News

Statement of Concern from the Institute for Public Education BC

Statement of Concern from the Institute for Public Education BC

December 8, 2024

IPE BC is disappointed that former school board trustee and now the Minister of Education and Child Care, Lisa Beare, has chosen to intervene in the work of the Greater Victoria School Board (SD61) by appointing a Special Advisor. This decision undermines the authority of a democratically elected school board and sets a concerning precedent for ministerial overreach.

We acknowledge the importance of safety in schools but emphasize that addressing such concerns requires collaboration, respect for community voices – especially Indigenous voices, and thoughtful consideration of equity and inclusion.

IPE BC urges the Ministry of Education to work constructively with SD61, supporting the board’s autonomy while fostering meaningful dialogue with all stakeholders, including marginalized communities. Democratic governance must remain at the heart of public education in British Columbia.

 

The Impact of the New Rights on the Privatization of Education

IPE/BC is an independent, non-partisan organization, however we recognize that IPE/BC Fellows and guest authors hold a range of views and interests relative to public schools, education issues, and the political landscape in BC. Perspectives is an opportunity for Fellows and others to share their ideas in short, accessible essays.

The Impact of the New Rights on the Privatization of Education 

Andrée Gacoin

November 25, 2024

The conservative discourses of the new Rights, and their impact on education, was top of mind in October 2024 as BC went to the polls to elect a new provincial government. In Canada, education is the mandate of provincial governments and, while education is not always an election issue, this particular race was dominated by harmful and hateful rhetoric that sought to control and further privatize education. This included:

-Censoring of classroom materials. In media interviews, as well as the party platform, the Conservative Party of BC critiqued educational materials for being politically biased and promoting (progressive) ideologies.[i] The popularity of this view can be seen in the increase of “book challenges” across Canada. These challenges are when individuals or group seek to remove books from school libraries or restrict them to certain audiences. Books that are inclusive of diverse gender identities and sexual orientations, as well as books by Indigenous, Black and authors who identify as People of Colour have all been challenged.[ii]

-Attacking social justice and rights-based approaches as “indoctrination” and seeking to control teachers’ professional autonomy. The Conservative Party’s agenda built on moral panics that have mobilized parent groups across the province, panics seen in previous elections for school trustees as well.[iii] For example, groups have gathered outside schools, and targeted individual teachers, to protest the inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity in the curriculum.[iv] Complaints have been made to the Teacher Regulation Branch, a body that governs the professional conduct of teachers, related to teacher’s curricular decisions related to social justice issues.

-Being explicitly anti-union. The Conservative platform focused on terms such as “open procurement” and “qualified” workers and critiqued government for being overly influenced by unions. This is part of a broader fiscal conservatism that promotes reduced government spending, free markets, free trade, and privatization.

Increased funding for private schools. In BC, many private schools (called “Independent Schools”) receive government funding at either 50% or 35% of their local public school district rate. The Conversative Party of BC argues that private options are necessary because of parent’s concerns about the “ideologies” being taught in public schools.

While the Conservative Party of BC did not ultimately win (barely),[v] they have formed the official opposition and there was overwhelming support for the Conservatives in many parts of the province. Their ideas for education are reflected in the ongoing advocacy of right-wing Think Tanks, such as the Fraser Institute, that champion education reforms “to achieve better value for money and improved results for both students and taxpayers.”[vi] Proposed measures include returning to a “back-to-the-basics” curriculum, increasing student testing for accountability, and establishing charter schools in the province.

