Manitoba Hansard — 9 May 1994 (Sitting 23B, 35th Legislature, 5th Session)

35-5-23b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fifth Session • Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Bonourtlble Denis C. Rocan Spettlcer Vol. XLin No. 23B • 8 p.m., Monday, May 9, 1994 ISSN OS42-5492

NAME ASHI'ON, Steve BARRE'IT, Becky CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERn.LI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Louise DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER. Gary DOWNEY,1ames, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Geny, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, flDl, Hon. EVANS,Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILM ON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon.

FRIESEN,1ean MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-F'd'th Legislature Members, Constituencies and PoUtical Afft Uation CONS1ITUENCY Thompson Wellington River Heights Radisson Kildonan Ste.Rose Seine River Roblin-Rossell Selkirk Concordia Arthur- Virden Steinbach Riel St.1ames Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley GAUDRY, Neil GnLES HAMMER, Harold, Hon. GRAY, Avis St. Boniface Minnedosa Crescentwood Gimli HELWER , Edward R. HICKES, George KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDBAU, Man:el MACKINTOSH,Gord MALOWAY,flDl MANNESS, Clayton, Hon.

MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCORMICK, Nonna MceltAJE,1ames,Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PALLISTER, Brian PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN,1ohn PRAZNIK, Dmen, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROBINSON, Eric ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad SCHELLENBERG, Hany STEP ANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE,1ercy SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, Rosemary, Hon. WOWCHUK, Rosano Point Douglas The Maples Inkster The Pas St.

Norbert St.1ohns Elmwood Morris Burrow s Sturgeon Creek Osborne Brandon West Assiniboia River East Pembina Portage Ia Prairie Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonn et Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Rupertsland Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Rossmere Kirkfield Parle FlinFlon La Verendcye Fort Garry Swan River PARTY. NDP NDP Liberal NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC Liberal PC NDP Liberal Liberal NDP PC NDP NDP PC NDP PC Liberal PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP -

1349 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, May 9, 1994 The House met at 8 p.m. ORDERS OF THE DAY (continued) COMMITrE E OF SUPPLY (ConcuiTt!llt Sections) EDUCATI ON AND TRAINING Mr. Deputy Cha irperson (Marcel Laurendeau): Good evening. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. The committee will be resuming consideration of the Estimates of the Dep artment of Education and Training. When the committee last sat, it bad been considering item l. (c)(

l) on page 36. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): I wanted to go over somewhat brie fly, I gue ss-un der Activity Identification, it makes reference to the critiquing of divisional plans to ensure concurrence with de partmental strategic priorities. If I can just get a bit of a further explanation in terms of what it is that they actually do. Are we talking about submission of all the school division budgets that are given to the department through here, or what more specifically is this? Bon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Deputy Olahperson, it is as it sa ys . This is where our ma in policy and thought-d ev elo ping

section is wi thin the dep artment It is done different ways. Education is pretty large, but within the context of gre ater centralization we have always sensed that all of our renewed thinking or review should be passed through a group of people who are learned in many re spects, not the least of which is reading literature, seeing what is happening elsewhere, reporting on what is happening elsewhere, and to try· and give greater insight into policy development or day-to-day decisions . Of course, this group is involved very closely with Admin istration and Finance, Program Development and the BEF sections, if that is the question. •

(2005) Mr. Lamoureux: Yes, it does help clarify it somewhat. I would ask then in terms of the government adopts priorities or strategy, bow does it e nsure that those priorities that it has esta blished are in fact being brought down? Again, it is just more sort of as an explanation of trying to get a better understanding. Mr. Mann ess: We ll, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, there is movement both ways. There is not down or up so much as there is-and again, this depends on person alities, this depends on the make-up of, I guess to start at a place, ministers.

Some ministers are more proactive as to wanting changes and/or certain thrusts, certain emphasis, as compared to others. Others, of course, like to stay within the existing routine and make decisions from day to day. Then of course it depends on the depu ty. Deputies have an awful lot of influence. Then, within the dep artment, you have your ADMs who also are given an awful lot of res ponsibility, beyond day to day though, beyond to look into the future, look into the past and come fo rward with recommen dations.

The great clearing house of all of this and these dif fe rent forces at work, of course, is housed within the unit of policy and development, and whoever has greater-whoever is more dominant in these discussions ultimately will come to a point where dire ctions are given to staff to rese arch and/or prepare towards certain goals. So it is a society in a sense . There is nothing particularly novel about it. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Depu ty Chairperson, in my opening remarks, I ma de re f erence to the government now being in for six years, a number

13 50 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 9, 19 94 of Education ministers, and I look at it in tenns of strategic priorities. I am somewhat curious in tenns of why it is at this point in time that we have been hearing about the whole need for education refonn. Is it because it is this particular minister that is currently in place , or is this something that the department within itself-because the department as I say is the one that develops the strategies fo r the ministers to prioritize, I guess. I wonder if the minister could comment on that. Mr.

Manness: Aga in, my response will be somew hat simila r to the one I ma de. Our government has been responsible for fo stering a number of reviews in a number of areas . I think of the STAC report, and I think of the High School Review inherited from the other government, but we have done a number of reviews, the initiatives of which, of course , were to focus in on areas of change . Where the strategic direction came from those reviews, I imagine some of them did start within the department.

I imagine others have started within the policy arm of government, the Premier' s policy arm, and some are initiatives of ministers. They can start almost anywhere, but before they go very far , I mean they have to go through cabinet, and ultimately, the cabinet decides whether or not the Department of Education should maintain along a course. So to the extent that the minister of the day starts them depe nds on who that minister may or may not be, and you know the personalities play a large role here . Mr. Lamoureux: Mr.

Deputy Chaiipe rson, I am not too sure if this is maybe the most opportune or the best time to bring this particular issue up, but it was made reference to earlier. It is the amount of restructuring that was taking place . I was faxed a copy with respect to the program development and support servi ces, a number of different flow charts or organizational structures. If this is not the most appropriate time to discuss it, I would be interested in knowing if in fact the minister could either provide for the actual diff erences. Because this is my first year as critic, all I have is what the refonn package ent ails.

To see first-hand in terms of what the actual changes were, it would be somewhat beneficial to have the last year's structures or organizational structures. It all came to me through the program development and support services where I unde rstand that a vast majority of the reorganization took place. • (201 0) Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chaiiperson, I could do it now. I prefer very much to do it a little further on when we get right into that division. It is a major division, a major change. The questions are certainly worthwhile putting and hopef ul ly responding , and the response will be worthwhile.

I would ask the member maybe to def er till then if he would not mind. Mr. Lamoureux: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chaiiperson, I do not have any problem with that. I would ask the minister, if he does have the previous charts that it would be somewhat beneficial for myself just to be able to crossche ck, again, so I can just get a better unders tanding so that when it does come up, I am better able to ask questions on it. I know that the member for the New Democratic Party was ending off while we adjourned, so I am quite content to let him have the floor again. Mr. Manness: Mr.

Deputy Chairpers on, I think that mo re or less was covered in last year's supplementary, but if it is not, we will try and provide those leaflets for the member. Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Mr. Deputy Chairperson, is the minister working fr om a five-year strategic plan, or is there such a thing right now in the department? Mr. Mann ess: Oh, there are alway s strategic plans in departments. The member knows that. Am I worlcing from one? Well, I am sure I am part of one. Do I go to it and look at it every night before I tum in? The answer is no, but everything we are doing is part of a strategy. Mr.

Plohman: I am sure it is part of a strategy. It might be a six-month plan right now, I do not know, or maybe three. I just wondered if the minister has the plan, and maybe it has been revised, whether he could table -

- May 9, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 135 1 a strategic plan, the current one, for the members of the committee. Mr. Manness: Well, the deputy inf orms me that a strategic plan began in '91, and it was to last till 1996, but obviously it is being radically altered over the course of the last few months. The member was not here when I made comment in response to a question put by the member for Inkster.

Ministers have certain responsibility, and within the strategic plan, of course, I sense it is my responsi bility, not so much of a political point of view, but certainly from an educational point of view, to make some rapid decisions which, for the most part, are within that strategic plan, but to the extent there may have to be some differences, well, then so be it. Mr. Plohman: So the minister is saying he is altering the plan to fit the curre nt situation, perhaps accelerat ing some things or is it to fit his own priorities as minister? Mr.

