If readers want to know exactly what Ontario school boards spend their money on, a good place to start is our Sunshine on Ontario Schools http://www.sunshineonschools.ca

School boards have to devote the bulk of their budgets to salaries and benefits.  Very little is left over for textbooks and toilet paper.

I saw clips of both McGuinty and Kidder on the news and have to tell you that that tag-team couldn’t have written a better script. Trouble is that neither Kidder or McGuinty have clued in that the solution to the problem is NOT to throw more unaccounted for money at the problem but to come out and advise parents to simply say NO to the requests for constant cash.

Kidder’s comments aren’t very supportive of parents actually. I find that quite odd seeing as though the media and politicians like to tout her as being a parent advocate, yet the notion for me of advocating for parents would be to advise parents to SAY NO MORE to the glut and guilt that the system loves to play on parents.

That the Premier has now found religion and abhors the process of parents picking up the tab is rich isn’t it?

His concern rings hollow to most parents and proves once again just how truly out of touch he is on education despite the spin.

” The report by People for Education also noted a disturbing trend in fundraising activities, which more often are now being directed toward classroom staples such as computers, text books and other supplies.

McGuinty called that “unacceptable.”

“What we will not and cannot accept here in Ontario is that kids are out there fundraising for the basics,” he said.

Watch for the rules to change, to prevent councils and parents from fund raising for the basics, and an approve list of what type of activities and a defined, narrowing list of what things that can be fund-raised for.

The only way around it, parents giving direct donations of supplies and other things, rather than money,  to the school. The more well-to-do schools will do this.  Changing the rules as what I suspect will happen, will not address the inequities of the schools. A better approach, that would really put a dent in the schools that are have-nots, to increase the budget in text books, and other basic supplies. Than parents would no longer feel the need to fund raise for basic supplies, and can concentrate on fund raising for things that are nice to have, or things that will have an education impact on children, and in the long run, improve achievement rates.

Parents will continue to fundraise for their children’s schools, if they want to.  I’m not sure if you can outright ban it.  Well-intentioned people will just find ways around it.

Does this mean that teachers would not be able to accept token gifts either?  (Think of all those Staples and Chapters gift cards that get used for classroom supplies.)  It would be pretty difficult to enforce.

The problem is how the funds are used and why many school councils have become fundraising bodies instead of what they were intended to do—-monitor student acheivement.

School boards now report on how much money they raise from school fund’raiding’, which can be compared at http://www.sunshineonschools.ca. 

It will be interesting to see what “parents” are consulted going forward.

I decided to check the sunshine list.

I found something interesting. As fundraising has increased in each year since 2004, total expenditures exceeds board revenues, starting in 2004.

Is the Ontario Ministry of Education nickle and dimed the boards in the grant department, which in turn, causes the increases in fund raising, especially fundraisers for school supplies?

Or is the Ministry of Education, moving money around to pay for the salaries, including the raise increases, shortchanging the boards and their ability to provide basic school supplies to the schools.

Also, since expenditures are now exceeding revenues of boards, since 2004,  one can logically conclude, that the Ministry is playing the old game, of Robbing Peter to Pay Paul. Sooner or later , and probably sooner in Ontario, this shaky foundation will fall and exposed the the underpinnings, where the Ministry and the government, can no longer use the boards and others as the blame.

I have to disagree that it’s about how the money is being spent.

It’s about parents knowing that they have the right to refuse and say “no” to fundraising…..period, without a backlash or pressure.

Advocates for parents will not help parents build their confidence within the system they’ll publicly encourage parents to stop the “giving” if they wish.

The gravy train has to stop and it stops with the parent and yes the school council which has within it mandate to curb fundraising - many have moved fundraising right out of their constitution.

Let’s also be honest with parents and let them know that parents willing to do anything for the good of the children are sometimes approached by school staff or admin. to lead fundraising requests thereby creating a mini-hierarchy among the parents of the school. There are perks to being good fundraising parents when asked.

correction - “Advocates for parents will help parents build their confidence within the system and they should publicly encourage parents to stop the “giving” is they wish.”

I notice that from her quotes over the years on this subject advice for parents isn’t quick, but advise for government to cough up more cash is People for Education’s usual and predictable message.

Most school councils, and rules are in place, that the giving of money, is voluntary only. One would think that there is no pressure. But there is, and one would find it any group, such as the hockey associations, girl guides and for that matter belonging to a church.