The political landscape in BC reflects the rise of conservative politics across Canada. In the province of Ontario, for instance, there is a populist provincial leader who has consistently underfunded public education for six years, leading to larger class sizes, decaying buildings, and fewer supports and services for students.[vii] In Quebec, the rise of conservatism can be seen in politicians who openly and proudly push an anti-union agenda and attempt to convince the public that unions are to blame for the failing of public services. This is coupled with xenophobic rhetoric that blames immigrant populations for problems within the province.[viii] Nationally, the leader of the Conservative Party is seeking to be the next Prime Minister of Canada. He is a self-described “champion of a free market,” believes in “limiting government” and posits that schools should “stick to teaching math, reading and writing.”[ix]  Public opinion polls indicate that he would win if the Canadian election was held today.[x]

As illustrated in the case of the BC election, these conservative political parties are linked to the rise of the “parental rights” movement in Canada – a movement that embodies the many links between far-right ideologies and interest in education privatization. In BC, for example, the attacks have been focused on a program called SOGI 123, which supports teachers to make schools safer and more inclusive for students of all sexual orientations and gender identities. Contrary to the arguments of the new Rights, research illustrates the positive impact of this program. A recent evaluation of SOGI 123, done by researchers at the University of British Columbia, found that the program decreased bullying and sexual orientation discrimination for both LGBT+ and also for heterosexual students.[xi] However, conservative groups, taking up the language of “choice” in education, continue to attack the program (and those who teach it) as “indoctrinating” kids and promoting “radical ideologies.”

Across Canada, this “moral panic” becomes a weapon against public education in two key ways. Firstly, it is used as a political rallying call to “take-back” public education, such as by electing morally conservative trustees on public school boards. Secondly, it legitimizes parent “choice” to opt-out of public education and mobilizes this “choice” to increase the privatization of public services.

[i] See for example: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-conservatives-election-eductation-policy-1.7351918 and https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/sogi-123-sexual-education-b-c-election-2024-1.7333988

[ii] https://www.teachermag.ca/post/book-challenges-protecting-diversity-in-our-llcs

[iii] See for example: https://www.comoxvalleyrecord.com/community/courtenay-school-board-trustee-candidate-distributing-anti-sogi-material-1636411

[iv] See for example news coverage, and teachers’ responses, at: https://pressprogress.ca/surrey-teachers-speak-out-against-misinformation-around-2slgbtq-education-in-bc-schools/

[v] 47 seats in the BC Legislative Assembly are needed to form a majority government. The center-left National Democratic Party (NDP) won those 47 seats, just securing the majority. The Conservative Party of BC won 44 seats and the BC Green Party won 2 seats.

[vi] https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/k-12-education-reform-in-british-columbia

[vii] See a statement from the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation (OSSTF) here:  https://www.osstf.on.ca/en-CA/news/new-coalition-announces-coordinated-response-to-ford-government.aspx

[viii] See for example: https://cultmtl.com/2024/11/quebec-mna-haroun-bouazzi-accuses-colleagues-of-recurring-xenophobia-polarizing-lie-or-uncomfortable-truth/

[ix] https://www.conservative.ca/pierre-poilievre/

[x] https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/no-trump-bump-liberals-us-election

[xi] See: https://www.saravyc.ubc.ca/2024/10/09/report-evaluation-of-sogi-123-in-bc/

Dr. Andrée Gacoin is the Director of the Information, Research and International Solidarity Division at the BC Teachers’ Federation and an IPE/BC Fellow. Her research focuses on developing a unique, in-depth and contextualized exploration of education in BC from the perspective of teachers. Andrée is particularly interested in using research as advocacy to uphold and strengthen an inclusive public education system.

Advocating for BC’s Public Education System

At IPE/BC we believe that public education is in the public interest. A high quality public school system that is accessible and welcoming to all is essential to a strong democracy and a healthy, equitable, and prosperous society.  We expect a great deal from our public schools and, in turn, they need our support. Together we must advocate for the funding, staffing, support and conditions that students, educators, parents, and school communities need.  IPE/BC has created a new webpage with resources, contacts and links to help support public education advocacy and we hope you’ll check it out. 

A Big No to Big O

IPE/BC is an independent, non-partisan organization, however we recognize that IPE/BC Fellows and guest authors hold a range of views and interests relative to public schools, education issues, and the political landscape in BC. Perspectives is an opportunity for Fellows and others to share their ideas in short, accessible essays.