Manness: Well, certainly the latter-! mean, I have always prided myself in being a minister who likes to move on and do things. I do not think what I am doing is in any respect contrary to the plan, but even if it were , is a plan, because it was developed in '91, sacred until '967 Of course, it is not. Nothing is particularly sacred, but the general thrust and indeed much of the work that was done in 19 90 and '91 and '92 is going to come to ultimate fruition once the reform package comes down. Mr. Plohman: Yes, well, you know we have a copy of the original plan.

I just wondered if the minister had updated it as a result of the current actions and whether he would be willing to table a revised strategic plan, because as the minister said, it does change and nothing is sacred. So it is a guideline, but these things change . They are revised. So in keeping with that, I just wanted to know if the minister had a revised plan and whether that could be made available . • (2015 ) Mr. Mann ess: Mr. Depu ty Chairperson, I do not have a plan, I mean, not that I can share with the member-! put that qualifier in.

When I look at in '91 what we referred to, we ref erred to labour market developme nt, we talked ab out rural development strategy, college governance , adult literacy, basic education for adults, northern education strategy, and I could go on and on and on. Those are still key planks of the '91 plan, of the '91-96 plan. Mr. Plohman: Okay, so the minister can just be very clear in his answer. He does not have a revised plan that he coul d share with the committee. This is still working from the '91-96 plan. It is not revised to become a '92-97 plan, a '93-98 plan, a '94-99 and so on. Mr. Manness: Mr.

Dep uty Chairperson, I have never been somebody who has been deeply in love with socialist fiv e-year plans. I underst and strategic planning. H the member says we have not looked at the plan or we have not done anything in concert with it-he can try and put words in my mouth if he so choose s, but the reality is we know what areas in education we need to address, and we are working the best we can to address them . Mr. Plohman: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I was not trying to put words in the minister's mouth.

He was not being very clear about what he actually is working from at the present time, and I was just endeavouring to have that clear. It is not a socialist five-year plan. It can be many kinds of five-year plans, COipOrate five-year plans. I understand the Lotteries Corporation has a running five-year plan. The Liberals are fully aware that they have not been able to get anything past the '91 plan. I do not know whether in fact there is a '92-97 plan or whether it is just someth ing that is imagined. On that basis, it would seem that these plans are revised and another year is tacked on.

It is done for capital pwposes many times, for many different pwposes, and that is why I am asking the minister if he has such a revision. If he has not completed it, it is fine to say he does not have a revised plan on a five-year basis in front of him at the present time. He is working from a different timetable right now, and that is fair ball. Mr. Manness: The member for Dauphin makes a good point. Certainly the strategic plan at this point

135 2 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 9, 1994 in time is being rewritten. We are attempting to update it indicating aspe cts that we sense have been completed since '91 and, as importantly of course, to redefine, given new thrusts, but which still in themselves are not terribly far removed from some of the significant planks that were put into place in '91. Yes, there is greater definition around some of the reform iss ues that we are talking about, but they still more or less fit into what we attempted to define with some certainty in 1991 for five years out.. Mr.

Plohman: Yes, and some of them might have been accomplished already. For example , the minister talked about college governance. I do not know if there is another model contemplated, but obviously there was a change made there, so that should now be written out of this plan and of course new issues included in the plan. That is really what we are talking about here. I wanted to ask the minister about the SAIP program. That is the national test. It was raised earlier.

Last year it was math, and the results came down, and there was some controversy over how Manitoba did and some conclu sions drawn I think from that, perhaps unf airly, about Manitoba's public schools in general. I just wanted to get the minister's view of the value of that particular test and how he perceived the resul ts of that test insof ar as Manitoba's performance was concemed. •

(2020) Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, as I said cas ually when the resul ts came out, but I will say for the record with more force right now, I was not very happy with the resu lts. I lo oked into the methodologi es. I heard the criticism around the methodolo gies. I heard about some indications that a certain skill set of learning was not in our curriculum.

I looked into that and I fo und out that students though that le arned it in another stu dy are a, in geo graphy-people that had tak en geography seemed to do better than those who su pposedly-no, was it the other way around? [inteijection] That is right. If they stu died it in geo graphy they did it in math. I looked into methodologie s, I looked into all the criticism of how it was that Alberta had set it up, because they were involved in the piloting or som ething and from my perspec tive we just did not do very well on the test.

Now, some people said- 1 went and tal ked to principals and they said, well, the reason we did not do well on the test was because it had no value , my students would not study . I looked across the land and nowhere, no province gave it value, so I have to believe that our students are more or less homogeneous with other Canadian students and, therefore, I would have to fa ctor out that role . I looked at it I thought in as dispassionate , as objective a fa shion as I could.

I am sorry, I have to come to the concl usion that we did not do particularly well, given though when we looked at our students studying fran �ais in immersion and someone says , well , the immersion students tend to be students whose parents are a little bit more active and a little more involved, but even separating that out and going onto the fran�ais side and using the same Manitoba curriculum, which more or less was translated, I am led to believe , that still within the French milieu the resul ts were significantly better.

I guess this is what troubled me more than anyth ing, that when it came to doing basic mathematical functions like , to us e an exampl e, A plus B divided by C multi plied by D, when you lay it out as a function, our st udents did relatively well, average.

But you put the problem or you take those same computations in the context of a problem where you have to comprehend, you have to read, and we have talked and we have given a lot of fo cus today to this thing called problem solving , and you put it in the context of a worded question where you have to be able to read and write and comprehend, well, that is where we fell off the scale. Is it a math problem? I do not know. Is it a curriculum proble m? I do not think so. Is it a comprehension or is it a literature problem or a languag e arts probl em? I am beginning to think so and I am troubled by that greatly. Mr.

Plohman: Well , the minis ter covered off a lot of the areas that were criticized fr om various quarters with regard to that test. So far as the - -

- May9 ,1 99 4 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1353 curriculum cover ing actual concepts in mathematics that were tested-the minister said, well, some of them were studied in other subjects like geography. I am not certain, I do not have the specific examples, but I do know that teachers and students did approach me that there were concepts that were part of our Grade 12 curriculum and this test was being administered to Grade 11 students right acros s the country, our 17-and 16-year olds, and therefore they would not be in Grade 12.

They would not have taken those concepts and therefore they could not possibly have been taught those concepts, and what sense does it make to test them on them? The minister may say, well, that shows that we are behind or our curriculum is wrong. The point is, and that is what I wanted to ask the minister, why would you participate in a national test if you do not have a national standard, a national curriculum for that particular test other than to tell you that you do not have a national curriculum? I mean, what does it really tell you?

It is absolutely ridiculous to test kids on concepts that are not part of the curriculum or that they are not being taught at a particular leveL It does not serve any particular purpose. It just frustrates everyone, demoralizes people, students and teachers alike . I just asked the minister, if he recognizes that certain concepts were not being taught in that particular grade level, then why did Manitoba participate at that stage in this test? •

(2025) Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, quite easy, because Manitoba, under this government, is a team player. I mean, it is so easy to say, well, I am not going to play unless I have got everything my way. Saskatchewan did not play. The only province in Canada, but Saskatchewan is going to play science, I can tell you that-in '95-96. At least they have led us to believe that they are in. So everybody is in, and everybody was in the last one except Saskatchewan.

I did not talk to a Minister of· Education who did not indicate to me, well, you know, that test, there was one part of it that we do not think our students covered either. That was the call across the land. I know one thing. We will never get to the point where we want to go, if we are talking about some unifomiity standards across this country. We will never get there unless we start. Was it a perfect start? No. The member talks about the teacher s and students being frustrated. I have not had any students report to me as to their frustration. Yes, I have had some teachers, and I have had some trustees.

I am not going to blame and I never will blame anybody. I mean, to me it is not an issue of blame. To me, it is an issue of learning from the result, trying to wotk more closely with the other provinces, trying to detennine whether or not we can wotk towards some common curriculum by subject area, and ultimately being honest to our students and letting them know where they stand vis-�-vis other students across the land, nothing more. I am not looking for alibis. Alibis are for losers. Our students, in my view, gave it their best shot. I have to think that they did the best they could.

