

St. Lawrence High School, 
Student Council, Cornwall 

St. Patrick's Catholic Secondary 
School students, Toronto 

St. Paul's Secondary School 
students, Trenton 

Stoney Creek Adult High School 
& Learning Centre students, 

Students from the following five 
Peterborough-area high schools 
came together to make one 
presentation to the Commission: 
Thomas A. Stewart Secondary 
School, Student Council, 
Peterborough; Crestwood 
Secondary School, Student 
Council, North Monaghan; St. 
Peter's Secondary School, 
Student Council, Peterborough; 
Kenner Collegiate & Vocational 
Institute, Student Council, 
Peterborough; and Adam Scott 
Collegiate & Vocational Institute, 
Student Council, Peterborough. 

The Student School, Metro 

The Students Commission, 

The Students Commission, 

United Colours of Merivale, 

University of Ottawa, Faculty of 
Education students 

Vol. IV Appendices 

l'nivcr»ily o( loronu*, hjiulty of 
Eilucation iludcnts, Toronto 

Uiuvmity of Toroalo, 
Continuing nliKalion ttudrnlt 
(Dmgn & Icchnulogy. Part II ) 

Univcnity of Toronto, Faculty of 
Education, Future Tcachrrt' 
Qub, Toronto 

Univcruty of Windsor, Faculty of 
Education, ttudrnti 

Winston Churchill Collcgutc 
Institute itudent group, 

York Region Catholic Students' 
Otuncil York L'nivenity, Faculty 
of Education. Educational 
Foundalioiu Counc students. 
North York 

York Univenity, Faculty of 
Education, Educational 
Foundatioru Course Students 

York L'niveTsity. Faculty of 
Education Students' AsMxiation, 

\,jrth Y.trk 

Amaoclation d'*Mv*s/ 

Conseil des ^oles s^ar^es 
cathotiques du dtstnct de 

Ecole tecondaire catholique 
Marie- Rivier, Conseil des tl^vcs, 

(((At ircnntlairr Ftienne tir(i\t, 
Etudunts, North York 

Ccole (ccondairr Cicorgo- P 
Vanier, Comeil da Stra 

Ecote wcondairc Macdonald- 
Carlirr, Sudbury 

Ccok Kcoftdairc Mgr. Brvytrr. 
Cornell da dtvct, L<»wion 

FJ^vo dc I'fvolc sccundaire 
I'Essor, St. Clair BfOih 

FJ^vn dc I'teole secundaire 
r^iunale Glengarry 

F^d^ratiun des ^l^ves du 
secondaire franco-ontarien 
(FESFO), r^ion du centre 

FM^ralion des ^Itvcs du 
secondaire franco-ontarien 
(FESFO), rtgion du sud 

FM^ralion des ^l^es du 
secondaire franco-oniarien 
(FESFO). r^wfi d'Ottawa- 

FMeration des ^l^es du 
secondaire franco-ontarien 
(FESFO), la commission jeunesse 

FM^ration des ^l^ves du 
secondaire franco-ontarien 
(FESFO), r<fionde/'«f 

F^d^ration des ^l^es du 
secondaire franco-ontarien 
(FESFO), region du nord 

Inter-Franco scolaire du Sud de 

rOntano, Toronto 

Youth ott/itnizaXl9n%: 

1st Woodbridge Girl Guides, 

Board of Fducation tor the City 
of Toronto, Youth Alienation 

Board of hduiaiion tor ihr (.iiy 
of Toronto, Working to Learn 

Boys' and Girb' Clubs of 
Ontario, Provincial Youth 
C^ouncil. Hamdton 

Canadian Youth Foundation, 

City of Toronto, loronto Young 
People 'i Advisory Board 

Creating Hope and a New 
Generation of Equality 
(CHANGE). Vort Region. 

lohn Brooks Community 
Foundation & Scholarship Fund, 
Youth Council, Toronto 

Lakehead Environmental Youth 
Alliance, Thunder Bay 

leaders- In- Action, Hamilton 

Lesbian & Gay Youth of Toronto, 

Mayor's Youth Advisory 
Committee, Ad- Hoc Committee 
on Education, Miutuauga 

Ontario Educational Leadership 
Centre. Student Ixraders of 
Ontario, Ixyngford Mills 