A Big No to Big O

By Patti Bacchus

October 1, 2024

Pity the poor tire-store marketing account manager, if there is such a gig. The client has a measly $20,000 to spend on a campaign, which doesn’t go far if you’re buying advertising space in a fractured and crowded media environment.

Here’s an idea: Let’s use unpaid labour in the form of captive public-school kids and their overworked, underpaid teachers, and heck, we can even make them compete for the privilege!

We won’t even have pay to promote it, we’ll get the taxpayer-funded school board’s communications staff to promote it for us!

It’s like that time Chevron tried to promote gas sales through “Fuel Your Schools,” where teachers were supposed to compete for grants to fund classroom projects, with the program being promoted at the pumps, urging parents to fuel up to fund their kids’ classrooms. Yuck.

Those were the thoughts that crossed my mind today when I scrolled by a post from the Vancouver School Board (VSB), promoting “The ‘Big Idea’ with Big O Tires,” a grant program that requires students and their teachers to compete for a $20,000 grant “implement a new, creative initiative that will help service a need in their community.”

Sounds fairly harmless, doesn’t it? I don’t know. If you go to the Big O website, the finer print gets to what this is really about: marketing. It says: “Big O Tires reserves the right to publish through its marketing channels, including but not limited to social media, in whole or in part any submissions received, including any accompanying materials and/or the names of the faculty member and/or school from which the initiative was submitted.”

It would cost the tire company a heck of a lot more than $20,000 to do some good in the community, without the free labour from students and teachers, so you can see why they came up with this scheme.

As a former Vancouver school trustee and its longest serving chairperson, I’m opposed to private businesses using schools to polish their public images. If they want to support schools, they can make a donation to the school district without requiring students and teachers to be part of their marketing programs.

With all the emphasis on critical thinking in our public school curriculum, you’d think the folks making the decisions at the VSB would pause to subject this marketing pitch to the rigours of critical thought. Apparently they did not. It should have been a big no to Big O.

 

Patti Bacchus is a public education advocate, commentator, and IPE/BC Board member, who was also the Vancouver School Board’s longest-serving chair, from 2008-2014. She has also served on the Board of the Broadbent Institute. Patti has written extensively about public education issues in the Georgia Straight. She believes that a strong and well-resourced public education system is key to a healthy and just society.

On September 30th, National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, and all year round

September 30th, National Day for  Truth and Reconciliation, and all year round 

“We have to learn how to talk to, and about, each other, with greater respect than has been the case in the past,” Chancellor Sinclair says. “We may not achieve reconciliation within my lifetime, or within the lifetime of my children, but we will be able to achieve it if we all commit to working towards it properly. Part of that commitment is that every year [on September 30] we will stand up together and we will say never again. What we did in this country was wrong, and we will never allow that to happen again.” Murray Sinclair, Queen’s University Chancellor and former chair of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

Today on September 30th the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, please take time to reread the TRC’s Calls to Action. Our public education system has a particularly important role in ensuring the history of colonization and the treatment of Indigenous peoples is taught, and the impact of intergenerational trauma is understood. We all have a duty to ensure that every child is acknowledged, welcomed and supported in our public schools and that, collectively, we work towards reconciliation each and every day of the year.

It is a journey that we are on together and it’s up to us to each of us to deepen our learning. Fortunately, there are many speakers, resources and guides to support us in doing so. We’ve included just a few of them below and hope that you’ll share others that you’ve relied on. We are deeply grateful for the wisdom and generosity of all those who have created and contributed to the resources and made them so readily available.

On September 30th and all year round, IPE/BC commits to truth and reconciliation.

8 ways to engage in truth and reconciliation

Decolonizing and Indigenizing Public Education

National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation, Teaching Resources (for children, youth and adults).