I am not down on the stude nts. All I am saying, though, is, let us try and find some uniformity and be honest with them; let them know where we stand vis-l-vis others; and, more importantly, let us in this nation try to wotk towards some comm on areas of standards so that our students know where they stand. Mr. Plohman: Yes, well, the minister talks about being a team player and so on. It is easy to say he is being a team player, but he has to think about the impact of this on the people that are most closely involved and the pwpose of it. That is what I am trying to explore with the minister.

Saskatchewan may have decided not to go in it because they felt that, rather than being philosophically opposed to the concept, they were more concerned about the nature of the test or the composition of it or whatever, as opposed to the principle of it. So, at this point in time, the minister is talking about a science test, and they are going to go in there. Well, we understand that is taking place, that this year the test is being developed, so they are going to have a

part in developing that test, I would think.

1354 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May9, 199 4 The minister says, he had a

part in developing the math test My point at the time was that, if you had a

part in making it, why did you not e nsure that the parts that were being applied to students in Manitoba were indeed being taught in that particular grade level? You do not need a test to tell you that your curri culum is not the same. You do not have to go through that process; if indeed they are not the same , then why test, why have a national test? Why not develop as ministers these common areas of standards in curriculum and then test for them? That makes sense; it does not make sense to do the testing bef ore. Anybody knows that you are not going to do well if you never took the stuff.

I think that is a valid criticism of it, and· I wondered why this government did not identify that as a major problem with this and voice that concern at the time that the test was being undertaken, if they were going to do that, indee d, at least when the results were given. Otherwise, it und ermines the public education system, and then I think that it leads to lack of confidence in the public education system to a greater degree, perhaps, than is necess ary, by the public, if the minister is indeed playing into that kind of scenario. Mr. Manness: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, I wonder if the member for Dauphin has delved into this to even know what part of the curriculum we did not teach- Mr. Plohman: I talked to teache m. •

(2030) Mr. Manness: Yes, and so they would have told him, what particular area, because I can tell you, we were certainly mindful of the criticism that the area dealing with graphs and charts was the only area that our students did not have presentation, only that part that had not been taught within the formal mathematics, yet its offset is being in geography. The member may find it intere sting, because he will not find this from the teachers , but we have seen the notes, Mr. Deputy Chairpe rson.

Our students did very well in graphs and charts, better than they did on average in the rest of the other, because they learned that in geography. So the criticism is invalid. The criticism is not valid. Unless the member can tell me that there was another area of study that our students were not provided for within the Manit ob a-made curri culum, then I say he is using rhetoric, because we looked at this. We were sensitive to it. So the member is generalizing. He is saying that our kids did not have access to this curriculum, and he is wrong. Well, then he will prove me wrong if he shakes his head.

If he says I am wrong, well, then he will prove me wrong, and he will show me what areas our students did not have presented to them by way of Manitoba-made curriculum . Again, as I point out to him, our students did reasonably well when it comes to basic math. That was not the problem where we fe ll down. It was in the prob lem-so lving side and where you can draw a concl usion. It came from pure comprehension. Of cour se, I pointed that out to the trustees, I pointed it out to others, and I draw a stare. I draw a stare, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, because all of a sudden there is no convenient entity to blame . Mr.

Plohman: Yes, clearly the area of application and knowledge in problem solving was identified as an are a that was the probl em, and not one teacher said, well, we have not taught that or we are concerned about this test because we have not been able to prepare our students for application of knowledge in a problem-solving situation. It was factual pieces of inform ation that they were concerned was not being taught in, I believe, algebra and geometry, some concepts in those areas, and I cann ot tell the minister now.

This was a year and a half ago that I talked to them about it, and I had raised this during the Estimates last year as well , but I think it is important that the minister not genera lize, as well, at this point without having all of the information as to the subtleties of what might have been on that test and what was precisely taught in that particular grade, and so to refute it and say that is a gene ralization. I think the issue of problem solving is one that is of deep concern and, I think, one that I am surprised the minister has not identified when he talks about his basics. If I am wrong, he can -

- May9, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1355 perhaps tell me that is not his view of what constitutes basics, but I think most people are talking about ability to problem solve , critical thinking, those kinds of words to describe a basic for students in education today. Yet the minister talks about going back to the basics, and I just wonder whether in fact he defines basics in a broader way than the traditional basics. If so, what basics is he talking about.

As a result of this test, does the minister have a greater fee ling for the need to ensure that our students are able to apply knowledge in a problem-solving situation and to critically analyze data and apply the knowledge they have , or is this something that he always did fee l was part of the basic curr iculum and should be part of the basics in education today? Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the member says the minist er, meaning myself, talks about back to the basics. 1bis minister has never once used those term s.

Never in a public format, never in a private format, have I been quoted as saying, back to the basics. There have been a lot of headlines written, a l ot of people want to cast me as being en thralled with back to the basics. I have never ever said that, and I never will, but I mean the member and others will want to, of course, forge me in that mold , but that is fine. Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I do not know what terminology one uses.

I know that the traditional partners today in my discussions with them are just scared to death, hate the term and yet everybody is searching around for basically a term that captures pure literacy so that individuals, regardless of the new technology coming in, we can talk about critical thinking, we can talk about communication skills, and we can talk about problem solving. We can use any term we want, but unless you know the meaning of the word, unless you can comprehend words put together in a sentence, you are basically not literate , and you are not going to learn.

You are not going to problem solve , and you are not going to be able to do critical analysis, because you have to have a foundation in which to do those things. So if the member wants to move me back 50 years ago into a back-to-basics person, fine, he can call me anything he wants.

All I care about is literacy , nothing more, so that an individual, when they are in grade-well , whatever grade they are in and, indee d, whether they graduate or whether they do not graduate , whatever they do, but if they have the fire and the energy and they want to be lifelong learners and they want to improve their lot by doing things on their own, as more and more will be called to do in our society over the years to come, at least they have the tools to do that The basis of all of that is literacy and language arts.

So if the member wants to know where my-and I am a math-science type of person but, as I have said to others , my focus purely is on language arts and the ability to read and write and communicate and compre hend. Mr. Plohman: I would agree with the minister that literacy is a fundamen tal basic to all learning.

I wonder, though, if the minister is going to attempt in his reform to qualify or to define the term or is he going to generally kind of stay away from this kind of jargon that has been used, perhaps unfairly, to describe either the minister or others who have talked about the basics as if it was what was taught 30 yea r s. And if it unfairly describes that, then I would say, I agree that that is a simplistic way of looking at it. Mr. Manness: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, what I find so difficult, everybody agrees, but there is a mindset out there that you cann ot use the word "basic." Now, I have heard the word foundation skills used. That is now beginning to become growingly offensive to some. I have beard-we are trying to come up with a new term too so we do not offend anybody. But why is it that people in the education community are the most offended? I guess because it conjures up memory, learning by rote . I guess it just conjures something up so negative to a lot of people, or is it something greater than that?

I have not been able to put my finger on that, quite frankly , but there is just an incr edible co ncern within the tr aditional educatio n community that the word basic not be used. Fme. I do not care. I am trying to find a better word, trying to reach out, but the reality is, it has to mean

1356 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May9, 1994 foundation in the sense that you cannot do anything unless you have a foundation. So you better know by the time you are in Grade 3 or 4, you better have a pretty fair understanding as to the principles of mathematics, and you better have -no t that you have to be a rocket scientist by the time you are in Grade 9. I mean, that is foolhardy. I would love to see a system, and I am giving the member some insight where a lot of students by the time they are in Senior 1 or Senior 2, is it really important that they take any math after that?

It may not be, as long as they have good grounding in math. But more importantly than math, of course, in my view, is language arts because you have to be able to comprehend. •

(2040) Today I have questioned whether all the forces within the public school system or even in the independent school system are being, regardless of what your specialization is, whatever it is you are teaching within the setting of the school, whether or not we are giving enough focus to all the dimensions that lead to fuller comprehension, so, yes, that is my bias. Mr. Plohman: Would the minister have any comments on his view of what the basic-I should not use the word now-[intetjection] No, no, I was not going to use it in the form that the minister thinks in terms of basics.