Pape Adolescent Resource 
Centre, Toronto 

Social Planning Council of 
Niagara Falls, lunior Social 
Planning Council, Niagara Falls 

Teens Educating Against & 
Confronting Homophobia 
(TFJ^CH). Toronto 

TG Magazine, Toronto 

Youth 2(XX), Winlbor 

Youth in Care Connectioiu 
Across Ontario, Toronto 

Youth Involvement Ontario, 

Youth .Summit Ommittee of 
World Cxtuncil for Gifted & 
Talented Children Inc., Torortto 

Youth to Youth Network. Anti- 
Racism Youth Working Group, 

Part 2: Non-«chool v*nu*s 
for atudent* and youth 
outraach - Spring 1994 

Mall viaHs: 

liLvuiishirc.Mall, Windsor 
F^ton Centre, Toronto 
Kidrau Mall, Otrim'iJ 
Station .Mall, .S<ju/r Sle. Mane 

Datantlon cantraa, 
community centras, and 
other »oclal aarvica 
aganciaa vlaitad: 

.Alexandra I'ark. ( oninuiiiilv 
Centre, Toronto 

Ambassador School, Toronto 

Beat the Street, Toronto 

Bethel Home for Young Women, 

Brookside Youth Centre, Cobourg 

Cecil Facer Youth Centre, 

Community Girls School of 
Sarnia, Sarnia 

Oivenant House. Toronto 

Durhamdale House, Pickering 

F^agle Rock Youth Centre, Samui 

Kmployment and Education 
Resource Centre, Cornwall 

F.tobicoke Ciirh Residence, 

Irrnic House. Pefferlaw 

Mayden Youth Scrvica, Ajax 

Hope Harbour Open Custody 
Facility. Kitchener 

lohn Howard Society. Othawa 

Kingston Employment and 

For iha Lo«« of Laamtnc 

Youth Service, Kingston 

Marjory Amos House, Brampton 

Maryvale, Windsor 

Massey Secondary School 
Program, Toronto 

Metro West Young Offender 
Unit, Etobicoke 

Native Child & Family Services, 

Operation Springboard, Toronto 

Pape Adolescent Resource 
Centre, Toronto 

Portage Open Custody Facilty, 

Roebuck Home, Peterborough 

Rosalie Hall, Scarborough 

Scarborough YMCA, 

Sudbury Children's Aid Society, 

Talitha House, Ottawa 

Theatre Graduation School 
Program, London 

Thunder Bay Young Offender 
Unit, Thunder Bay 

Touchstone Youth Centre, 

Vanier Centre, Brampton 

Woodgreen Community Centre, 
East York 

Youville Centre for pregnant 
teens, Ottawa 

Part 3: Volunteers 

Eric Adams 
Saryu Aggarvifal 
Veneta Anand 
Camille Bailey 
Trasi Beardy 
Jennifer Beauchamp 
Linda Bertrin 
Anuja Bharti 
Sarah Bobka 
Jason Bryan 
Heather Bullock 
Shelly Cameron 
Sam Castrglione 
Tuyet Ha Chuong 
Krystal Cooke 
Vanessa D'Souza 
Tim Dafoe 
Kelly Dowdall 
Drew Eaton 
Vicky Eutridef 
Miriam Figueroa 
Greg Frankson 
Kim Fry 
Linor Gerchak 
Stephanie Gibson 
Mandi Gosling 
Lisa Graham 
Sarah Grant 
Mark Grill 
Jenn Harren 

Susie Herbert 
Sheena Hockham 
Esther Hoppe 
Ryan Hordy 
Meghan Houghton 
Sonya Howard 
Brendan Hughes 
Jolene Hunt 
Chandra Hunter 
Terry Lynne Jewell 
Naana Jumas 
Katrina Kam 
Proesy Kawesa 
Nicole Kennedy 
Glenn Kukee 
Autumn Langis 
Matthew Laverty 
Jason C. Lin 
George Listen 
Susan Littleton 
Armando Lucarelli 
David MacDonald 
Ken Mark 
Amanda Maud 
Lina Mayer 
Laura McKibbin 
Ryan McNally 
Lori Mercier 
Kristopher J. Moron 
Imran Mughal 
Zahra Nathoo 