First Peoples’ Map of BC

Beyond September 30th:  Doing the Work

Walking the Talk

Project of Heart Resource Page

First Peoples: Principles of Learning

Truth and Reconciliation and Residential School Resources

Decolonizing Dialogues; The auto-pedagogical of encounters with Indigenous Art

Caroline Roberts’ Lesson Plans

“Together, Canadians must do more than just talk about reconciliation; we must learn how to practise reconciliation in our everyday lives—within ourselves and our families, and in our communities, governments, places of worship, schools, and workplaces. To do so constructively, Canadians must remain committed to the ongoing work of establishing and maintaining respectful relationships.” Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada

Let’s make education an election issue!

IPE/BC is an independent, non-partisan organization, however we recognize that IPE/BC Fellows and guest authors hold a range of views and interests relative to public schools, education issues, and the political landscape in BC. Perspectives is an opportunity for Fellows and others to share their ideas in short, accessible essays.

Let’s Make Education an Election Issue!

By Patti Bacchus

September 24, 2024

Here we go again. My inbox is filling up with urgent pleas from B.C.’s political parties (well, mainly one of them in my case), wanting my money, my time, and space on my lawn for a sign.

As we head to the polls in just a few weeks, we’re hearing a lot of inflammatory rhetoric as the campaign kicks off, but not much about education. This needs to change.

Public education is the cornerstone of democracy and the solution to many of the most challenging problems we face, including those issues party leaders are discussing in the news media: crime, homelessness, addictions, mental health, and inequality. These are all downstream effects of children not getting their needs appropriately met in their early years.

Whether you have kids in school or not, education should be a priority as you head to the polls and consider donating to a campaign.

Don’t get me wrong: We have an excellent public education system, but it’s chronically underfunded. Those working on its front lines have been warning us for years that they can’t achieve the best outcomes in overcrowded classrooms without adequate support and staffing in poorly maintained buildings.

We have an urgent teacher shortage that is stressing the system, shortchanging students, and causing those working within it to consider leaving, risking the problem getting worse.

Many of our schools are aging, inadequate, and seismically unsafe. In some communities, families have to enter lotteries to get their kids into neighbourhood schools because governments have failed to adequately fund school construction and seismic upgrades.

We’re seeing record levels of public funds being diverted to private schools—over $570 million in direct annual provincial funding grants alone, along with various tax exemptions and deductions. This diverts money from the public treasury that could otherwise fund public schools.

According to Statistics Canada, B.C. now spends less of its Gross Provincial Product (GPP) on K-12 education than every other province except Newfoundland and Labrador, causing public school boards to cut programs and staffing and struggle to meet the needs of diverse student populations.

The provincial election is an opportunity to push parties and candidates on what they’ll do for our public education system and hold them accountable for what they haven’t done.

There’s still a backlog of major school seismic-upgrade or replacement projects waiting for funding. Kids are still coerced into writing the FSAs (even though teachers say they have little value and actually cause some harm). B.C. still lags behind most other provinces in per-student funding.

B.C. teachers’ salaries are still lower than many of their Canadian counterparts. Surrey still has far too many portables, and Vancouver families in many parts of the city have to enter lotteries to get their kids into neighbourhood schools—if, unlike those who live in the Olympic Village, their community actually has a school. And as we’ve seen repeatedly, when seismic upgrades or replacements finally get funded, the money is not adequate, and the schools end up too small.

Support for students with special needs is uneven and too often, inadequate, and kids still get sent home and miss school due to a lack of support.

Parents still fundraise for basics, and teachers still buy resources for their classrooms with their own money.

It’s time to let parties and candidates know what you want to see if they want your vote, donation, or volunteer time. If they want to put a sign in your window or on your lawn, demand to know what they’re committing to for public education.  I’ll be letting my candidates know that having among the lowest per-student funding in Canada doesn’t cut it. I want to know when they’re going to complete all outstanding school seismic upgrades.