I was going to use it in a diffe rent way. The kind of fundamental concern that the private sector has with the public education system, an agenda that they might have, I would like to get some insight into-as a result of putting together this reform plan and discussions the minister may have had, has had on an ongoing basis with the private sector and so on-what their motivation is, what do they want in students?

I really do not like to hear people getting on to Peter Warren or other situations and saying that the graduates coming out of school are illiterate, and they hired this one person, the person was illiterate. Fust of all, I kind of wonder why they hired the person in the first place with the choice they have nowadays, the number of jobs versus the number of people looking. Did they perhaps hire a student who was not qualified academic ally, pethaps in a different stream in high school completely than what was required?

I just cannot fathom the idea of illiterates looking for jobs that have a Grade 12 graduate certificate nowadays from the university entrance program, for sure. I would think perhaps not for the 04 program, I do not know. We have given them certificates, but surely the.employers know the diffe rence of the kind of people and the kind of courses that people have taken for jobs that they are hiring them. I cannot understand where we get that kind of situation nowadays, employers saying there are illiterates coming looking for jobs and have a Grade 12 diploma.

I do not know what they are really looking for in the criticism of the public school system. It seems to me that it is to their advantage to have critical thinkers, to have analytical minds, to have people who will question and want to look behind something to find the greater knowledge of why things are done a certain way and to question and to propose alternatives that are better-critical thinkers that can analyze like that. I would not think people who can do robotic tasks and produce widgets for employers. What is it that they are complaining about? Mr. Manness: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, the member hears the complaints as well as I do. I am not going to sit here for one moment and protect the business community or defend the business commu nity, because at times I do not really understand what it is they are seeking either. But · let me say very clearly that I too am troubled in many respects with what the Grade 12 graduation certificate does not say. It says basically today, in the minds of many, at least that are reporting to me, that this student has been in the public school system for 12 years or 13 years. Some would say not a lot more.

So consequently the good-faith public school model that we have in place lends itself to a growing degree of criticism and is almost hapless and helpless to def end itself, and that is unfortunate. Because many, virtually all, are graduating without differentiation and, in fairness to them, are presenting their wares, in other words their certificate of graduation and their place in our -

- May9 , 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1357 society, having achieved, to the marketplace. The marketplace is growingly upset because they sense some individ uals are lacking some shortage of achievement in the area of math, science, language, social studies skills , the ability to read, write and communicate and to creatively solve problems. The great discomforting aspect to me is one I believe that tends to be truer more often than I would like to see .

Secondly; it is so unfair to that student who bas made this achievement in their own mind, presented their academic wares, and are turned down or criticized because of the shortage, perceived and real. Now, the business community comes along and they say, well, we want a change. Well, good for them. I mean, what bas gone wrong in the first place if something bas gone wrong? Well, the business community 25-30 years ago began to delegate. I mean, they were once pretty vital partners in the community within the education area. But, of course, individuals like the member for Dauphin (Mr.

Plobman) and myself and many others, we graduated and we bad some higher learning and we convinced people that now if we went into education it was in good bands. So the business community said, well, we do not have to watch as carefully as we used to. Public education is in good bands.

Not indicating for a moment as to whether or not it was, the fact is the wor ld was changi ng, everybody was pu lling away from everybo dy except of course the teachers and the practitioners who were pulling away from the public school system, and pushing more and more upon it, expecting it to be all things to all people and be successful in doing it. All of a sudden, now it seems to be short in some dimensions. Now the business community says, well, they want change. They want back in. They want it righted.

They do not know how to get there though, and they never will, but you better believe they are going to have influence on the say. So let us llnderstand then that they are going to have influence. Are they going to rewrite the script as to what the public school system is going to look like? Absolutely not. Why should they? I mean, the busin ess community is on e player in the community of influence , but will they have influence? Yes, and maybe that is exactly what the public school system needs again. It needs the business community. It needs the home. It needs the church. It needs the service groups.

It needs everybody to take an interest in it again, and when . that happens your public school system again will grow, because then no longer can the Minister of Education and/or the locally elected trustees and powerful associations, whether they are trustees or teachers, have the monopoly of influence. So I am not troubled by it, but believe me I am not also carrying a business agenda with respect to reform. Mr. Plobman: Fll'St of all, I thank the minister for his frankness on that.

I think taken to extreme we see some of the things that are happening in the United States with corporate takeover of schools in some areas, actually managing the schools, and directing to a large extent, as I understand it, even what is being taught in the schools, charging tuition fees and so on. •

(2050) Is this the kind of competition that the minister would like to see developed? He did say on several occasions in different forums and here at the table that competition, be believes, is good, keeps everybody on their toes. It is going to be a positive thing, in his view, for the public education system too, but be talks about doing that in the public domain primarily, as I understand it.

I just want to ask the minister whether be sees this moving tow ards a kind of cor po rate involvement in the public school system in any way, or does be feel that there is absolutely no way that should be an avenue that should be pursued? Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Cbaiiperson, I do not see that type of model coming in here into Canada, certainly into Manitoba. I could not countenance it if it did. I believe in the public school system. I am a product of the public school system. My three oldest children are products of the public school system.

I believe in it, but that does not mean for one moment that it is going to be able to rest on its laurels. It cannot. At this point in time, because the

1358 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May9, 1994 world is moving so quickly, the change that we are engulfed in right now is going to have to be, by necessity, quicker than we may be used to. I think if we do that and we reach out to everybody to once again claim the public school system as part of its own, just not in words but ind eed by actions, and we break: some of the monopolies that exist around it, we will end up with a better system. If we do not do that, then the model that the member is talking about in the U.S. system will find its way here in some form or another.

I mean it is a given because there are despe rate parents out there today who have means and will go to any length to see their children access them if need be .. I have said this many times, and I do not ask the members to accept it-because I say it is the main reason I do not ask them to accept it-but education is power and the great opportunity for so many of our people from lesser advantaged classes or locations is always through the public school system, but to the extent that the level it provides is in any way average or lower, then I say that the great opportunity we talk about just is not there.

The greatest opportunity for those disadvantaged in our society is when the public school system, the standards around it, free access to it, are at the very highest levels. That is then when you can make meaningfully the statement of equal opportunity for all and for anybody in the space of a generation to pull themselves from below average economic status to something average or above. Indeed, that is the foundation of our system. That is why we believe in it, but to give that common effect we had better make it as high quality as possible. Mr.

Plohman: It is an interesting discussion about the system resting on its laurels. I do not know whether that is because governments have not led sufficiently. If you look at this government in the past few years, the Curriculum branch, for example, which should be developing and working with teachers, with parents, with school boards, with students, with all the partners in education to develop and update curricu lum, has been decimated by the government over the last few years. So when the minister talks about, the system cann ot rest on its laurels, I mean, who is really re sting on their laurels here?

What has really been happening ? Would the minister say, would he fault his own gove rnment for perhaps not taking enou gh initiative in this area over the last number of years and in fact failing in that particular role? Mr. Mann ess: Mr. Deputy Chairper son, most definitely not I do not fault the government, and I do not fault anybody particularly. I do know that my statements, per Manitoba, are in keeping-! look at this not so much as a Manitoba Minister of Education, I look at this as a Canadian issue. Yes, I would like to have done better but, I mean, this is not a Manitoba issue, this is a Canadian issue.

The member may like to try and comer me to suggest that our government has not taken a lead I do not accept that. A lot of the work that my prede cessors have done with respect to review are going to be meaningfully used with respect to the reform, and it is all in place. I really do not think we are following anybody in the nation. I have read all of or at least most of what has happe ned in other places. I have seen the gyrations Br itish Columbia has been going through.

I am mindful of Alberta They probably have a curriculum development area that probably is leading the nation in some dimension in the public school system. Mr. Plohman: It was, you mean, or is? Mr. Manness: No, is. We of course are going to want to worlc closer with Alberta and Saskatchewan to the extent they want to work, and I think they do, together, because there is no use reinventing all of this, particul arly in your-what is the word? You cannot use the wo rd "basics" any mor e foundation and skill area, fundamental. So we are trying to do it. No, I will not cast any blame on the government.