Claire Parkinson 
Josh Paterson 
Saara-Ilona Pinola 
Ben Poiteoin 
Kelley Porter 
Colin Putney 
Julie Racine 
Stephanie Raymond 
Ryan Rizzo 
Shannon Roberts 
Mike Rodaway 
Vanessa Brandt Rousseau 
Daniel Eipaage Rundle 
King Siu 
Erin Smylie 
Navneet Sodhi 
Becky Stranberg 
Becky Stranburn 
Monica Tessier 
Norma Jean Trout 
Fercana Visnani 
Alice Weber 
Zerlina Whitecrow 
Paula Wilson 
Gisele Yanez 
Laila Zafar 

Special thanks to: 

Denise Campbell 
Bindu Diahwal 
Zenia Wadhwani 

Vol. IV Appendices 

App«ndix C: Consultation with Groups and Individuals 


Ailunt, G.. UnileJ Kingdom 

Adunv (Vtrr. VnileJ Kingdom 

Aitkrti, l>yUn 



Allen, P.A., United Kingdom 

Allison. Patncu 

Anucf. Paul 

Architxld. Ro9«anne 

Annstrong, lane 

Baincv Dr., United Kingdom 

Barben. Deb 

Baronc, Anihony 

BjLueK. Lydu. New York 

Baxter, Graham 

Beartiy, Ma<leleinc 

Beauger. loseph 

Beauregard. Retny 

Bcdeau, lulei 

B^n, Fenund 

Benhamida. Zaiha 

Bene, Christina. Alberta 

BtemiUer, Andy 

Bintikingombe Mme 

Bondar. Rnberta 

Booth. Davtd 

Bourn*. Brian 

Boyai^nda. Randy 

Brathvratic. Harold 

BrtMcttc. Borriy 

BtomMdoI. Patncu. 

Vntttd Kingdom 

Brum, Marta 

Brtustowilu, Tom 

Burden. Arlene 

Burns, K. 