The IPE/BC has prepared some questions for parties and candidates. Feel free to use them to ask your candidates questions to ensure they know that education is indeed an issue that matters to voters.

IPE Questions for Candidates:

1. Funding: B.C. has fallen behind the rest of Canada in how it funds its public schools. The only province that spends less of its GDP on education is Newfoundland and Labrador. B.C.’s relative contribution to public school budgets has fallen significantly from 2000 to the present, considering what the province can afford.

For the 2023/24 school financial year, B.C. reports spending grants of $6,754 million across the province’s 60 school districts. If B.C. were to spend at the “% of GPP” rate found in the year 2000, this budgetary allocation would increase by $3.8 billion to $10.552 billion.

What will you do to increase funding to B.C.’s public schools to ensure students receive the opportunities and supports their counterparts in other provinces are able to access?

2. Staffing: B.C. schools are struggling with an urgent shortage of qualified teachers and special education support workers. This is shortchanging students and putting increased stress on school employees, making it difficult to retain them.

What will you do to recruit and retain teachers and education support workers?

3. Facilities: The Ministry of Education is forecasting significant enrolment growth in B.C.’s public schools, yet many districts already have overcrowded schools and not enough space for all in-catchment students. Hundreds of B.C. schools are still at high risk of significant structural damage in the event of an earthquake.

How would you ensure B.C.’s students have access to safe, neighborhood schools, in a timely way?

4. Reconciliation: Historically and statistically, Indigenous students have had poorer outcomes in school due to Canada’s history of colonialism, discrimination, and, in particular, residential schools.

What will you do to ensure Indigenous students receive educational opportunities and supports to enable their success in B.C.’s public schools?

5. Inclusion and Safety: Ensuring that schools are inclusive and safe environments is crucial for the well-being and success of all students. Programs that support students’ understanding of sexual orientation, gender identify and anti-discrimination are essential in fostering a respectful and welcoming school culture.

How will you ensure schools are safe, inclusive, and welcoming for all students, and how will you support and protect programs that educate and support students regarding sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) and other anti-discriminatory programs and practices?

See you at the polling station!

Patti Bacchus is a public education advocate, commentator, and IPE/BC Board member, who was also the Vancouver School Board’s longest-serving chair, from 2008-2014. She has also served on the Board of the Broadbent Institute. Patti has written extensively about public education issues in the Georgia Straight. She believes that a strong and well-resourced public education system is key to a healthy and just society.

Gone forever- the folly of selling off public school properties

IPE/BC is an independent, non-partisan organization, however we recognize that IPE/BC Fellows and guest authors hold a range of views and interests relative to public schools, education issues, and the political landscape in BC. Perspectives is an opportunity for Fellows and others to share their ideas in short, accessible essays.

Gone forever- the folly of selling off public school properties

by Rory Brown

September 12, 2024

One of the downstream effects of the disastrous public education policies of the BC Liberal era is the pressure on school districts to sell off school land deemed ‘surplus.’ The BC Liberals closed 267 schools during their tenure, and K-12 funding fell to all-time lows. They also created a program (that still exists) to sell property deemed ‘surplus.’

Currently, BC has again fallen to ninth place for provincial funding in Canada for K-12 public education, and the pressure on local school boards to generate funds through the sale of the family silver (school board and provincially owned land) continues unabated. Like many things in Public Education, the devil is in the details, and we’d all do well to pay close attention to decisions of local school boards when it comes to declaring school lands surplus and especially if there is consideration to sell school lands.

With an astonishing number of schools that need repairs across the province, the temptation to fund new school buildings through the sale of land is keen, yet ultimately foolish and irresponsible. It’s never a good idea to move publicly owned assets into private hands completely and forever. There are always creative and innovative ways that school lands can be used (even to generate income) yet still be kept in the public domain, preserving the perpetual endowment of public assets.