If a school council decides no fundraising, the board will not come to the school’s rescue in increasing the amount that has been dole out, unless the student population has change, where it is warranted. The supplies are still needed, and often it comes in the form, of student fees and the yearly supply list by the individual school to the parents, and where the parents purchased the supplies that are requested by the school.

Of late in the news, the student fees and the supply lists are on the increase. I spent $85 for school supplies, which I hope it will last for the whole school year. Some parents cannot afford this, especially when students fees are on top of this.

As this parent states in the Niagara area, “Parents have to “go in and directly approach them, and if there’s a financial reason, they can be waived,” said the mother of six. “But they are being presented as mandatory.”

A school with 900 students, charging each a $50 fee, would bring in $45,000 a year.

“If this fee is really needed to run the school properly, then I think the ministry is being unfair to school boards.”

Brett Sweeney, a media relations officer for the District School Board of Niagara, said no school would deny any student any service based on a fee, and will work to clear up any confusion in the future.”

When NL had student fees and it has been eliminate since 2005, the government stated the same thing, that no student will be denied any service. Even though they too had a system, where fees were waived for financial consideration. What most parents did, cough up the school fees, and brought much fewer school supplies.  Rather this, than filling out the application form asking nosy questions, to have the fees waive, and your child had to wait for her workbooks, and whatever else was included in the student fee. The kids who did not have all the supplies, borrowed from the kids that did have.

Of course P4E chooses her usual route of asking for more money, but even the parent from Niagara blame the ministry. What is really needed is a system, where the supplies are funded based on the needs of the school and the student population, and not the number on student population. Oh I forgot one important element, properly funded by the government.

To eliminate fund raising, may actually hurt the school’s ability to provide and meet the needs of the student population, that have special consideration, such as low-income, or a unique learning problem or a special project on the go, such as greening the school. The school fees should be banished, and a much shorter list on school supplies.

“Most school councils, and rules are in place, that the giving of money, is voluntary only”

Unless of course a school council doesn’t include fundraising in its rules - many do in Ontario.

“If a school council decides no fundraising, the board will not come to the school’s rescue in increasing the amount that has been dole out, unless the student population has change, where it is warranted”

I’m pretty sure that not many school councils which decide to eliminate fundraising from its role don’t expect the board to “rescue” them because the board can’t do that. The allocation is decided by the province.

Absolutely nothing happens to student learning if a council decides not to fundraise. Education and learning carry on.

Continuing to open your wallet just lets governments off the hook and unless parents create a serious dent in the millions they give nothing will change.

Parents should be told right up front, on the day they register their kids for school what the true cost of their child’s education will be and that they’ll be expected to pay an additional $200+ at minimum until the child graduates.  Add the money parents dole out in fundraisers and to purchase supplies to the allocation per student and parents could well opt to send their child to an alternative or private school given the choice and resources.

I’m betting that the province of Ontario has no idea how much individual schools collect in fees, or how arbitrarily they increase those fees. I know that the board my kids are in did their own in-house study and among schools within their own board there was a huge discrepancy.

P4E’s message is old and so less relevant with each passing day.

In Ontario by the OSTA.

““Schools are making kids pay to play,” said association president Cody Welton of Lindsay. Schools are charging fees for sports, clubs, drama and other activities.

These fees - which have risen by over 50% in recent years - are a systematic barrier to equitable education. Evidence shows poorer students are less likely to participate in extracurricular activities. Schools charge a student activity fee at the start of term, of a cost around 35$. But each sport and club then charges additional money to pay for items like uniforms, tournaments and transportation. Some students playing in several sports may face fees in the 1000$ range in one year of high school.

Perversely, students can feel penalised when they succeed because their success requires another fee to play in the next level of competition. This barrier can impede excellence.

What is truly frightening is that school boards have no central control over the fees, and most boards have no data on the fees their schools are charging. The fees vary across school boards, sometimes drastically between schools in the same municipality.”

http://www.cochranetimespost.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?archive=true&e=1416114

Further down, a solution is offered. “he report proposes a simple process over the next three years. School boards need to determine the costs their schools are charging, cap the costs and bring in a relative standard across the board. This standard needs to be communicated to the Ministry, who should begin removing these fees by improving the funding formula and reinstating funding for sports equipment, musical instruments and extracurricular transportation.

