More money not the answer for schools—just look at Alberta

From the Fraser Institute

If you didn’t already know, higher government spending on schools doesn’t necessarily produce better results. Just look at what’s happening in Alberta.

According to Statistics Canada, from 2012/13 to 2021/22 (the latest year of available data), per-student spending in Alberta increased by 2.1 per cent from $13,146 to $13,421. After adjusting for inflation, this amounted to a 17.2 per cent spending reduction.

This stands in sharp contrast to most other provinces. During the same 10-year period, inflation-adjusted per-student spending increased in Quebec (by 24.6 per cent), British Columbia (5.1 per cent) and Ontario (0.5 per cent). By the raw numbers, Alberta now spends less per student than any other province.

The results?

According to the latest Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) tests, Alberta students scored second only to Quebec on their math skills and almost half a grade level ahead of their peers in B.C. (even though B.C. spent $1,468 more per student in 2021/22). Even better, Alberta students scored highest in the country on their PISA reading and science assessments. This is exactly the opposite of what we’d expect if less spending hurt student performance.

Of course, this doesn’t mean that money is irrelevant. In countries that spend considerably less on education than Canada, more spending does correlate with better academic results. Excessive teacher turnover harms student learning and students must be in a stable learning environment to excel. If teachers aren’t paid enough to make a decent living, they will not remain in the profession, and students will suffer.

However, things are quite different in Canada where all provinces including Alberta already spend a significant amount on education. Governments should spend more wisely rather than simply pour more money into the education system.

Since Alberta is a top-performing province, it’s worth asking what makes this province different. Simply put, Albertans have more educational choice than any other province. Not only does Alberta have fully-funded public and separate school systems, accredited independent schools receive 70 per cent of per-student grants available to public schools, which makes it easier for independent schools to keep tuition affordable for parents. And it’s the only province to allow charter schools, which are fully-funded public schools that operate independently from government school boards. This makes it easier for charter schools to offer specialized programming based on parental demand and creates an incentive for government school boards to diversify their programming options.

Alberta also has a rigorous standardized testing program. Grades 6 and 9 write provincial achievement tests in English language arts, math, science and social studies. Meanwhile, Grade 12 students write diploma exams in a variety of courses that are worth 30 per cent of their final mark. These tests and exams play an important role in holding schools accountable.

However, before Alberta politicians get too comfortable, it’s important to note that Alberta, despite its relative success compared to other provinces, saw a significant decline in academic achievement over the last 20 years. The latest PISA tests show that Alberta students declined in their math skills by 45 points from 2003 to 2022. To put this in perspective, PISA equates 20 points with approximately one grade level. In other words, Alberta students are (on average) approximately two years behind in their math skills than they were in 2003.

Getting to the root cause of this decline will take considerable effort. But one thing we know for sure—despite any rhetoric to the contrary, simply spending more money will not solve this problem. As another school year begins, policymakers in Alberta and across the country should keep this in mind.

Author:

Michael Zwaagstra

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute

Related Topics:#EducationFunding #FraserInstitute #MichaelZwaagstra EducationResults EducationSpending feature

Up Next

Freedom Convoy leaders await final court date in long trial after lawyers present final submissions

Don't Miss

How global warming saves more people than it dooms

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

The Snack Attack: Are Major Food Brands Making Kids Addicted?

Business / 4 hours ago

Solving the Housing Affordability Crisis With This One Cool Trick

Censorship Industrial Complex / 13 hours ago

WEF Pushes Public-Private Collaboration to Accelerate Digital ID and Censorship

Censorship Industrial Complex

TDF and James Kitchen appeal Monique LaGrange decision to Alberta Court of Appeal

Published on January 23, 2025

Todayville

TDF’s Legal Team

Written by TDF’s Legal Team

The Democracy Fund (TDF), together with lawyer James Kitchen, will appeal a recent Alberta Court decision involving school trustee Monique LaGrange. Mrs. LaGrange was a trustee of the Red Deer Catholic school board until the board disqualified her as a result of memes she posted and media interviews she gave, of which a majority of the trustees disapproved.

Mr. Kitchen has now filed his Notices of Appeal with the Alberta Court of Appeal, which can be read here and here.

In 2023, Mrs. LaGrange shared a meme on her personal Facebook account outlining her concerns about the increasing indoctrination of students into Queer theory and transgender ideology. The meme featured two side-by-side images: one of young children holding swastika flags and the other of young children holding pride progress flags, accompanied by the caption, “Brainwashing is brainwashing.” The post garnered support but also criticism, especially from teachers and other school trustees. One of the trustees submitted a complaint alleging that by posting the meme Mrs. LaGrange had violated many sections of the new trustee code of conduct.

Following a hearing in September 2023, a majority of the board of trustees determined Mrs. LaGrange had breached the code of conduct. The board imposed several sanctions, including that she cease making any public statements in areas touching upon or relating to the 2SLGBTQ+ community, issue a public apology, and complete sensitivity training at her own expense.

Mrs. LaGrange refused to issue an apology and maintained that her actions were consistent with her commitment to protecting children, stating, “I was elected to stand up and protect our children, and that is what I am doing.”