The trouble of course is that much of this land isn’t really surplus and is almost always needed in the future. With the ever-upward march of land values, school properties that are sold are gone forever- unattainable and unaffordable when needed back. Where land values are highest, the pressure to sell land is greatest, and the public has the greatest amount to lose in this folly. In Vancouver, the site of the current Wall centre, worth likely hundreds of millions, was formerly the site of a school.

Worth remembering as well is the obligation of local and provincial governments to consider, consult and seek permission from Indigenous host nations in the disposal and sale of public land that in almost all cases was never ceded away. There are moral and legal prerogatives that are thrown to the wind when public land is sold – usually to land developers whose profit motivation is not in the best interest of the public and certainly not in the best interest of future school-aged children.

In Surrey district, where the population of school-aged children is exploding, the lack of land set aside for new schools is felt keenly as the district packs more and more students into existing schools – many in portable buildings. In Vancouver, where land values are high, schools are in poor repair and some buildings have excess capacity, largely created by the lack of family housing stock in the city, something likely to change in the future as the calls for increased density come from all political camps. North Vancouver district closed and sold many elementary schools during the last twenty years and parents in the district are now desperate for spaces as the density of school-aged children increases past capacity and projections.

We’d all do well to pay close attention to the decisions of local boards when they contemplate the removal of public land from the public endowment. It’s penny-wise but pound-foolish and has implications for many decades to come.

Rory Brown is an IPE/BC board member and long-time public education teacher, advocate and activist. He is currently a member of the BCIT faculty in the Mechanical Engineering Department, Technology Teacher Education Program.  

BC public school enrolment expected to surge in fall of 2024

Perspectives is an opportunity for Fellows and others to share their ideas in short, accessible essays. IPE/BC Fellows hold a range of views and interests relative to public education.

BC public school enrolment expected to surge in the fall of 2024

by John Malcolmson

August 29, 2024

Data recently released by BC’s Ministry of Education shows the province’s public school system anticipating a sizeable increase in student enrolment this fall.

The data is part of the Ministry’s Revenue and Expenditure Information system (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/education-training/k-12/administration/resource-management/school-district-financial-reporting/revenue-expenditure-tables) and is released in distinct stages within each year as a means of reporting on district budgets.  Because BC’s system of funding allocation is primarily enrolment-driven, the system offers a window of insight into the ebbs and flows of provincial student counts.  Some historical information is also available to allow for cross-year comparisons.

The 2024 figures are estimates so they are subject to change.  That being said, Ministry enrolment forecasts have historically been relatively accurate.

Last school year (2023/24) provincial enrolment dipped a small amount with about 1,400 fewer students in attendance compared with the previous year.  However, this September, reports drawn from the school budgeting process show BC anticipating an additional 21,000 students for a net growth rate of 3.7%.  If this projection pans out, this will be the first time BC’s public schools have crested above the 600,000 FTE enrolment mark since 1999.

The chart below places this number in recent historical perspective.

At first glance, the two-decade period shows a system in enrolment decline for the first half and in enrolment rebound and growth for the second.  Over the period leading up to this September, the annual rate of enrolment change has averaged +0.4 per cent.

In the coming school year, almost three-quarters of BC’s school districts – 44 in total – are expected to grow while the remaining 16 will likely contract.  Of the latter, most are in northern coastal or interior locations where school enrolments track population migration triggered by changes in local economic conditions.

The larger “growth cohort” shows some eye-popping rates of expected growth.  The following table shows the top twelve growth districts, all of which are expected to expand more than five per cent.

Of the twelve, seven are within the Lower Mainland region and most are in suburban areas.  Two are south/mid-Island while the remainder are located elsewhere.  What is truly fascinating is that eight of the above 12 districts experienced enrolment loss last year!  There is no immediate explanation for how or why the enrolment picture is expected to change so drastically for this group in the coming fall.