I think we are where we should be, but we have to move the pace forward a little more quickly, and we plan to do that. - -

May9, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1359 I just may say, Mr. Deputy Chairpers on, that in discu ssion with the stakeholders I find it so interesting that when they are talking about back to the basics they are not using the word basics. The most interesting part of the discussion that you would have with an educator today, or anybody for that matter, when you talk about the past is, they cannot talk about the past without using the word basic. They will use another word.

As sure as I am sitting here, what they will say parenthetically is, well, I mean, like the old basic, or they will use the word "basic." It will come up almost in eveey third sentence. You cannot get away from talking education today without using the term, even if you do not want to. Even if you want to wash your own mouth out in using it, you end up using it. Mr. Plohman: That is right. People will talk about the most important things as being basic. They may not be the same things as what we would call the traditional basics, but they are fundamental to today.

So they will say, these are basic things that we must concentrate on. I do not have a problem using that word as long as what we are defining is the modem-day basics and not just what was viewed as the three Rs or whatever it was in previous years. Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. We will have to recess this

section of Supply to go to the Chamber for a vote, and we will reconvene after the vote. The committee recessed at 8:59p.m. After Recess The committee resumed at 9:15p.m. (Mr. Bob Rose, Acting Deputy Chaitperson, in the Olair) The Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Rose): Order, please. We will now resume consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Education and Training. We are on line l.(c)(l) . Mr. Plohman: Well, we are not going to, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, get into too much more, I think, here.

There is lots of time in the departmental areas to discuss some of these issues that we are discussing now as we get into the changes in the department and some of the branches of the department, but I just wanted to ask one or two more questions following on what we were discussing before, and that is whether the minister could give some idea about, shed some light as to, what he feels the role or impact of so-called competition in the public school system is supposed to have on the quality of the service that is being provided?

It seems to me that a combination of things are taking place, unless you are talking about resting on their laurels at the present, and they can no longer rest on their laurels. I asked him whether in fact maybe that could not be blamed somewhat on the department not showing leadership and, as a matter of fact, reducing staff in key areas, in curriculum, for example. So the minister is saying we have to get on with changes in a more rapid way than has been customaey in the past, but then be says that there has to be some competition built in.

With cuts and funding that have taken place and so on, I just wanted to know whether be thinks that the system is not teying hard enough, or the people in the system, to do the best job they can with what they have, with the reso urces that they have, which are limited and dwindling in many cases. What is it that the competition is going to do to enhance educational opportunities in the public education system? Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chaitperson, I am not one who is here lobbying for competition per se.

What I am saying is that such incredible structures are built into place right now within public education in Manitoba that if the s e structures cannot be freed a little bit to give and take some of the turf protection, for want of a better word, ultimately competitive models will come into place that will provide a service that in the minds of so me parents will provide an alternative, and maybe one that is more in keeping with their educational philosophy.

I am not advocating for competitive systems; I am saying that they are inevitable if indeed we cannot begin to have more flexibility with respect to the traditional partners. Now, I must say that from a Manitoba perspective, what we are engaged upon as far as discussion and collaboration, I am

1360 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May9 , 1994 led to believe-and these are not my words, but I am told by certain members of some significant associations involved in the process that what we have in Manitoba is a dialogue between groups that does not exist else where. That is all meaningful, and that is all very important. Let us hope that we can continue to see that dialogue bear fruit, but ultimately, at the end of the day, the government, as the lead in education, after they collate all the views, are going to have to come forward with a plan.

I am hoping, and today there is no reason why I should not hope, but today I am hoping that the traditional partneiS and the parents and the business community are all wanting to be suppo rtive of in-broad terms. Naturally, nothing can come for ward that everybody will accept in totality, but that the communi ty at large, just not the edu cation community, but the community at large including the education community can accept. So I am not here to drive the competitive model, never have been. I am just saying that common sense dictates that if you cannot move quickly enough, some other force will grow. •

(2120) The member can sa y, well, if we were in government-and I will put words in his mouth now-we would make su re that no level of funding went to these other systems. We would find a way. We would close it We would make sure. The reality is he cannot do that The reality is legislatively he may be able to do that, but in a free· society he cannot do it because we are free people. People can demonstrate their freedoms in various ways, not the least of which is making sure that in som e fashion ther e is an alter na tive or a competitive education system in place.

So let us take the one that we all I think sense as, in many respects, the most relevant to Canada and to Manitoba and improve it. Mr. Plohman: Those are, by and large, positive statements from the minister regarding the public education system and perll aps shed some light on ·his reference to compe tition, perhaps as a motivation for change is more than any real specific models for it, at least in the first instance included in the so-called blueprint. I am pleased to see the minister characterize the envir o nmen t for change in Ma nitoba as co-operative and positive and perhaps unique.

I think that is a very positive approach for all of us to look at it that way, because I really think it is that, and there is a tremendous desire to be part of innovation and change. I do not sense that there is this kind of resting on laurels mentality.

I just wanted to explore that with the minister a bit as to whether in fact he thinks there is a desire by these entrenched powers, as he talks about them, as being desirous of kind of pushing this whole thrust for change to the side and not wanting to real ly see meaning ful change and improvements, that they want to just keep things as they are type of thing and to protect their turf as the minister said. Has he sensed that is a real problem? I do not re ally get that feeling in talk ing to those organizations, to the trustees, to the TeacheiS' Society.

Although they have their own very strong views, I sense a willingness and a desire to involve particularly parents from all sides. It is almost universal that there has to be more involvement and I think not token involvement, but meaningful invol vement by parents in decision making. It is something that is embraced with open arms almost-welcomed. So I do not know where the minister is getting this id ea or his statement, his basis fo r hi s statement, that in fact there is some kind of monolith here that does not want to move. Mr. Manness: Mr.

Acting Deputy ChairpeiSon, it is a study of human nature more than it is reform. We do not have to look very far. We just have to look into the entrenched positions in the area of health reform to have a real insight into human nature. You are right at this point. We are all saying all the same things and we all want to go to the same goals , but I was asked a question here earlier with respect to empowering parents. Good will and people involvement and you can basically have a scenario which was infinite in size, but when it comes to power, governance - -

May9, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1361 power, there is only so much power. So if you give the parents more, if you give the parents some power, by definition, you have to take away power from somebody else. It is a given; it is an axiom. Well, share power, but if one person has all the power, to use an example, and you want to share it, that means somebody has to give up power. [interjection] Oh, no. I think it should happen and that will be part of the program, but that, then, will be the test of our uniqueness of woddng together and to what extent some will be able to give up some turf protection.

As the Minister of Education, I am prepared to give up some power for changes in other areas, but then let us put out all of the players who now have power and let us see how the ones who are going to lose some power react. Then we will know whether we have meaningful buy into the will to work together for the good of education. Then we will know, because we all, of course, in principle can accept the reform. That is when the rubber hits the road. That is when we will know whether everybody's best interest is the student or to some degree maybe is also their own self-interest.

Without appropriating any of that comment to any group in spe cific, that is a general statement I make. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I do not know that democratic decision making necessarily means loss of power or whether it just means more people involved in making decisions.

It is an interesting view and actually ultimately, if a proposal comes forward that means that parents are going to have, for example, more say in budget decisions for their school or in the hiring of the principal or local curriculum component or whatever the case may be, obviously that means others who wer e previously making those decisions are going to not be able to make them as easily on their own, or they are going to have to share them with someone else. That will be when, as the minister says , the rubber hits the road or the test of what is happening. That is true.

On the other hand, I think if they are involved in the proces s, they buy into the process, they say we are prepared to go where this process takes us and to accept the consequences of the end result of this process, then I do not think there is going to be the kinds of major upheavals or resistance to it in the final analysis if they are committed to change in that regard in that way.

Does the minister still feel that the issue of-after what he is saying today, it almost seems premature to say that the issue of choice has to be at the top of the list here, because even in the workshop at the Parents' Forum it was contained in the same statement about parent involvement as if choice and parent involvement go hand in hand. They were contained in the same statement. I do not see them neces sarily having to go hand in hand. To.the minister, is this issue fundamental to any change? Mr. Manness: Choice can find its way into the dialogue in so many different areas.