“Today, with the release of this report, we are calling on the government to support equity in education, support poverty reduction and get rid of these fees. We have put forward a plan to tear down this barrier to education, and we call on the government to enact the plan so that we can truly reach every student in Ontario,” Mr Welton said. “

It is a problem right across the country, and even if parents stopped donating money for the fundraisers, the money will come somewhere else, like upping the fees in the extracurricular activities. Do you really think the government is going to respond in a timely fashion, if parents’ donations are at a all time low, when they ignored the pleas from the trustees’ association, who put out an excellent argument for the elimination or control on school fees?

I beg to differ, that nothing happens that impacts a student learning.  It is on the social level where it occurs, where the students who do not have, are single out by their peers, who do have. 

What is interesting is the politics where both sides are shouting at each other, that fees and other fund raising methods, is a form of privatization, and the other side declaring it is not.. I even read one article, supporting it is a form of privatization, to push for choice, to make public school weaker. and force choice upon the education system.  After reading a number of them, I concluded that the educrats sitting in the education ministry’s office, prefer to leave sleeping dogs alone, because it gives them a political advantage. Coming to the rescue as Ontario is, but a new plan won’t be put in place until 2012. 

Now as mentioned before, whether the parents are going to be consulted, that is the $64 dollar question.

These additional fees may be an issue for some parents. While this is unfair, I don’t think a few hundred dollars a year are going to be beyond the means of a great number of parents.

Sorry, I have a hard time understanding how the media and the parents spend so much time discussing this issue and is becoming a rather big sore point while they spend very little time on the main issue: the quality of the education.

We waste 10,000$/year plus per student, we have low expectations for all the students - the lowest for the disadvantaged students - and we worry about 200$/year ...
This doesn’t make sense to me.

Or maybe - as someone on this forum was saying about class size - people tend to discuss the issues that are concrete as opposed to the issues that make the biggest difference and that are more touchy.

My life experience has taught me that people tend not to value what they receive for free.
Even a low, symbolic price, makes people more involved and more likely to care about what it is that they are buying.
From an applied psychology point of view I don’t see anything wrong with students having to pay for their own supplies or for some specialized sports activities as long as these payments are low and within the reach of everybody.
That being said, to insure a measure of fairness, I think these fees should be the same everywhere.

So, yes this may be unfair to some degree to some parents, but I think it is much less unfair and much less important than that their kid doesn’t have a chance to a solid education.

“I beg to differ, that nothing happens that impacts a student learning.  It is on the social level where it occurs, where the students who do not have, are single out by their peers, who do have.”

We started out talking fundraising which is being confused by “fees” charge by schools for various things.

If fundraising stops by parents classroom learning will not stop. It continues.

Where sports teams, band, drama fees are considered you’re right Nancy, those who can afford it are likely the ones benefiting most. It’s not fair and equitable for the kids who can’t afford it but in Ontario the gov’t support of extra-curriculars is so small as to not be existent YET parents still demand it.

Nancy, don’t hold your breath for McGuinty’s gov’t coming up with anything with teeth to “rescue” things. There is no money. If anything I see McGuinty pushing hard to get individual schools to do what they can to attract corporate sponsorships of things like teams, gyms, tournaments etc.

If school council parents had been allowed to evolve and learn that their statutory rights as elected representatives of parents they could have a HUGE role in this.

Europe - you’re thinking the way I am. The most important thing is what’s going on in that classroom and fundraising or not it continues.

“Sorry, I have a hard time understanding how the media and the parents spend so much time discussing this issue and is becoming a rather big sore point while they spend very little time on the main issue: the quality of the education.”

Europe you have got it absolutley bang on.  This is a political tactic and it seems to be working.

It is interesting that all the discussion both here and in the media are all asking and answering the question ‘What?’‘, not ‘Who’ or ‘Where’.  I don’t mean who is doing the fundraising, I mean ‘Who has the money?’ and ‘Where is it going’.

When I started, we collected fees, like a $5 fee for the computer labs.  That money was collected by the business department and spent on buying printer paper, ribbons, floppy disks and so on.  The department was responsible for running the courses, but not given a budget to supply it.  There was always money left over, so we were able to buy ‘neat’ things for the students to use, like scanners and so on.  Sports teams did the same to defray costs, and if there was money left over they would buy new equipment.