Shortly thereafter, another trustee submitted a complaint about Mrs. LaGrange, alleging that she had again violated the code of conduct and also breached the sanctions by posting another meme and doing two media interviews. The meme was a popular one depicting a wolf with colourful make-up with the caption, “I just want to read some books to your chickens”.

After a second hearing, a majority of the trustees again determined Mrs. LaGrange had breached the code of conduct and the sanction regarding public comments. The board then disqualified her as a trustee, effectively kicking her off the board.

The lawyer for Mrs. LaGrange, James Kitchen, said:

“This case is the first of its kind. Never before has an Alberta board of school trustees kicked another trustee off the board for what effectively amounts to a disagreement regarding expressed political and religious beliefs (disguised, in our view, as trustee misconduct). Such an outcome has been made possible by the recent adoption of trustee codes of conduct by Alberta school boards. These new codes enable a majority of trustees to censor and cancel individual trustees with whom they politically disagree. In this case, it appears that a majority of politically left-leaning school trustees applied the code of conduct to a politically disfavoured trustee in order to censure, humiliate, and remove Monique for her outspoken opposition to the sexualization and indoctrination of young students.”

TDF and Mr. Kitchen challenged the board’s decision at a judicial review at the Alberta Court of King’s Bench. The Court varied the board’s apology requirement but otherwise upheld all of the board’s findings.

TDF litigation director Mark Joseph expressed concern over the broader implications of the case, stating:

“Disqualifying a democratically-elected representative based on public comments sets a dangerous precedent. It undermines free speech rights, tolerance for political diversity, and representative democracy by allowing officials to impose ideological purity tests on electoral candidates. The proper response to allegations of bad policy is repudiation at the ballot box rather than official disqualification. If upheld, this decision will pose a significant threat to democratic rights in Canada.”

About The Democracy Fund

Founded in 2021, The Democracy Fund (TDF) is a Canadian charity dedicated to constitutional rights, advancing education and relieving poverty. TDF promotes constitutional rights through litigation and public education. TDF supports an access to justice initiative for Canadians whose civil liberties have been infringed by government lockdowns and other public policy responses to the pandemic.

Education

Parents should oppose any plans to replace the ABCs with vague terminology in schools

Published on January 2, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Paige MacPherson

According to a recent poll, the vast majority of parents in Canada easily understand letter grades on report cards but are confused by the nouveau “descriptive” grading adopted in British Columbia. This should serve as a warning to any province or school board thinking about adopting this type of convoluted descriptive grading.

In September 2023, despite overwhelming opposition from British Columbians, the B.C. government replaced letter grades—such as A, B, C, D, etc.—on K-9 report cards with a “proficiency scale,” which includes the descriptive terms “emerging,” “developing,” “proficient” and “extending.” If these four terms seem confusing to you, you’re not alone.

According to the recent poll (conducted by Leger and commissioned by the Fraser Institute), 93 per cent of Canadian parents from coast to coast said the letter grade “A” was “clear and easy” to understand while 83 per cent said the letter grade “C” was “clear and easy” to understand. (For the sake of brevity, the poll only asked respondents about these two letter grades.)

By contrast, 58 per cent of Canadian parents said the descriptive grade “extending” was “unclear and difficult” to understand and only 26 per cent could correctly identify what “extending” means on a report card.

It was a similar story for the descriptive grade “emerging,” as 57 per cent of Canadian parents said the term was “unclear and difficult” to understand and only 28 per cent could correctly identify what “emerging” means on a report card.

It’s also worth noting that the poll simplified the definitions of the four “descriptive” grading terms. The B.C. government’s official definitions, which can be found on the government’s website, speak for themselves. For example: “Extending is not synonymous with perfection. A student is Extending when they demonstrate learning, in relation to learning standards, with increasing depth and complexity. Extending is not a bonus or a reward and does not necessarily require that students do a greater volume of work or work at a higher grade level. Extending is not the goal for all students; Proficient is. Therefore, if a student turns in all their work and demonstrates evidence of learning in all learning standards for an area of learning, they are not automatically assigned Extending.”

So, what are the consequences of this confusing gobbledygook? Well, we already have some anecdotes.

Before the B.C. government made the changes provincewide, the Surrey School District participated in a pilot program to gauge the effectiveness of descriptive grading. According to Elenore Sturko, a Conservative MLA in Surrey and mother of three, for three years her daughter’s report cards said she was “emerging” rather than clearly stating she was failing. Sturko was unaware there was a problem until the child’s Third Grade teacher called to tell Sturko that her daughter was reading at a Kindergarten level.

Former B.C. education minister Rachna Singh tried to justify the change saying descriptive grading would help students become “better prepared for the outside world” where you “don’t get feedback in letters.” But parents in B.C. clearly aren’t happy.

Of course, other provinces also use terms in their grading systems (meeting expectations, exceeding expectations, satisfactory, needs improvement, etc.) in addition to letter grades. But based on this polling data, the descriptive grading now used in B.C.—which again, has completely replaced letter grades—makes it much harder for B.C. parents to understand how their children are doing in school. The B.C. government should take a red pen to this confusing new policy before it does any more damage. And parents across the country should keep a watchful eye on their local school boards for any plans to replace the ABCs with vague terminology open to interpretation.