Originally when I used the word "choice" in Brandon before Christmas, I did so in the context of saying , look, I am concerned that there is not going to be movement in this system, and that ultimately the only way you can give parents what many are clamouring for today is some option within a larger make-up of school division or school entity or school unit to not necess arily be forced to go to a school. So that is an element of choice, and although it is a secondary priority, it certainly is not one of the burning issues that is keeping me awake at nights.

I still believe that parents have to have, at some additional cost to them, not to the other taxpayers, but some additional cost to them, freedom. That is an element of choice. There are other types of choice too.

There is choice, within schools, of programs, and I would have to think that we are going to have to be able to present that with greater clarity, with greater certainty to some stated goals in education but with a greater understanding by parents at the beginning of the term, not after the end of the school period of time, Grade 12 , when it is too late in many respects, or later on when it is too late. But there are some greater elements of choice certainly as we move into the senior years. •

(2130) Of course then we can give effect to choice in the area of home schooling. I mean, I am not

1362 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May9, 1994 troubled by it under certain conditions, and yet those elements of choice I tell you will not be exercised to the extent that the public school system becomes again the central point and the focus point and the most important institution of the community, just not paying lip service by those of us who are educators, but indeed meaningfully met by everybody, whether they have children in that school or not. Today that is, I dare say, missing. (Mr. Jack Reimer, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Olair) Mr.

Plohman: Certainly there is a great deal of choice within the existing system, a choice within school programming and so on. I would suggest that if parents have a greater say in shaping their local community school that there will be less desire for change, and that will take care of itself or could to a certain extent or to a great extent than the desire to choose a different school because they are dissatisfied with what is happening in their local school.

I think that is something that the minister will obviously have to consider if in fact he is committed to a model that would see more parent power and involvement in decision making. It seems to be a logical outcome, if they do have a greater input that there is going to be less desire to want change or choice in terms of school optiom. I wanted to ask, and maybe the minister could comment on that, but also I am very concerned about something he said on a number of occasions too, and that is, linking funding to education outcomes.

Perhaps he could shed some light on that if in fact it is still something that he as minister thinks is a kind of a relevant way and a fair way of funding the public school system in the province? I think there are many drawbacks to that kind of system and many inequities that can result. We could discuss those at greater length at some point. That is why I am interested in hearing what the minister has to say about it. Mr.

Manness: There is no doubt that today, because public dollars are so scarce in all of the areas of responsibility that governments have today, that there is without exception in the western world greater focus being placed upon how programs are delivering. Evaluations are being done, very difficult within the context of sub jective evaluations, but still they have to be done. So mebody has to ma ke decisions, and education, of course, is not any different from that. In due course I would think results with respect to how schools are doing vis-a-vis are ultimately going to report.

And ultimately the question is, would you want to fund something or a location where it is not working? Would you want to do that? Yes, you will go through whatever changes you can, but ultimately you are going to see-I mean if you are putting into some location an awful lot of money and the results are not there, I do not think it will be the government that will ultimately decide that. I think the parents and the community will want to know that. So it will have some effect.

If the member is trying to trap me by saying, what will be the funding consequences, I say to him that dollars for outcomes is basica lly accountability. It is telling the public the truth as to what is happening at that school or at that school setting. If indeed you tell the people and they have some greater choice to attain education for their students elsewh ere, they will make the move. Why should they not in a free society? Obviously, as they go, the dollars and the pupil grants will go with them. Mr.

Plohman: Well, I guess the point is, if parents are more involved in the setting of the goals and objectives of the school and if the measurement instrument to determine how well the school is performing is measured against those objectives and goals, then it is a fair kind of a way to do it, as to how is the school performing, how is it meeting the goals that the parents and the administration, the principal and the teachers and the students , that they have determined are the important goals, how are we meeting those?

I think if that is the yardstick that is measured, is used, I do not see any great difficulty with that. However, if there is some artificial measurement that is used, that is imposed on that particular -

May9, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1363 school , without consideration of what objectives and goals have been set by that sc hool and the kind of student clientele, or the make-up, socioeconomic condition and so on of the student body is not considered, then it may not be fair to measure them against a common yardstick in all cases. There may be another kind of measuring tool that has to be developed.

Does the minister see an external evalu ation then to determine how well a school is doing, in other words, determining how to determine if the school is meeting the objectives and, therefore, how much funding they should get? If we take this to its logical conclusion, I imagine it would be based then on how well it st acks up in the evaluation as to how much it is going to get in terms of provincial funding. Mr. Manness: Well, the short answer, no.

I cannot see it taking into its logical conclusion that the member may want to drive me, no, but I do see, yes, some outside me asure ment The yardstick will be measured in some of these fundamental or these founda tion sk ills for sure. Now how the community reflects itself in all of the other activity it wants to, hands off, the funding will be there nevertheless, but again, in those very, very important areas of education, yes, a community, I would think, would want to-those parents that are interested. You know, parents are not interested in all settings.

To the extent they are though, and they set a goal for the sc hool, in those fundamental courses , the department will want to know what obje ctives are in place. Ultimately, if the school is not attaining those goals or those objectives, then I would have to think the Minister of Education of the day will want to know why and may have to take steps accordingly, but to withhold funding, no.

As long as you are open and accountable, and the parents say, my goodness, I do not like what is happening in this school, I do not want my child to go here, well, the dollars will go with that person to whatever the school of choice becomes. That is opening up the system. That is the issue. I am not talking vouchering. I mean, I do not have time for that. That is something that I do not think works particularly well in ver y many settings, but you have to have some additional freedom today. I mean there is nothing more important than an education of a young person. Mr.

Plohman: Is the minister talking about taking those funds within a division or from one division to another? Mr. Man nes s: Well, Mr. Acting Deput y Chairperson, I cannot answer that because our thinking has not gone beyond the principle that I have expounded. I would have to think that for some type of normalcy, you have to recognize that there are school boundaries. I mean in the area of nonresident fees, we have not even discussed yet. Mr.

Plohman: The minister did make a public statement about eliminating-it seems, at least it was interpreted that way-boundaries insofar as choice, that students would be able to, or parents would be able to choose the school that they wanted to atte nd, irrespective of boundaries, without having to pay additional fees. That was the way it came acros s. •

(2140) Is that something that was just amusing at the time but nothing that the minister is committed to, or is that unfairly attributed to him 7 Mr. Manness: Again, I made the comment in the context of within division and the expe ctation that divisions are going to be larger in the urban context. In the rural context, to me, the freedom of choice is more easil y provided throug h technology, through the adoption of techn ology by way of distance education. Mr.

Pl ohman: When the minister talks about these fundamental standards or fundamental skills or basic skills that should be measured, is he talking only about academic sta ndards or is he talking about manipulative standards? There are many different kinds of courses. Of course the minister prefers to recognize I guess, after some of the statements he has made, that the whole area of apprenticeship has to be ex plored and opened up, vocational education,

1364 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May9, 1994 technical education. De pending on the nature of the student body, there could be a valid outcome from testing that is quite different from one to another in terms of how well a school is doing. In fact, a school could be doing very well with a much lower number of academic students, for example, than another might have. We cannot measure them all with the same yardstick then, in terms of how well they are do ing. Does the minister agree with that? (Mr. Deputy Chailperson in the Chair) Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, in theory I agree with him.

I am sure I would not swprise him or anybody to indicate that this is a tough area, but still we believe that in some areas those referred to in the Throne Speech Debate or in the throne speech have to lend themselves to some greater me asurement. Whether that is grading, it has to have some greater description to it in the form of references and perf ormance levels so that the parents understand, because parents are asking. They want to know. I know there is another point of view out there- well, let us define the student totally in all of their capabilities and all their weaknesses through subjective means.

I am sorry. If l have to decide between one or the other-let the subjective comments come. That is good information. That is great information. As a parent I would like to see it-but I am sorry, unless I know what the benchmark is, I do not know how my child rates relative to the rest Today people want to know that, so there is going to have to be some measure. We are trying to find a way that is meaningful, cert ainly meaningful and yet carries with it some greater degree of measure and is subjective to. Mr.