Then, starting about 1999, everything began to be centralized.  All the little bank accounts were gradually phased out and departments had to go to central bookkeeping to get their funds.  It also meant that we had to buy equipment from approved lists.  So, rather than take $50 from left over lab fees and go to Staples and buy a colour printer on sale; we now have to go through a budget approval process justifying the purchase, then select from the approved list and pay $500-$1000 for an approved printer.

Parents need to be asking exactly what the fees/fundraising is for; who has the money and how it will be spent.  I think you will be surprised by some of the answers you get.  In many cases the real answer is that it goes into general funds and is used to run the school.

Good points Wayne. 

When I was a younger parent, we used to ask those questions at school council meetings all the time, but always got vague answers.

Our newly formed school council, used to buy cameras for the school that would mysteriously go missing much to the frustration of our treasurer, who was a CA!  I’m sure she would have loved to audit the school.

Agree totally with Wayne. I have also had parents on school councils tell me that re: the funding that they can apply for from the gov’t that often it’s the principal who writes the application and “suggests” where the money should be applied…..not parents who make up the majority of councils(or should).

Have a look at the list (available on the MOE site) of what school councils spent our money on and you’ll be surprised that the gov’t is buying parent engagement when the money might be better spent in the classroom for the students.

“If school council parents had been allowed to evolve and learn that their statutory rights as elected representatives of parents they could have a HUGE role in this. “

Yes I agree with the above statement. A school in NL, located in an urban setting, that mainly consists of students who are low income, the parent council has evolved, taking full advantage of their own statutory rights. This past spring, the parent council was very effective in stopping the closure of their school. 

Here is one link, where the parents under the council took action.

“The planning committee of the Eastern School District is recommending that a new school to replace aging Virginia Park Elementary be built on Snow’s Lane, near subdivisions richer than the working class neighbourhood where the school presently sits.

Peter Whittle, who co-chairs the Virginia Park school council, said the recommendation goes against the board’s own policy of promoting community-based schools.

“I think if anyone wanted to look at the socioeconomic spread in the east end of St. John’s, they would see a pattern, and that pattern will show you that there has been an attempt to marginalize this school and eventually close it out.”

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2010/06/16/virginia-park-school-parents-616.html#ixzz0ySqdpn2L

The ending to the latest chapter is here.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2010/06/17/virginia-park-school-board-617.html

“Parents argued that busing children to another area of the city contravenes the Newfoundland and Labrador government’s policy of championing neighbourhood schools, as well as healthier lifestyles.”

This particular parent council had no choice but to evolve into a council of action, and move far beyond what most parent councils are, fund raising machines.

I believe it is the hidden fees and costs that is the burden. What once was supplied by the education system, is now the responsibility of parents. As one moves away from the heavily built-up urban areas, the retail cost of school supplies, clothing, shipping costs, and other supplies are much higher, than what they are in the urban setting. Add the other factor of fewer retail giants, less competition =  higher retail prices.
The government is alarm over basic supplies and capital projects being fund raised by parents, because it shows the cracks within the education system, and the funding formulas.

Here is another link, dated 2004 , titled, “Meet the King of Parent Fundraisers”.

“But the drive has drawn fire from some parents and pundits. Columnist Allen Garr suggested in the Courier that the Queen Mary direct-ask appears to contravene the School Act that says students must be provided educational resources free of charge. “

“Patti Bacchus, whose two children attend Queen Mary, shares these concerns. “All the parent fundraising in the world won’t reduce waiting lists for psycho-educational assessments, increase support for special needs kids, increase library staffing or reduce class sizes. It’s naive and shortsighted to think you can solve the education funding crisis by throwing galas and tossing in parent cash.”

http://thetyee.ca/News/2004/10/06/KingParentFundraisers/

The many articles that I have read, the common theme is the reliance of fund raising and school fees by the public education system, is in part,  determining the kind of education that children received in Canada. When boards decide to cut back basic funding for schools in books for the school libraries, computer hardware and software, and other related classroom educational items, either the school does without or fund raise to provide. It impacts all children and their parents in the school, and not just the children and parents who are low income.

It forces the parents to focus on issues such as library books, taking the attention away from the real education issues.

It is rather a complicated issue, with many different viewpoints, and lots of shades of grey.  I am incline to agree as Chuck has stated, “Continuing to open your wallet just lets governments off the hook and unless parents create a serious dent in the millions they give nothing will change.