Bu\Vi, lulius. Alberta 

Butter, David, United Kingdom 

tUmenin, H^lene, 
British Columbia 

Gampbell, Brenda 

lUmpbell, Denise 

Carrier, Denis 

Case, Robbie 

Cazabon, Benolt 

CEFFO Esecutive 

Chabot, Diane 

Challis, William 

Ch^ier, Raymond 

Chummar, .Noble 

Coalition For Education Reform 

Collins, loan, British Columbia 

Common, Ron 

Comptois, lean 

Connon. Pit 

Convertini, Angela 

Convertmi, Anna 

Cook. Bob 

Cooke, Cntal 

Cooke, Dave 

CattA, Filomena 

Col^-O'Hara, locelyn 

CoUui-Clevcland, Tara 

CourchoiK, Renaud 

Courville. Aaron 

Cousineau, lY^va 

Cressy, Gordon 

Curran, Mary 

D'Allaire, H^lenc. Quebei 

Dandurand, Pierre, Quebec 

Davis. Tom, United Kingdom 

Demctra, George 

Dennis, LIuyd 

Uprose, Anioinc 

Dhaliwal, Bindu 

Diakite, Kaba 

Dickenson, BnKk 

DiGiovanni, Caroline 

Dilamarter, lames 

Dixon, Bob 

Dorais, Leo 

Doris, lim 

Dourctte, Phil 

Downey, lim 

Doxtator, Harry 

Dryden. Veronica 

Dunning. Paula 

Duran. Marcela 

Eakin. Lynn 

FjrI. Lorna 

F^astham. Kay 

Erie I Board of (^-operative 
Educational Services. New York 

Evaru, Roy, United Kingdom 

Evans, Gareth, United Kingdon 

Ewens. Peter 

Faucher. Rolande 

Finlayton, Ann 

Firestone. William. New leney 

Fiihcr. loan 

Fitzgerald, lane 

Flinl, Kcnl 

F»>ot. David 

Forgucs. Oscar 

Frccdman, Bev 

Fullan, Michael 

Gabriel, Glen 

Gandikuta, Priya 

Gaulhicr, P Wiibrod 

Gittens, Margaret 

Gitterman. Aryeh 

Gogna. Sarabjit 

Gonzales, Theresa 

Goodchild, Melanie 

Grant. I.inda 

Grattan, Robert, Alberta 

Grayson, Linda 

Green, Duncan 

Green, loan 

Ibtkcll. Helen 

Haines, Grifiilhs, 
United Kingdom 

Hall, Nancy, British (jtlumbia 

Hargreaves. Andy 

Hawkins, Karen, 
British Columbia 

Hendricks, Mary 

Hill. Anne Mane 

Hill. Ada 

Hindle. I.yn 

For ttw Low* of Laarrrinc 

Holmes, Ann 

Houghton, Roy 

Inter- Faculty Technical Council 

Jacob, Lynn 

Jalsevac, John 

James, Roy, United Kingdom 

Jamieson, Rebecca 

Januario, Ilda 

Jeffrey, Alan 

Jessen, Leigh 

Jones, Owen, United Kingdom 

Kaplan, Beth 

Keating, Dan 

Kelly, Peter 

Kelsey, Brian 

Kenny, Brenda 

Kentucky Office of Education 

Kentucky Department of 

Kilcher, Ann, Nova Scotia 

King, Allan 

Kirner, Joan, Australia 

Knox, Marilyn 

Lacelle, Gilles 

Lacelle, Heather 

Lacey, Veronica 

Lafond, Marie-Josee 

Landry- Sabourin, Monique 

Lane, Carola 

Lapointe, Marie 

Lauwers, Peter 

Laxer, Jim 

Leithwood, Ken 

Lemire, Jacques 

Lessard, Remi 

Levi, Marion 

Levin, Malcolm 

Lewis, Stephen 

Lewko, John 

Li, Francis 

Lichti, June 

Lickers, Keith 

Lim, Sam, British Columbia 

Lind, Phil 

Lloyd, M.E.R., United Kingdom 

Loretan, Robert 

Lowry, Keith 

Luis, Derek 

MacDougall, Dave, Alberta 

Mackay, Bauni, Alberta 

Maclaren, Janet 

Maclure, Stuart, United Kingdom 

Major, Judith, Washington 

Maloney, Colin 

Malubungi, Mueni 

Maracle, Doug 

Marguerite Bourgeoys Parents' 

Mark, Ken 

Martin, Richard 

Marujo, Manuela 

Mather, Dick, Alberta 

Mathien, Julie 

Mauti, Sante 

Mawhinney, Hanne 

McArthur, Doug 

McCaU, Douglas, 
British Columbia 

McDonald, Elaine 

McGuire, Norma 

McKenzie, Hugh 

McKeown, Ned 

McKittrick, Sara 

McMurphy, Elsie, 
British Columbia 

Messenger, Bill 

Meyer, John 

Michaud, Pierre 

Milton, Brian 

Milton, Penny 

Minchin, Edward 

Miskokomon, Joe 

Morcos, Baher 

Morgan, Gareth 

Mortimore, Peter, 
United Kingdom 

Munro, Marg 

Mvogo, Germain 

Mwenga, Macky 

Myers, Doug, Nova Scotia 

N'Zingi, Sebastien 

Nahwegahbow, Leona 

Negron, Richard, New York 

Nelson, Fiona 

Noble, Wendy 

Nunes, Fernando 

O'Leary, Mary Ann 

Offord, Dan 

Ontario Women's Directorate 

Ontario Advisory Council on 
Women's Issues 

Ontario Parent Council 

Ontario Welcome House 

Ontario Association of Deans of 

Ontario Council of University 

Ontario Anti-Racism Secretariat 

Orlikow, Lionel, Manitoba 

Orpwood, Graham 

Panschi, Bobby 

Paquette, Jerry 

Park, Paul 

Pascal, Charles 

Passmore, Ellen 

Patterson, Joshua 

Pawis-Tabobondung, Vera 

Pawria, Kavita 

Pearl, Stan 

Pegahmagabow, Merle 

Pelletier, Jacqueline 

Penfold, George 

Peters, Gord 

Phillips, Carol 

Pluviose, Marie-Josee 

Poisson, Yves 

Premier's Council, Economic 
Lifelong Learning Taskforce 

Premier's Council on Health, 
Children and Youth Advisory 

Vol. IV Appendices 


Pncturd. Robcn 

Probcn, PitncM 

IUb«. GufUve 

RMiwuuki. Cicorgr 

iUhim. Mohamcd K.K. 