Plohman: I just want to say, I do not know that there are a lot of people that disagree with the idea for greater definition and benchmarks being necessary and defined and communicated so that everyone is aware of what they are and how their child is doing in rel ation to those benchmarks. I think that is some thing that all of us as parents would like to know.

Of course if our child is not meeting those standards or up to those particular benchmarks at the ages for which they are established, then we would like to know what is being done to get them to their capacity, moving as quickly as they can or developing to their own capacity. If they cannot meet those benchma rks, then what are they meeting and what kind of-I do not know if I should call it remedial action-but special individual kind of programming is being put in place to move them along as quickly as possible? Individual programming is necessary, and it seems to me is fundamental to this.

That does not mean we throw out standards, but it means that every student advances at a different rate and learns in a diff erent way. What concerns me, of course, is that this is where it ties into funding. If we do not have the resources made available, it makes it very difficult for us to meet the needs of all of those students. I think that might be one of the reasons why the minister never endorsed the parents' guide on gifted education, for ex ample.

That was develo ped after a lot of work in the department and then is left languishing, as I understand, from talking to Joanne Bevis and not endorsed by the government . It was not talking about an elitist type of education just for the brightest kids or anything. It is talking about enabling every student to develop to their potential, enrichment for every student. Really what that involves is individual programming. Yet that was just tossed right out, and I do not know why the minister did that, but I wanted to know if there is any linkage with what I have just said. Mr.

Manness: Well, the member has said it correctly in his last breath he drew when he talked about individual programming. Who in our society has the right to individual programming? In the last 25-year model when government has been borrowing money hand over fist, we led a lot of people to believe they had the right to individual programming. Where did this word "needs" come from? It came from the last 25 years when governments have borrowed money hand over fist to provide. So now I inherited a model which was always add-on, add-on. What I am saying is, hey, I understand the argument from those parents of - -

May9, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1365 exceptional children (gifted). I understand the arguments well. You have got a base which was starting to diminish in size, and yet you had this program hanging from here, this program hanging here, one over here, one here and you have all the ad hockery around that and the base could not sustain it, because individual programming means exactly that, individual programming. It means specialization; it means additional resources. It means whatever it takes. Today we no longer have the resources. So let us again rebuild the foundation.

Some would say let us reinvent education, but let us rebuild the foundation so that indeed we can move everybody along at a higher level as long as we can and then let us do the streaming at a later period in time which will really chall enge , sign ificantly challenge , those who are exceptional and however defined. Mr.

Plohman: This gets right back to the structure that the minister talked about earlier, that he talked to students, and he found some who wanted more structure, tending to support his view of the world, I guess, he said, something like that, then others who wanted to have complete freedom like a university setting, where they could come and go when they felt like it. As long as they were meeting their requirements, I guess, who should worry about it?

I guess it is a question of, at what age do they get that kind of freedom 7 Do you have complete structure right to Grade 12, as we know it, or do you all ow greater freedom and therefore individual responsibility, particularly for some students who have proven that they can function under that kind of situation at a much earlier age? Therefore, you do not have to have all of those additional resources.

The minister says individual programming, just by its very nature is going to cost a lot more, and we just cannot afford it A lot of this comes about as a result of allowing students to undertake individual initiative to explore enriched activities and undertake research and so on, and they are quite capable of doing it It just means that they have to be given the means to do it and the flexibil ity in their timetable to do it, as long as the standards that they are meeting for the basics are there.

They have met those, and they are ready to move on to apply them, to problem solve , to develop models and applied situations for that knowledge. It seems to me that we do not have enough of that freedom in the system at the present time to allow those students who can function independently to in fact do that. They have to sit in that structure and go over and over the same stuff that they know with their eyes closed long before the teacher opened their mouth. Mr. Manness: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, the member sets himself up as an advocate for a group with whom I also have great empathy, but a policy statement by itself by the ministry is not going to do very much. I am as troubled by the lack of challenge for some of the students as he is, but I can tell the member, I am even more troubled by the lack of challenge what I sense is the vast student body.

I am sorry, I have to in my view-my mandate is to deal with the greater number and to challenge them at a higher level so that they will be meaningfully productive in a world that I am afraid and I am very fearful is going to become very tough. Government will be helple ss, even if it is an NDP government, to do very much. We have no alternative but to take the vast majority of our students and equip them with the best possible skills we have, because the world I see coming will dictate that half of them are going to have to find their own employment. So they are going to have to be up to the task. •

(2150) I know we talk about the world of employment, but we never talk about self -employment, do we? But it is coming. So I know, with respect to the gifted, and I say, where you got that special teacher in the cl assroom today, that special teacher who has that ability still will draw out of those gifted kids, even in spite of the programming restraints, still will chal lenge those kids at a higher le vel . But parents are going to be called upon to do their bit, and many are, many are, but they are going to have to do quite a bit also. I can change the policy. I could have put the policy out. I do not think it would have made

13 66 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May9 , 1994 anybody happier though, if I did not have a bunch of money to follow it or if I started shifting money from here to there in support of that policy, and that was my dilemma. Mr. Plohman: Well, the minister bit on what I thought was the major reason for this not coming out, and that was money.

It is bard to come in with this program, with this policy even though it involves parents getting more involved in the education of their children, understanding bow they can get involved, that was a parent's guide, but I think the minister thought be would genemte a grea t de al mo re demand for additional programming, and it was clear that he was cutting back in funding to the school system. How could he be putting out something like this that create greater demands? So he felt that he should not go forward with it. I do not know that it would have led to that.

I think it might have led to a more educated parent body generally who therefore would get more involved in the education of their child ren, which is something we all want to see. It is not just aimed at exceptional children, although some people would say all children are exceptional or gifted, as we call them. It was not just aimed at that, that group. It was aimed, if you look through it and if you talk to the people who developed it, it is aimed at all children.

The minister talked earli er about his concern about problem solving, and I am simply saying to the minister that this leads to activities that allow children of all abilities to apply some of those basic skills in a way, in a problem-solving situation, an applied way. That is what this does and so, therefore, I do not see it being at odds with the concern that the minister expressed there as a result of that test that took place. He says we have to challenge them all.

I could not agree more with that statement, and I do not believe that this should be equated with chal lenging only a small number of exceptional children. However, I will leave that. The minister may want to make some closing comments. I have said enough on this for tonight I think we can move on to some other areas where others can get involved insofar as the discussion is concerned. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I did want to make, just very briefly before we pass this line, quick reference to a couple points.

The first was, when the minister was talking in terms of that public perception of education where there was quite a bit of discussion about public perception of education, you made specific reference to a Gmde 12 gmduation certificate. I have bad at least one individual who bad come up to me and had talked about his son and the gmduation certificate that his son bad and was unable to read or write or was illitemte. I am wondering if the minister could give some sort of indication whether or not that is in fact the case and to what degree. Mr.

Manness: Well, I cannot quantify it, but it is happening too often and too frequently. It is happening more than it should be. I will not stamp or label anybody illitemte, I have no way of doing that, but I do know that a lot of students are moving-there is no policy of no-fail provincial ly -but I know a number of students are moved continually through the system, and I question really what they do know in some respects, and many are otherwise. I cannot quantify it, but it is happening too frequently to satisfy me. Mr.

Lamoureux: In the discussions that I have had with respect to back to basics, if you like, or fundamental skills- An Honourable Member: It is that bad word. Mr.

Lamoureux: That bad word as the member for Dauphin and the minister has talked about, the fundamental skills then, I reflect in terms of why it is that there seems to be that push, and as much as we might not necessarily like to acknowledge that there is a problem , I am of the opinion that there is, in terms of there is a public perception that is out there and I think it is widely shared that we are not receiving the type of education that we could be receiving, and one of the primary reasons why the whole discussion of educational reform is coming up.

Make reference to standards, standard exams, particularly the maths exam, if you like. Parents indicate, or I should say a parent-! had one -

May9, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1367 teacher who indicated to me that you have a curriculum of maths and a certain number of hours set out that they are supposed to be teaching maths, yet be is not aware of any other colleague math teacher of his that actually is able to teach the number of curriculum hours that be or she is told to teach. The minister somewhat frowned on that statement.