Parents should be told right up front, on the day they register their kids for school what the true cost of their child’s education will be and that they’ll be expected to pay an additional $200+ at minimum until the child graduates.  Add the money parents dole out in fundraisers and to purchase supplies to the allocation per student and parents could well opt to send their child to an alternative or private school given the choice and resources. “

Something has to happen, to bring the issues to a head, and Chuck’s suggestion, although painful in the short term, may be just the ticket.

I disagree with this Nancy “The many articles that I have read, the common theme is the reliance of fund raising and school fees by the public education system, is in part,  determining the kind of education that children received in Canada. When boards decide to cut back basic funding for schools in books for the school libraries, computer hardware and software, and other related classroom educational items, either the school does without or fund raise to provide. It impacts all children and their parents in the school, and not just the children and parents who are low income.”

If this is what parents really feel then they’ve effectively bought into the myth(lie) that the system likes to spin. Everything you mention above are tools of learning that play a bit part in the delivery of education. However the starring role is that quality teacher in front of the classroom who doesn’t need to rely on the bells and whistles of the “tools” that fundraising buys.

I would much rather see effective school councils learning about effective reading programs and if the majority of the parents in the school wished they could raise money for phonics reading programs or something like that.

You talked about the school council in NL being thrown into a role of responsibility and decision-making. All Ontario school councils are also being thrown into a position of organization and authority with the new accommodation review process. The assumption and wrongly by the gov’t was that councils were working and in compliance with the regs. governing them. That was not the case in many communities.

You’re right Nancy, parents do need to be told the truth right up front and given a shopping list of how much they’ll spend in a given year in fees and how often they’ll be asked to dole out cash.

This is were seasoned parents could shed light on things for new parents just coming in to the system.

What I find truly amazing is that school funding has mushroomed during the McGuinty reign, the number of kids has plunged and we’re still being told there’s no money to cover what could be seen as the most basic of items, books, building maintenance, etc.

I suspect parents would be outraged if they saw some of the things seen as higher priorities than the things they keep hearing the boards can’t afford unless parents pay for them.

On the P4E survey that is compiled entirely on voluntary returns by people with various links to their schools so I’d imagine its a little unscientific and limited in scope.  It might be interesting but it isn’t very definitive.

SQE encourages Ontario parents who concerned with the fundraising issue to contact us at info at societyforqualityeducation.org.

Another area of inquiry some parents might consider investigating is some of the ‘hidden’ waste in the system. 

A couple of years ago our board created a list of ‘consumeables’ that are not replaced by the board, but at department or teacher expense.  I have always understood that paper, pencils, and so on are constantly being used up and departments and schools have been given budgets to cover these expenses.

However, I was surprised to find that this new list was for ‘technology’ comsumeables - like disks, thumb drives and so on?  That’s what I thought.  The list was for things like overheads, scanners, LCD projectors printers and so on.  Equipment costing thousands of dollars, in many instances mandated by the ministry, was now the sole responsibility of the site, not the board.  Which means that beyond not replacing the equipment, the board will no longer repair it either.  Because many departments do not have budgets to cover textbooks, let alone this, I have seen projectors, both LCD and overhead, as well as other equipment thrown out rather than repaired.

Another interesting casualty of this policy were PDA’s.  Our Board decided to create a project to pilot their use in our schools.  They encouraged administrators and teachers to use them collaboratively.  This new list specifically singled out those PDA’s to be repaired at employee’s expense (ie: schools could not use their budget to fix them).  No surprise - the project died creating more waste.

Wayne, doesn’t the board have their own repair guys on hand?  Just wondering, if little NLcan do it, why not Ontario? Nothing gets tossed until it is ensure that it cannot be repaired. Than it is replaced.

But you are right about the hidden waste in the system.

Hi Nancy,

Yes, our board does have their own technicians.  However, not enough to do all the work that is necessary.  Rather than hiring more technicians, they are limiting the work with the policy I have outlined.

I find the whole thing incredibly frustrating and annoying.  It seems no matter how much money flows into educations there’s a perpetual shortage and usually in areas which impact directly on services delivered to the classroom/students.

I suspect the demand for money will always exceed the funds available no matter how much that is.  Claiming to be acting ” for the good of the kids” covers up a lot of dubious spending; witness the mushrooming in costs of the ELP far beyond what Charles Pascal estimated would be needed.