Subscribe to our Blog
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy
The Toronto Star, using Freedom of Information, has obtained information about the total amount of private money flowing into Toronto-area publicly-funded high schools. Read all about it here. The fact that there is an enormous range of funding among schools is positioned as being unfair to less affluent students who are deprived of certain services because they’re too expensive. There is also the mandatory suggestion that these funds are necessary to bridge the growing gap between provincial funding and the actual cost of educating students.
Really? As our Sunshine for Schools shows clearly, provincial funding has been growing steadily and significantly every year, despite declining enrolment numbers. Between 2003 and 2009, for example, provincial grants to school boards grew by about one-third - from about $15 billion to about $20 billion.
Furthermore, students at the highly-funded high schools profiled by the Toronto Star are not doing particularly well academically, according to the Fraser Institute rankings (the rankings in order of excellence start on page 61). St. Aloysius de Gonzaga at “only” $1 million does the best, with an 8.8. score. Next is Mayfield ($1.3 million) which scores 8.1. Michael Power ($1.3 million) scores 7.8 and Turner Fenton ($1.4 million) scores only 6.6.
Leave it to Kidder to talk out of both sides of her mouth. At the end of the Star article, “Although Kidder is not against fundraising — a time-honoured tradition that can bring a sense of community to a school — she said some councils rake in significant amounts of money and feel pressure to continue doing so. Parents must share some of the blame for the fundraising gone wild, she added.
“We shouldn’t ban fundraising. It’s that we rely on it more and more,” says Kidder.
“We all feel we have the right to pay for whatever it is we want. We’re a more individualistic society than we were 20 years ago. And as parents, we’re all kind of nuts. Everything has to be perfect for my child all the time.”
All done in the name of of supporting a public education system of have and have nots. As was pointed out in today’s SQE posting, “The fact that there is an enormous range of funding among schools is positioned as being unfair to less affluent students who are deprived of certain services because they’re too expensive. There is also the mandatory suggestion that these funds are necessary to bridge the growing gap between provincial funding and the actual cost of educating students.” Kidder sidesteps the elephant in the room, the denial of education services because they are too expensive. So the lower the income levels of the school, less and less services and resources for the schools, and still somehow the individual schools must meet the mandates of the ministry and boards. That is, until one goes to the bother to dig further, why this is so, but no one is really talking about.
Kidder’s attitude is a prevalent one among parents who are of the higher income groups. This set of parents can afford to support public education as it is, because they have the ability to buy private services for their children that the school does not provide, or is not suitable for their children. Whereas, most people do not have that luxury of purchasing tutoring services for their children for reading problems, or it is done with great sacrifice on their part. The set of higher-income parents also have the political and social power to demand more funding, that often leads to new programs for all schools. Increasing educational funding, based on programs and curriculum that were demanded from the high-income group.
Why does one hear often from the educrats, that the reason for not having a systematic phonetic reading instruction, because people are not demanding it. How would the educrats know this? It has puzzled me for a few years, until I decided to asked the question to the educrats, what people are you referring to.Well, you be surprised at the number of people at the high income levels they will name, and none to be found in the lower income levels.
LD runs across all income groups, especially the kind that is inherited, such as my youngest. One would think that in the high-income group of LD parents, that they would be pushing for a massive overhaul of SE services to address the educational needs of their children, rather than purchasing tutoring services for their children, on reading,writing and numeracy issues. Secondly in the high-income schools, there is far less LD children identified formally by the education authorities, but a greater number taking advantage of accommodations that teachers have a right to grant. Not only do these parents have the means to buy tutoring services, they also have the means to get the psycho-educational assessments done privately as well. The assessments are needed for the future, when they enter post-secondary institutes, as well as proving to the teachers that their child has LD so they can receive accommodations. The public education system has one set of rules, for parents who do not taxed the system by purchasing educational services, and another set of rules for parents who do not have the means and must used the school’s services.
The public education system can get away with the statement that they cannot afford it, because the parents that they are talking to are parents who have other options, than using the resources of the school for educational services. Which schools are in the news most often? The schools of the high-income groups, doing wonderful things with the current curriculum and programs that are mandated by the ministry. Meanwhile other schools that are not high-income, are look upon by the public education system, as the main reasons increase funding, despite falling enrollment. Too many problems, and not enough money, but few educrats are looking at the source, the current curriculum and programing that is the cause of many of learning problems, especially in reading and writing deficits.
We cannot afford Kidder and others like her, nor can society in Canada afford the type of public education that is demanded by the well-to-do parents, and how the educrats are so attentive to their needs and their children.