Budgeting implications

Enrolment change has significant implications for school district budgeting. Recent commentary by the Institute for Public Education / BC has drawn attention to the fact that BC’s financial support for K-12 education has fallen significantly in recent times when measured in relation to the key variable of provincial economic growth. As a result, and despite annual reported increases in nominal funding, school districts in this province face an ongoing reality of financial austerity. (See IPE’s recent letter to Premier Eby on this subject https://instituteforpubliceducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/June-25-letter-to-Premeir.pdf)

Changes in enrollment inject a wild card variable into the triaging that austerity invariably produces. When enrollments are in decline, boards of education face a continual need to reallocate meagre budgetary resources in efforts to manage the inevitable reduction in service delivery while limiting the damage done to existing school programs, staff and those who rely on affected programs.

BC’s expected enrolment surge this fall offers a unique opportunity for governments to assess problems created by the declining level of funding priority given to K-12 public education.  This could and should result in efforts to institute a more robust system of funding support able to support districts, staff and students as they negotiate changes produced by a growth surge that could become a lasting fixture.

John D. Malcolmson, Ph.D, is an IPE/BC board member and a consulting sociologist providing research advice to unions on matters relating to compensation.

 

Public education should be free

Perspectives is an opportunity for Fellows and others to share their ideas in short, accessible essays. IPE/BC Fellows hold a range of views and interests relative to public education.

Public education should be free

by Larry Kuehn

August 23, 2024

That is the principle pursued by then Victoria school trustee John Young when he went to court against his own school board to get a ruling that provincial law meant that fees could not be charged. The court case was successful in 2006.

If that news stuck in your mind for nearly twenty years, you may have been surprised when your school handed you a bill for fees. But you wouldn’t be surprised to learn that the impact was overturned when the government in 2007 passed a new provincial law and procedures for schools to charge for some things.

The policy defines what can be subject of a charge: “items such as materials, supplies, equipment, safety devices, exercise books, uniforms and the rental of musical instruments, which are intended for the personal use of the students.” Pretty broad, especially with the “such as” indicating that there could be other items.

The school district will have a procedure defined to carry this out. It should be available on the school district website or available at the school.

The North Vancouver policy, as an example, says that the school principal is responsible for establishing the fees for the school. However, she “shall consult with appropriate teachers, staff, staff committee, students and the Parents’ Advisory Council prior to establish the fee.” Do you recall that consultation last school year?

In North Van, the proposed schedule of fees is supposed to be annually presented at a school PAC meeting in time for the list to go to the Superintendent by April 30 for the next school year or November 1 in secondary schools. Check your local policy for process and dates.

John Young went to court because he believed that charging fees produced inequalities. He grew up in a large family in poverty, himself. He was a teacher and principal in schools where he saw the impact on some students of not having what the other kids had, or having to plead poverty to get what they needed. As a school trustee for some twenty years, he heard from parents who felt ashamed that they weren’t able to ensure their children had the same opportunity as some others.

When the law overturning the court decision was passed, there was a requirement that districts adopt a policy for a fee waiver in cases of financial hardship and how the waiver can be obtained. The policy is supposed to be fair, consistent and confidential. You can find how your district provides this in the district policy or ask the school principal.

That was not enough for John. It still can make students feel marginalized based on their family circumstances. He believed that public education should be free and that meant it should include any resources that are a required part of the program of the school.

John continued advocating for the principle that public education should really be free until he died in his 90s. It is a cry worth taking up by the rest of us.

Larry Kuehn is a member of the IPE/BC Board of Directors and chair of the Research and Programs Committee.  He is a research associate for the CCPA and retired BCTF Director of Research and Technology. He has written extensively on education matters including funding,  globalization, technology and privacy.

 

NATO’s 2% and public school funding

Perspectives is an opportunity for Fellows and others to share their ideas in short, accessible essays. IPE/BC Fellows hold a range of views and interests relative to public education.

