So, without further ado:
Dave King, formerly the Minister of Education in Peter Lougheed's provincial government, has started a website (http://
I tend to agree with Mr. King's vision of what the public education system should be. Public schools are funded by the government in order to provide a certain education to all children. Because the system uses public funds and is intended to benefit all children, it should be inclusive and it should reinforce our values of multiculturalism and tolerance. Catholics, who share these values, seem to feel attacked by Mr. King's suggestion that their school system should be “disestablished.” In reality, this is not a proposal to take away their schools as much as to end the duplication of resources that result, for example, in two underutilized elementary schools neighbouring each other in established communities such as Midnapore (where I attended elementary school) and the attendant transportation costs. There is also the lack of involvement in the governance of schools that results from segregation and confusion about who can support which system. This was particularly apparent during the recent school board election and the lack of press coverage.
There are strengths that exist in the Catholic system from which all schools could benefit. One example is in learning and living their values. My children's public school talks about a “value of the month,” but little real learning accompanies these values. Further, there are families of many other religions who would be happy for their children to experience moral or faith-based education at school. Witness the number of private and charter schools that provide these programs. Rather than force parents to choose a private school, it seems that it would be preferable to offer faith-based classes in community schools which are targeted toward the community they serve and completely optional. This way, more students could participate in reinforcing their values and exploring their beliefs. I may not choose to send my child to a class about Catholicism, but I would extremely interested in exposing my child to Buddhism or Taoism or aboriginal beliefs in an effort to help understand the cultures of our land and our extended family.
In light of this view of a public education system that is inclusive of all students, I would propose more than a merger of the public and Catholic school boards. Excepting the duplication of resources, I see the Catholic schools as very similar to charter schools in that they provide the publicly-mandated curriculum with a special focus. The problem that I see is that charter schools are able to exclude students arbitrarily. This is particularly unfair to families who live in the neighbourhood of the school and are forced to travel because the school won't accept them, as well as students who struggle in school. It's very easy for a charter school to exclude all but the students who score in the top 1% on tests. They may then boast that they have a great program of instruction because (surprise, surprise), their students are scoring in the top 1% on tests. I believe that choice is of great value to families and I believe that charter schools fill a valuable role. However, they should no longer be allowed to exclude students based on any criteria except location (for transportation reasons) as long as they receive public funds.
There also exist private schools in Alberta. Private schools are funded 60%-70% by public funds. Private schools must meet the same curriculum as other schools in order to offer a recognized diploma, but they are under no requirement to accept all students, they are not required to employ teachers that belong to a union (the ATA) and they are able to charge tuition. I don't believe that private schools present any danger to the program of public education. They provide choice for parents who have the desire and resources to participate. Again, as long as they are exempt from providing an environment that is inclusive of all students, I don't believe they should receive any public funds.
Saying that the funding should follow the student sounds good in theory, but encounters problems when followed to its logical conclusion. We all pay taxes that are collected by the provincial government to fund the public education system. This includes families with children who attend school, single people and families without children, families who will leave Alberta before their children attend school and families who will immigrate to Alberta after their children are grown. There are no exemptions. It is understandable that parents who choose a private school would prefer to have their tax dollars redirected to support their child's school. But if we allow that, do we begin to offer full funding to home schoolers? Do we offer full refunds to families without children in public schools? If we do, we might as well cut out the tax middleman and simply charge tuition for all schools with a lifetime payment plan. This is not the view of education as a public good that we currently hold in Alberta.
I believe that there is much value in an inclusive public education system. As long as our tax dollars are supporting schools, I believe those schools must accept all students who live within a reasonable distance. Allowing schools to offer diverse programs or a novel focus provides choice, which is valuable to parents who want to provide the best experience for their unique children. These programs could focus on fine arts, sports, religion, back-to-basics, or any other focus that there is a demand for. If parents choose a program within the public system, it will be publicly funded. If parents choose a program outside the public system, they should expect no public funding.
No comments:
Post a Comment