Education
School board trustees should embrace genuine diversity and avoid unnecessary legal fights
From the Fraser Institute
Too many Canadian school boards are getting sidetracked by unnecessary legal battles rather than focusing on educating students.
Case in point, Carolyn Burjoski, a former teacher in the Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB), recently won a decisive legal victory when Justice James Ramsay rejected WRDSB’s attempt to quash Burjoski’s defamation lawsuit and awarded her $30,000 in legal fees.
Burjoski had sued her former employer because the board chair publicly accused her of transphobic behaviour for raising concerns during a board meeting about the sexualized content in a number of school library books. His public attacks on Burjoski exposed the school board to a defamation lawsuit.
In his decision, Justice Ramsay found that the WRDSB chair “acted with malice or at least a reckless disregard for the truth.” Furthermore, Ramsay explained, nothing Burjoski said during the meeting could reasonably be described as transphobic. Given these facts, it comes as little surprise that the judge ruled decisively in Burjoski’s favour.
Things could have been handled much better by the board. Had the trustees stayed focused on education, they likely would not have gotten sidetracked by Burjoski’s comments. They could have simply thanked Burjoski for her input then gotten back to work on education policy. Instead, the board chair picked a fight with one of his own teachers and led his fellow trustees into a losing legal battle. No one can seriously think this was in the best interest of students, particularly since school taxes were spent on legal fees rather than classroom resources.
Sadly, WRDSB is far from the only school board where trustees are distracted by non-educational issues. In Winnipeg’s Louis Riel School Board, trustee Francine Champagne was suspended three times in one year for making controversial social media posts and failing to submit paperwork. The board even filed a legal application to have Champagne removed from office for allegedly violating the Public Schools Act. However, Champagne resigned before the court case began, which was fortunate for the board, since it no doubt saved them considerable money in legal fees.
Parents and other taxpayers don’t elect school trustees just so their hard-earned tax dollars can be squandered on legal fees. Getting into unnecessary legal fights is a bad idea for any school board.
Fortunately, it’s not difficult for school boards to stay out of court. Refrain from defaming employees who make presentations at public meetings, stay focused on educational basics, and allow for diversity of thought on controversial issues. A board that does these things will save money in legal fees, and have a better learning environment for students.
Besides, there are real issues to be addressed in public education. For example, data from the Programme for Student Assessment (PISA) shows that academic achievement is on the decline across Canada, particularly in reading and math. If students don’t learn these fundamental skills in school, not much else that happens there will matter. Improving classroom instruction should be a top priority for every school board.
Trustees would also be wise to crack down on the growing incidents of violence in many schools. Empowering teachers and principals to remove persistently disruptive students from the classroom is essential. Teachers must know that their employers have their backs when dealing with tough situations. Safe and orderly classrooms are a prerequisite to student learning.
And when controversial issues do come up during board meetings, trustees should take a measured approach and acknowledge that Canadians (including many of their own employees) hold a variety of views on topics such as how much gender and sexuality content should be in library books accessible to children. There’s no need to force everyone into the same mold.
If trustees are serious about promoting diversity, they must remember that this includes diversity of thought, not just diversity of appearance. Genuine diversity means that everyone, students and teachers alike, are free to express different opinions without fear of negative repercussions.
Education suffers when school trustees lose sight of their primary mission. The lessons learned by WRDSB and other embattled school boards should be a clear sign to trustees across Canada—stay focused on educating students.
Author:
From the Fraser Institute
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.
Paige MacPherson
From the Fraser Institute
Not only does Alberta have a fully funded separate (Catholic) school system, it also provides between 60 and 70 per cent operational funding to accredited independent schools. In addition, Alberta is the only province in Canada to allow fully funded charter schools. And Alberta subsidizes homeschooling parents.
This week, the Smith government in Alberta will likely pass Bill 27, which requires schools to get signed permission from parents or guardians prior to any lessons on human sexuality, gender identity or sexual orientation.