NATO’s 2% and public school funding 

by John Malcolmson

July 17, 2024

It is hard to turn on the TV these days without being besieged by news of Canada’s “failure” to meet a “2% of GDP” defense spending target.  We are all invited to share in the shame of this failure.  Canada the laggard, the freeloader, the scofflaw!  Busy spending money on other things while ignoring important international commitments!

By my “back of the spreadsheet” calculations, moving Canada to 2% of GDP on defence would have us spending about $14 billion more each year going forward.  And yes, that is not a typo – it is billions we are talking about.

The NATO-induced commitment is not something prescribed by law.  Nor is it a treaty commitment.  It is a political deal hashed out within a supranational military organization that hasn’t been elected by anyone.  It is very telling that when the Prime Minister announced his recent 2% timetable, it was not done in parliament, or even within Canada – it was done in a European forum in front of politicians, bureaucrats, generals and defense pundits – and covered by a mainstream media that increasingly functions as echo chamber for military-industrial interests.  This is the group calling the defense spending shots and the group Canada has decided to answer to.

What if, instead, we agreed to commit 2% of our economy to running our public school system?  Not too long ago (2013) BC did spend the equivalent of this amount on school operations but those days are now in the rearview mirror.  IPE has done past research on this very question and recently sent a letter to BC’s Premier touching on this topic

Currently we spend in the order of 1.6% of GPP (Gross Provincial Product) to run our public schools.  Increasing it to 2% would pump an additional $1.67 billion into the K-12 system annually.

Admittedly, comparing defense and school spending has some challenges.  Defense is a federal responsibility while public education is provincial.  NATO spending plans include capital outlays while our suggested focus on public education funding is limited to operating expenses.  And is the idea of linking school funding to GPP the best option for us to consider when looking at how we support public education?

All this aside, the idea that we must spend more on defense while holding current financial rations in place for schools raises other important issues.  Decades of neoliberal globalization have left Canadian industry and society ill-equipped to benefit from boosted defense spending.  Case in point: plans for Canada to partner with other countries to acquire a new submarine fleet.  The lion’s share of the billions to be spent there will go offshore once decisions are finalized.  Foreign military contractors like Boeing, McDonnell Douglas, General Dynamics and Raytheon wait in the wings, salivating at the prospect of such new largesse.  And little in the way of spinoff benefits for Canadians.

Compare that with a public school system which pushes spending on wages, salaries, services and supplies into every single BC community, large or small.  And think of what we might do with an additional $1.67 billion in school funding every year:

  • Pay teachers, support staff and others’ wages and salaries that would make careers in public education a more attractive option,
  • Address the longer-term sustainability of our public system, including things like mentoring and supporting new staff currently at increased threat of burnout,
  • Have smaller classes, something research confirms are better able to deal with complex student needs
  • Overhaul and fund a special education system straining under the impact of decades-long neglect,
  • Expand and improve professional development to ensure all staff are better equipped to deal with complex and changing needs of both students and the school system as a whole,
  • Accelerate necessary repair and maintenance on existing facilities so that, among other things, older school buildings aren’t death traps when a major seismic event eventually happens,
  • Ensure all schools have the best technological resources at their disposal, those able to support valued educational practices,
  • Look at possibilities for better integrating schools into local and community networks providing other services (like childcare) to children and families,
  • Other? (Fill in your priority – ‘hopes and dreams’ encouraged) _____________________

Here’s a radical idea – encourage and support experimentation and innovation aimed at making schools better able to deal with the social and educational challenges of the future.

Or maybe something more modest?  How about moving the public school system off the treadmill of endless triage caused by resource shortage and funding insecurity?

Funding decisions are about the priorities we make for how we want to live.  And we would be wise to remember money spent in one area is not available in another.

Do we want to steer money to funding a military alliance whose recent history is one of fueling war, conflict and tension in distant places around the globe?  Or do we want to support and improve a vital public institution, and ensure its sustainability for the generations to come?

 

John D. Malcolmson, Ph.D, is an IPE/BC board member and a consulting sociologist providing research advice to unions on matters relating to compensation.