Provincial Liberals........ geniuses

[fluffy]

I agree, it's a matter of best use of taxpayer dollars. An oversimplification would be that's it's more expensive per student to run two schools at 50% capacity than one school at 100% capacity. I agree with shuttering schools that are underutilized, but I think it would be premature to start selling them off.

[Boda]

and yet assaulting the horrible BCTF would improve education by finally ridding it of the horrible union industrial model.

OK, I wasn't sure how you felt about the BCTF.
However my post didn't address means to improve public education.

[driveangry]

I agree, it's a matter of best use of taxpayer dollars. An oversimplification would be that's it's more expensive per student to run two schools at 50% capacity than one school at 100% capacity. I agree with shuttering schools that are underutilized, but I think it would be premature to start selling them off.

So the best use of taxpayer dollars is to do a complete makeover and new appliances in the teachers lounge, and then replace hallway tiles and lockers.

Why not transfer the funds to another school in the same SD that is in need ??

[rustled]

I agree, it's a matter of best use of taxpayer dollars. An oversimplification would be that's it's more expensive per student to run two schools at 50% capacity than one school at 100% capacity. I agree with shuttering schools that are underutilized, but I think it would be premature to start selling them off.

Shuttering is hard on a building, and districts can often lease their buildings out (a win-win because it provides income to the district and maintains the building inventory in case at some point it's needed again).

Also, there are a range of agreements by which school properties have been acquired, so selling one property may make sense while selling another may not. Some neighbourhoods have shifted so dramatically (demographics and zoning) it seems unlikely there will ever be enough neighbourhood children to support them again. I'm thinking of the area around Carmi Elementary, for example, which was considered during this round of closures.

Travelling in the US last summer, we were struck by how many schools are built "out of town". This may have been a response to land costs when these schools were needed, but it was an interesting trend, especially since so few children walk to school today. From a social and environmental point of view, perhaps bussing students to fewer schools makes a great deal of sense.

[The Green Barbarian]

I'd much rather see the money go to classroom services.

I would too, but I'd rather that they were "non-unionized" classroom services.

[pentona]

Also, there are a range of agreements by which school properties have been acquired, so selling one property may make sense while selling another may not. Some neighbourhoods have shifted so dramatically (demographics and zoning) it seems unlikely there will ever be enough neighbourhood children to support them again. I'm thinking of the area around Carmi Elementary, for example, which was considered during this round of closures.

I disagree re Carmi School. I know a lot of parents who have recently moved into that exact neighbourhood and with children that will go to that school. Plus, when another school such as Westbench closes, they will bus them to Carmi and it will be full again. Always used to be a big bus school; that changed when they changed the bus routes years back and sent kids to other schools.
Now, Carmi will be much better utilized than ever, once again.

[rustled]

I disagree re Carmi School. I know a lot of parents who have recently moved into that exact neighbourhood and with children that will go to that school. Plus, when another school such as Westbench closes, they will bus them to Carmi and it will be full again. Always used to be a big bus school; that changed when they changed the bus routes years back and sent kids to other schools.
Now, Carmi will be much better utilized than ever, once again.

Yes, with bussing, it will be full again. My comment was around having several schools (particularly elementary schools) located throughout the community so most children could walk to school.

Today, this neighbourhood is made up of a higher mix of people who don't have school age children, and a lot of the family homes are being re-purposed as offices (along Government in particular). The trend in my immediate neighbourhood is long-term residents aging in place, and sales lean toward rentals and starter homes for families with pre-school aged children, most of whom have scaled up and moved out of the neighbourhood before their children start school or soon after.

The old model of having an elementary school in walking distance of most elementary-school-aged children doesn't seem to fit today's reality as well as we'd like it to. And if we're bussing the majority of them anyway, perhaps there are other considerations around best use of land, etc.

[pentona]

Yes, with bussing, it will be full again. My comment was around having several schools (particularly elementary schools) located throughout the community so most children could walk to school.

Today, this neighbourhood is made up of a higher mix of people who don't have school age children, and a lot of the family homes are being re-purposed as offices (along Government in particular). The trend in my immediate neighbourhood is long-term residents aging in place, and sales lean toward rentals and starter homes for families with pre-school aged children, most of whom have scaled up and moved out of the neighbourhood before their children start school or soon after.

Sorry but you are incorrect on that, the truth is the complete opposite. My relatives live right in the middle of that area and have witnessed many older folks moving out/dying off and young families with Elementary school age children are snapping these houses up. More families live there now than ever before.