Rccv Ci«imi)rch, United Kingdom 

Reilty. Tom 

Rieu«:hin, Sue 

Rioux. Marcu 

Robiiuon, Nomun. 
British Columbui 

Roch. Lucille 

RoemcT. Frank. British Columbia 

Rote, lim 

Rouleau, Paul 

Ruuell. ( .arol (>ill 

Rutlc(%e, Don 

Sdnei. Ncshat 

Santerre, Annie 

Scane. loycc 

Schweinbenz, Hont 

Scott. Ciraham 

Seaton, lackie 

Selignun, loni 

Sewell, lohn 

Shapiro, Bernard 

ShapMin, Stan 

Shryburt, Bernard 

Shukyn, Murray 

Singh, Allan 

Slobodian, Valentina 

Smart, r>«)ugla^, 
hritish (Mlumbui 

Smith, Gerry 

Solomon Sylvia 

Speirs, Rosemary 

Sponagle, Sandy 

Steele. Louise 

Sleinhauer, Paul 

Stone&s, Rae 

Stuart, Susan 

Stunt, lohn 

Stursberg, Richard 

Swam, Ron 

Tegert, (ackie, British (x>lumbia 

Tempiin. Mary 

rhompson, Tim 

Tidd, Myrna 

Tidey, Tom 

Tottenham. Ann 

Toussainl. Pierre-Eddy 

Towndrow, Lee 

I'ownscnd, Richard 

Tranchcmontagne, Clement 

Tr*panier, Claire 

Trolticr, locelync 

Trustees Leadership Assembly 

Twist, loanne 

Vickcrs, Colin 

Vigneault, Dolores, (Jufhei 
N'igoud, Toby 
Wadwani, Zenia 
Wark-Martyn, Shelley 
Wells, Margaret 
Wells. Stan 
White. Krank 
Wiggins, Cindy 
Williams, Steve 
Wilson, Bob 
Wilson, Margaret 
Worzel. Richard 
Wright, ludith 
Wright, Ouida 
Ynez, Giselle 
Young, Don 
Youngchief, Mariam 
Young-Mitchell, Kcri 
Zussman, David 
Zywinc, loanne 

App«ndix D: Public Hearings - Dates and Sites (September 1993-May 1994) 

ScfNcmbCT 27-2» Thunder fiar 

Sc|»teMibci 2^ 
September 30 
October 4-S 

St pjirick't Secondary School 

Sioux l>ookout 

Queen FJi/ahelh High School 


St. Louis Klemenlary School 


Sudbury Secondary School 

October 6 7 Sault Ste. Marie 

korah ( ollcgiate & Vocational School 

October 6 7 North Bay 

'^t loseph - Scollard Hall Secondary School 

October 1 2 Toronto 

Kiival ( ommission on Learning Oflficei 

October 1 < lomnio 

< ardinal (-arlcr Academy for ihc Arts 

For the Love of LaarrtMC 

October 18-19 

October 20-21 

October 20 

October 21 

November 1 

November 2 

November 3 

November 3 

November 4 

November 4 

November 9-10 

November 9-10 

November 15-16 

November 17 

November 17 

November 18 

November 18 


Wheable Centre for Adult Education 


W.D. Lowe Secondary School 


Clearwater Arena 


Tecumseh Public School 


Bishop Ryan Secondary School 


Briarwood Adult Learning Centre 


Our Lady of Lourdes Secondary School 

St. Catharines 

Lincoln County Board of Education Offices 


Waterloo County Board of Education 


Welland County Roman Catholic Separate School 
Board Offices 


Winston Churchill Collegiate Institute 


Eastdale Collegiate Institute 


Albert St. Administration Centre 


Holy Cross Secondary School 


St. Laurent/St. Lawrence High School 


Thomas A. Stewart Secondary School 


£cole secondaire regionale Hawkesbury 

November 22 Newmarket 

Dr. Denison Secondary School 

November 22 Markham 

Markville Secondary School 

November 23-24 North York 

Northview Heights Secondary School 

November 29 East York 

East York Collegiate Institute 

November 30 City of York 

York Memorial Collegiate Institute 

December 1 Mississauga 

Dufferin-Peel Roman Catholic Separate School 
Board Offices 

December 6 Toronto 

Beverley School 

December 7 Toronto 


December 8 Toronto 

Regent Park Duke of York 

December 10 Ottawa 

University of Ottawa, Faculty of Health Science 

December 13 Toronto 

Brockton High School 

December 14 Toronto 

Gabrielle Roy Elementary School 

December 15 Toronto 

Lawrence Park Collegiate Institute 

March 2 Timmins 

Northern College (South Porcupine) 