It’s a sensible move. The government is proactively ensuring that students are in these classes because their parents want them there. Given the sensitive nature of these topics, for everyone’s sake it makes sense to ensure parental buy-in at the outset.
Unfortunately, many school trustees don’t agree. A recent resolution passed by the Alberta School Boards Association (ASBA) calls on the Smith government to maintain the status quo where parents are assumed to have opted in to these lessons unless they contact the school and opt their children out. Apparently, the ASBA thinks parents can’t be trusted to make the right decisions for their children on this issue.
This ASBA resolution is, in fact, a good example of the reflexive opposition by government school trustees to parental rights. They don’t want parents to take control of their children’s education, especially in sensitive areas. Fortunately, the Alberta government rebuffed ASBA’s demands and this attempt to abolish Bill 27 will likely fall on deaf ears.
However, there’s an even better safeguard available to Alberta parents—school choice. Out of all Canadian provinces, Alberta offers the most school choice. Not only does Alberta have a fully funded separate (Catholic) school system, it also provides between 60 and 70 per cent operational funding to accredited independent schools. In addition, Alberta is the only province in Canada to allow fully funded charter schools. And Alberta subsidizes homeschooling parents. Simply put, parents who are dissatisfied with the government school system have plenty of options—more than parents in any other province. This means Alberta parents can vote with their feet.
Things are quite different in other parts of the country. For example, Ontario and the four Atlantic provinces do not allow any provincial funding to follow students to independent schools. In other words, parents in these provinces who choose an independent school must pay the full cost themselves—while still paying taxes that fund government schools. And no province other than Alberta allows charter schools.
This is why it’s important to give parents as much school choice as possible. Given the tendency of government school boards to remove choices from parents, it’s important that all parents, including those with limited means, have other options available for their children.
Imagine if the owners of a large grocery store tried to impose their dietary preferences by removing all meat products and telling customers that the only way they could purchase meat is to make a special order. What would happen in that scenario? It depends on what other options are available. If this was the only grocery store in the community, customers would have no choice but to comply. However, if there were other stores, customers could simply shop elsewhere. Choice empowers people and limits the ability of one company to limit the choices of people who live in the community.
Think of government school boards as a monopolistic service provider like a grocery store. They often do everything possible to prevent parents from going anywhere else for their children’s education. Trusting them to do what’s best for parents and children is like assuming that the owners of a grocery store would always put the interests of their customers first and not their own self-interest. Monopolies are bad in the private sector and they’re bad in the education sector, too.
Clearly, it makes sense to require schools to get proactive consent from parents. This ensures maximum buy-in from parents for whatever courses their children take. It’s also important that Alberta remains a bastion of school choice. By making it easier for parents to choose from a variety of education options, Alberta puts power in the hands of parents, exactly where it belongs. Parents in other provinces should want that same power, too.
Nanaimo syringe stabbing reignites calls for involuntary care
Judge reverses suspension against Alberta police officer for speaking at Freedom Convoy rally
50,000 Students Missing: Trudeau’s Immigration Circus Hits New Low
Canada Suddenly Says It’ll Buy More US Products After Trump Threatened To Slap It With Tariffs
-
Alberta2 days agoTrudeau’s Tariff Retaliation Plan: Alberta Says “No Thanks”
-
National2 days agoBC Conservative leader calls for independent review after election ‘irregularities’
-
Brownstone Institute11 hours agoIt’s Time to Retire ‘Misinformation’
-
Addictions1 day agoAnnual cannabis survey reveals many positive trends — and some concerning ones
-
Artificial Intelligence2 hours agoDeath of an Open A.I. Whistleblower
-
Alberta2 days agoWhy U.S. tariffs on Canadian energy would cause damage on both sides of the border
-
Brownstone Institute1 day agoThe Cure for Vaccine Skepticism
-
Business2 days agoTrump’s oil tariffs could spell deficits for Alberta government