Government Street is another matter; who would want to live there with children; too dangerous with traffic.

[LoneWolf_53]

Well, I am not convinced that spending $10K per kid in a 'private school' computes as a 'saving' when the government rate for a public school kid is around $8K - or less.

Of course you aren't convinced but we've had this same discussion ad nauseam and some people still don't understand the basic math. The NDP understands the math so I give them credit for that.

Facts don't sway the closed minded, even less so when their judgment is clouded by hate.

There isn't a thing the Liberal government could do, that would be seen as right by this person.

It's frustrating to continually see complaints about less funding for education, when the amount actually goes up every year. The increase eaten up by the whiners union brethren, never ever is mentioned by them.

[JLives]

I would too, but I'd rather that they were "non-unionized" classroom services.

It doesn't necessarily have to be non-union. Just break up the BCTF and allow the teachers to form regional unions that aren't so top heavy. Should they be inclined to really want to fight for services for the kids, a union gives them more leverage to do that. I'm not anti-union, I'm anti-BCTF.

[JLives]

[
The subsidy to independent schools ends up saving the government money overall and that's one reason that even the NDP in the last election campaign promised to retain it. I'm not sure what you mean when you refer to "50% of the operating budget to Private Schools" but rest assured that half of the province's operating budget is not going to independent schools. For ideological reasons some people want to end the subsidy to independent schools but that would be very short-sighted.

This is another major issue I see in our education system. We're trying to fit all the children into the same mold. We could be so much more successful if we have a variety of education techniques offered in the public system. A publicly funded Montessori (Kamloops has one), a Waldorf style, a prep school style etc. Or at the very least adopt some of the techniques.

My daughter is a straight A student and flourishes in the public system and that's great. My son falls on the spectrum and processes information differently so the current system isn't a great fit for him. I'm going to be fighting to hold him back a grade to meet his needs but they don't hold kids back anymore. They get pushed through to make the pass levels look good and it's a complete failure to him and many others, especially boys.

We need change and we need it NOW.

[erinmore3775]

I really wish that those contributors to an "education forum" would do a little self education before pontificating. It is true that the Manitoba Teachers' Society agreed to a NO STIKE negotiating agreement with the province however, it was in exchange for a very important concession. The province agreed to BINDING ARTIBRATION to settle any agreement that could not be negotiated before the previous contracted ended.

This agreement ensures that no strike occurs and all aspects of working and learning conditions are examined during any contract negotiation or arbitrated settlement. It also ensures that Manitoba teachers are paid a "fair" rate when compared to other Canadian teachers.

I sincerely hope that those who suggest that BCTF follow the MTS model also include the government commitment to binding arbitration and settlements that consider what is fair to both negotiating sides.

[The Green Barbarian]

I sincerely hope that those who suggest that BCTF follow the MTS model also include the government commitment to binding arbitration and settlements that consider what is fair to both negotiating sides.

Just don't allow a union to use the suffering of children as a bargaining chip. Why is this so hard to grasp?

[flamingfingers]

GB wrote:

Just don't allow a union to use the suffering of children as a bargaining chip.

suffering
noun

Simple Definition of suffering
: pain that is caused by injury, illness, loss, etc. : physical, mental, or emotional pain

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suffering

Oh my! Does missing a few days of school ACTUALLY inflict that kind of 'suffering' on children?!!

[rustled]

Yes, with bussing, it will be full again. My comment was around having several schools (particularly elementary schools) located throughout the community so most children could walk to school.

Today, this neighbourhood is made up of a higher mix of people who don't have school age children, and a lot of the family homes are being re-purposed as offices (along Government in particular). The trend in my immediate neighbourhood is long-term residents aging in place, and sales lean toward rentals and starter homes for families with pre-school aged children, most of whom have scaled up and moved out of the neighbourhood before their children start school or soon after.

Sorry but you are incorrect on that, the truth is the complete opposite. My relatives live right in the middle of that area and have witnessed many older folks moving out/dying off and young families with Elementary school age children are snapping these houses up. More families live there now than ever before.

Government Street is another matter; who would want to live there with children; too dangerous with traffic.

The thing is, Carmi relies on bussing, and the reason for having a lot of elementary schools throughout town was so children could walk to them. Do you feel Carmi will ever be "full enough" without bussing, given that some of that catchment area includes my immediate neighbourhood (where I can assure you, the situation is quite different from your friends' immediate neighbourhood), and the homes on Government?

The real question is, does it make sense to maintain neighbourhood schools for children to walk to?