May 5 Moose Factory Island 

Ministik Public School 

May 6 Moosonee 

Northern Lights Secondary School 

Vol. IV Appendices 

Appendix E: Schools Visited (1993-1994) 

Aleumicr Muir/GUdstone Avmu« Public S<:hix)t. Toronto 

The AmhuMdor School Program, Toronto 
(A Division pro)eci of Frontier College) 

Avondale Sccon<lary School, North York 

Bishop Belleau Public School, Mooionet 

Buhop Sirachdn School, Toronto 

Canterbury High School, Ottawa 

difford BoMvy School, Ottawa 

Ecole tecondiire publique De La Salle, Ottawa 

Ccole Horizon leuncue. Cornwall 

Ccolc Notre- Dame, Cornwall 

Frank Ryan Senior Elementary School, Septan 

The Greemxood Centre School, Toronto 

Holy Family Education Centre 
(Technical School), Guelph 

Horizon Alteriutivc Senior School, Toronto 

Lakefield College School, UkefieU 

Lord DufTenn lunior & Senior Public School, Toronto 

Mary Ward Catholic Secondary School, Scarborou^ 

Mooic Factory Ministik Public School, Moose Factory 

MooMincc HuWk vHih)!, Siooioncc 

Northern Ughts Secondary School, Mooionee 

Pelican Falls First Nation High School, Sioux Lookout 

Powassan Junior Public School, hyHinuin 

Regent Park/Dukc ot York lunior Public School, Toronui 

River Oaks Public School, Oakville 

Rose Avenue lunior Public School, Toronto 

Senator O'Connor College School, North York 

Sir Wilfrid Laurier Secondary School, Orleam 

Smiths Falls District Cx)llegiaie Institute. Smiths h'alk, 

Sprucecourt lunior Public School, Toronto 

St. Joseph Scollard Hall Secondary School, North Bay 

St. loseph's School, Calabogie 

Topcliff Public School, North Yoii. 

Walp<ile Island School and Study Centre, Wallaceburg 

W. E. Govtrling Elementary School, Ottawa 

Widdifield Secondary School, North Bay 

Winchester Public School junior and Senior, Toronto 

For ttw Lov«o( L*am«nc 

Appendix F: Background Papers - Author and Title 

Titles are given in the language in which the paper was written and will 
be available. 

Allison, Patricia A. 

"Teacher Education in Ontario" 

Biemiller, Andrew 

"Indicators of Reading Progress" 

Biemiller, Andrew and Booth, David 

"Towards Higher Levels of Literacy in Ontario" 

Cazabon, Benoit 

"Ecole et culture: Creer une culture scolaire qui responsabilise les el^ves et 
les enseignants tout autant qu'elle cree les liens entre I'ecole, la famUle et 
la communaute" 

Corson, David 

"Towards a Comprehensive Language Policy for Ontario: 
The Language of the School as a Second Language" 

"The 'Sami Language Act' in Norway: Implications for Users of 
Aboriginal Languages in the Ontario School System" 

Coulter, Rebecca 

"An Introduction to Aspects of the History of Public Schooling in 

Ontario, 1840-1990" 

Cummins, lim 

"The Role of Language Maintenance and Literacy Development in 

Promoting Academic Achievement in a Multicultural Society" 

Daenzer, Patricia and Dei, George 

"Issues of School Completion/Dropout: A Focus on Black Youth in 
Ontario Schools and Other Relevant Studies" 

Dennie, Donald and LaFlamme, Simon 

"Rapport de recherche presente a la commission royale d'enquete sur 

rfiducation en Ontario" 

Desjarlais, Lionel 

"La vision de Tecole catholique de langue fran(;aise en Ontario" 

Earl, Lorna M. 

"Accountability and Assessment: Ensuring Quality in 

Ontario Schools" 

Hagarty, Stephen 

"Vision, Purpose, Values and Principles" 

Heller, Monica 

"Les aspects socioculturels du role du langage dans les 

processus d'apprentissage" 

King, Alan J.C. 

"Restructuring Ontario Secondary Education" 

Labrie, Normand 

"Les politiques linguistiques a I'ecole: Contraintes et libertes decoulant 
des dispositions provinciales et nationales et des engagements 

Masny, Diana 

"Quelques questions de langage dans les ecoles de langue fran<^aise de 


Mawhinney, Hanne B. 

"The Policy and Practice of School-Based Interagency Collaboration" 

Michaud, Pierre 

"Le centre scolaire-communautaire: reflexion et synthese des ecrits" 

Muir, Elizabeth Savard 

"Summary and Analysis of Recent Literature on Parental Roles in 
Educational Governance" 

Nagy, Philip 

"National and International Comparisons of Student Achievement: 
Implications for Ontario" 

Orpwood, Graham 

"Scientific Literacy for All" 

"Consideration of Alternative Models of System Assessment" 

Paquette, Jerry 

"Major Trends in Recent Educational Policy-Making in Canada: 
Refocusing and Renewing in Challenging Times" 

Scane, Joyce 

"What the Literature Tells Us about School-Based Management in 
Selected Jurisdictions: Implications for Ontario" 

Stuart, Susan 

"Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Ontario" 

Williams, Linda D. 

"Pre-Service Teacher Education in Selected Provinces of Canada" 

In addition to these commissioned papers, faculty Members and graduate 
students of the Faculty of Education, York University, contributed papers. 

The collection was entitled: 

"Equity, Social Difference and Ontario Schools: Collection of 14 Papers for 

the Ontario Royal Commission on Learning" (compiled and edited by Curt 


Vol. IV Appendices 

Appendix G: Commissioners' Biographies 

Moniquc B«{(in 
C uchdir 

A tormcr teacher, Monique Begin completed her M.A. in 
sociology at I'Univer&it^ de Montreal and did doctoral studies 
at rUniversit^ de Paris (Sorbonne), before working as a 
consultant in applied SiKial sciences in Montreal. From 1967 
to 1970. she served as the executive secretary to the Royal 
Commission on the Status of Women in Canada and co- 
signed the report to Parliament. After two years as assistant 
director of research at the Canadian Radio-Television and 
Telecommunications Commission, she ran for Parliament as a 

Re-elected four times ( 1972-*4), Monique Begin is best 
known as the first woman MP elected from Quebec to the 
House of Commons, and as minister of National Health and 
Welfare ( 1977-84). In that portfolio, she sponsored a range of 
legislation, including the Canada Health Act. 

Since September 1984, when she left politics, Monique 
B^in has been a visiting professor at the University of Notre 
Dame, Indiana, and McGill University in Montreal, before 
becoming the first holder of the joint Chair in Women's 
Studies at the University of Ottawa and Carleton University. In 
1990 she was appointed dean of the new Faculty of Health 
Sciences at the University of Ottawa. 

Gerald I . (apian 


Cierald Caplan has had a varied career as an academic and 

educator, political and social activist, public po!ic\' analyst, 

and public affairs commentator. 

He has an M.A. in Canadian history from the University of 
Toronto and a Phi) in African history from the School of 
Oriental and African Studies at the University of London. He 
has taught in the history departments at the University of 
loronto, the University C^ollogc of Rhodesia, and the 
Department of History and Philosophy t)f Kducation at the 
Ontario Institute for Studies in Kducation. He is the author of 
several books, many articles and book reviews in academic 
journals, as well as magazine and newspaper columns. 

After leaving OISK in 1977, Gerald Caplan became the 
Director of the CUSO program in Nigeria, after which he ran 
the Health Advocacy Unit of the City of Toronto. He then 
became federal secretary (national director) of the New 
Democratic Party and national campaign manager for the 
1484 election. Shortly after leaving that position, he was 
appointed (by the Mulroney government) as co-chair of a 
federal task force on Canadian broadcasting policy. Between 
the completion of the report on broadcasting policy in 1986 
and becoming co-chair of the Royal Commission on Learning 
in 199.^, he was primarily engaged as a newspaper columnist 
and television commentator, as well as a consultant on 
government relations. 

Fof Itw tov« of L«aminc 

Manisha Bharti 

Manisha Bharti has a list of accompHshments that would be 
impressive in a woman twice her 1 9 years. A graduate of St. 
Lawrence High School in Cornwall, she is currently studying 
at Harvard University. 

Academically, she was a gold award winner, with an 
average of 90 percent or more in her secondary school 
courses. In the Waterloo University Mathematics Contests, 
Manisha finished in the top eight percent of Ontario. 
Throughout high school, she was a member of her school's 
SchoolReach and Canada Quiz academic teams. She spent one 
summer involved in biological research at the University of 
Guelph and, upon graduation, she was awarded the governor 
general's medal of distinction. 

Manisha was extremely active in a variety of high school 
activities, including the school environmental club, the school 
spirit club, and the student leaders organizing committee. She 
was the Student Council president, chair of the SD&G Inter- 
School Student Council, and Eastern South Region vice- 
president of the OSSSA - the Ontario Secondary School 
Students Association. Manisha was also a representative on 
the Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry County Board of 
Education Race Relations and Ethnocultural Equity 
Committee, as well as involved the board's Environmental and 
Vision 2000 steering committees. 

Manisha has also been active in the broader community, 
volunteering with the Cornwall Alzheimer Association and 
the Cornwall Environment Resource Centre. She is a past 
president of OCTAGON, the Optimist Youth Service Club, 
and she has volunteered at the Hotel Dieu Hospital. In 
addition to all this activity, Manisha has attended a number of 
youth-related conferences and travelled extensively. 

Avis E. Glaze 

Avis Glaze taught in secondary school and teachers' college in 
Jamaica before applying to the Ontario Institute for Studies in 
Education to pursue post-graduate studies. There she 
completed master's programs in the areas of educational 
administration, guidance, and counselling, and additional 
courses in special education, curriculum, measurement and 
evaluation, and educational psychology. She completed her 
doctorate in 1979. 

Dr. Glaze has taught at all levels of education - elementary, 
secondary, community college, teachers' college, and 
university - and has been a superintendent of schools in both 
the separate and public school systems. As well, she is a 
member of the Board of Governors of Humber College of 
Applied Arts and Technology, and a member of the Senate of 
York University. Dr. Glaze has won awards for her outstanding 
contribution to education. 

In 1983, Dr. Glaze was seconded to the Curriculum Branch 
of the Ministry of Education as an education officer. She also 
served as a research co-ordinator with the Ontario Women's 
Directorate and has worked with both the Ontario and 
Canadian Advisory Councils on the Status of Women. She is 
called upon frequently to present at major conferences and to 
conduct professional development sessions with teachers and 
workshops with parents and students. Her most recent 
community involvement is with the Harry Gairey Scholarship 

Dr. Glaze is currently a superintendent of education with 
the North York Board and a course director in the Faculty of 
Education of York University. 

Vol. IV Appendices 

Dennis J. Murphy 

Dennis Murphy is j priest of the Diocese of Sault Stc. Marie 
and Wis ordained in 1960. He studied in North Bay, Toronto, 
Rome, Brussels, and Ottawa, receiving his PhD in education 
from the University of Ottawa in 1971. Monsignor Murphy 
has served in his diocese as a parish priest. Chancellor, and 
Director of Religious Education. He was also a lecturer in 
religious studies at Laurentian University. 

At the national level, from 1%7 to 1970 he was the director 
of the National Office for Religious Education, Canadian 
Conference of Catholic Bishops, and from 1977 to 1984 he 
was general secretary of the Conference of Bishops. 

In 1986 he founded the Institute for Catholic Education in 
Toronto, and for the first several years was its executive 

In 1977 Dennis Murphy was elected to the Nipissing 
District Roman Catholic Separate School Board, and served 
for a brief period. He v«s also chaplain of the Ontario 
Separate School Trustees Association from 1967 to 1985, and 
the chaplain of the Canadian Catholic School Trustees' 
Association from 1971 to 1977. 

Throughout his career, he has also served on many boards, 
including the North Bay Crisis Centre, the Metropolitan 
Toronto Catholic Children's Aid Society, St. Joseph's Hospital 
in North Bay, and the University of St. Jerome's College in 

For the Love of Laammg