Maybe I can ask the minister that there is a set number of hours to teach math, particularly say Grade 9, and I am wondering if be could comment if in fact the curriculum does allow for a teacher to teach that many hours. Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the deputy tells me that in high school we prescribe that a 11 0-120 hours are to be in place for one credit. That is a guideline. Most sc hools follow the guidelines. Some do not, some ex ceed that. I see a former principal here who I know would e nsure that those guidelines were followed.

It bas been brought to our attention that there are some schools that are below the guideline, an d that are signif icantly below, and right today are questioning what authority we have, questioning the authority for the Department of Education to have a guideline. In other words, in their view there is nothing in place. They can teach as many as they want for one credit. You can bet that issue will be addressed when the legislation comes forward to deal with or to reflect the blueprint. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Deputy Cbaitperson, I want to bring it back in terms of that public perception, if you will.

Public perception that is there, I believe at least in part, is held because of that lack of confidence on some of those fundamental skills. We can talk in ter ms of being able to communicate, reading, writing, to speak, to listen, in terms of communication. We can talk in terms of some of the numeracy or basic elementary math problems and so on. I have bad numerou s presentations saying, look, the curriculum, there seems to be a lot of additional pressure being put onto the curriculum from outside groups . •

(2200) I think in terms of, there was the Pedlar report, where there was a recommendation, for example, that do me stic violence be incorpor ated the curriculum. I recall the Manitoba Intercultural Council recommendation that combatting racism be incorporated into part of the curriculum. I have had discussions with a number of teachers, and that is why I am somewhat surprised by the minister's remark that, generally speaking, schools are, in fact, hitting that 11 0 hours, by and large.

I plan to further look into that because it does surprise me, but I am wondering whether or not the whole issue of number of hours is being discussed or a part of the curriculum, discussions that the minister is curre ntly going on with. Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Before the minister answers that, may I seek what the will of the committee is, seeing that the hour is after ten o'clock. Let us carry on? Okay. We will carry on for now. Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairpers on, we have not focused in that area per se, but we will be.

Our dialogue will come forward and we will ask the partners to reflect on the school day, school year firstly, the school day, and to suggest -and again the government is going to be most concerned about those core sub jects, and to help us decide the proper amount of time in a year to devote to them. If a community-but I dare say, in the same breath, the time that governments now are going to force mandatorily sub jects on the public school system and/or areas, I think those days are just about over.

If we are going to give the comm unity again the say back with respect to the school, in wanting to see itself reflected in its school-not the school system, its school-then you have to give them some choice, choice of programming, outside of what I consider to be the very important core areas. So government itself is going to have do a rethink about imposing yet more compulsory courses of study and focused areas on the public school system. Mr. Lamoureux: The bluepr int that the government is going to be bringing forward in June, are you anticipating bringing forward the basic fundamentals, the basic skills? Mr.

Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the throne speech said as much. That was the essence of the comment of the throne speech.

1368 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May9, 1994 Mr. Deputy Chairperson : Shall the item pass? Mr. Plohman: Just one question. I understand from talking to some groups that, and the minister can tell me if this is correct, that their statement was that the independent living skills or Skills for Independent Living course that was just made compulsory in the public education system over the last couple of years, has not been made compulsory for some of the independent schools . Is that correct? Mr. Manness: Well, at this point in time, it is a compulsory course.

I mean, what it will look like at the end of refOIDl, I do not know, but I am led to believe it is a compulsory course through all system s. I know there was some leeway at the beginning as to semest er and full-year systems or some schools and/or areas were granted a year reprieve because of a-some took it. That is right. If to some it is not a full stand-alone credit, they had to show where they had integrated it into some oth�r courses, so maybe they had integrated the subject material into other courses . Mr. Plohman: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, that minister is getting at the issue here, and that is, some schools, I believe independent schools, were allowed to do this. I do not know, can the minister give us some examples where it did not have to be taught as a stand-alone course and that it could be shown at-and I would like to ask the minister how much of it, 70 percent, 80 percent, 90 or 100 percent was being taught in other courses? Therefore, was it necessary to have it as a separate course? Mr. Manness: I would have to think it would all have to be taught.

One example for sure in the public school system and it had to-the Glenlawn Colleg iate did it, but they did it without permission. Permission has to be granted for it to occur anywhere, independent or public school system . , Mr. Plohman: And in the private school system? [interjection] Well , the minister is assuming my question. He gave me one example of a school that did not offer it on the basis that they had incorporated it into another course or into other courses, Glenlawn Collegiate in the public school system .

What examples can he give where he has given permissi on for independent schools to in fact not have to offer it as a separate course because it is allegedly being incorporated into all other sub jects? Mr. Manness: I cannot answer that question, but I will be glad to attempt an answer when we move into the school program area. I do not have that information right now. Mr. Plohman: Well, that is fair enough, Mr. Deputy Chairperson. Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Shall the item pass? The item is accor dingly passed;

(2) Other Expenditures $319,500-pass. l. (

d) Human Resource Services

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $351 ,700--pass. Mr. Lamoureux : We are still on (d)? Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Yes. Mr. Lamoureux: I just want to ask the minister, a while back there was the decentralization effort that the government took upon itself. Can he give some sort of indication in terms of any additional decentralized positions that have gone out? The Textbook Bureau has already moved, relocated, but if there is anything else. Mr. Manness: When the member talks about the incredible successful decentralization area, I guess he is talking about all of gove rnment but specifically in education.

Well , the example that he uses certainly is the last one that I am aware of within education. Are we looking around for other candidates to decentralize in an active fas hion? No. Yet, if there is a smaller unit that today, with the technology being what it is, we can consider as a candidate to be decentralized, we will. This department has made a very honourable commitment over the years to decentralization. Some 7 4 staff years have been decentralized to rural Manitoba. The Independent Studies Program in Winkler is just an incredible success.

We are doing things more efficiently at lower cost and servicing better then we ever were. There are some great success stor ies with respect to decentralization but right now, per the first phase - -

May 9, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1369 of decentralization, education has honoured its commitments to the whole global process . Mr. Lamoureux: Aga in, I am drawing from memory . I understood the correspondence branch was also decentralized? Mr. Manness: Yes. Mr. Lamoureux: Yes. And there was, at the time, some concern with respect to the costs of that not neces sarily being as efficient if it was located in the city of Winnipeg, primarily because the number of individuals involved in that particular program were overwhelmingly urban in the city of Winnipeg. Mr.

Manness: The correspondence pro gram, now called the Independent Studies Program , moved to Winkler and the evaluation that we are receiving is very strongly supportive of the location and the service provided from that location. •

(2210) Those that have been seeking services from the old correspondence branch, that number had been trending down for a decade long before this move was made, so I do not know what parallel the member is trying to draw, but I say to him that we believe we are servicing ev ery client in correspondence as well as we were and better. The member must reme mber that correspon dence in the first case, I dare say, was probably put into place as a rural outreach.

There were greater opportunities for specialized c ourses in many of your larger urban schools than ever existed in rural Manitoba, so the correspondence branch, although it reaches out to all Manitobans, certainly for decades had a greater call on it on a pro rata basis by rural people . Mr. Lamoureux: There are mor e rural individuals involved with the corresp ondence branch than urban currently? Mr.

Manness: No, the total number that use the services basically represent the rural-urban spl it, but the subject material that the 40 percent rural area used were your fundamental areas-- again, talk about the core areas in many respects-which were the most important areas of service. So . to take that out into a rural context I do not think made any difference to urban users-o r has the member beard complaints? Indeed, they are to service all Manitobans the best way possib le. Mr. Lamoureux: No, not offhand. I have not neces sarily heard the comp laints.

I can just recall that when there was the decentralization, there were a couple of areas within education that were being questioned. The teacher certification branch, I believe, which went out to Minnedosa was one, and this particular branch, the correspondence branch, because of the number of people that were using it within the city and the material that was necessary. At least at that time, it was a concern. I am just mostly trying to find out if in fact that concern was validated through complaints or anything of this nature , but I understand that the response to that is no. Mr.

Deputy ChairpeiSon, I did want to move on in terms of affirmative action and ask the government what their objectives have been with affirm ative action and this whole area. Mr. Manness: I do not know how specific the member wishes to be, but as of the middle of March this year, we have 24 employees who declare themselves to be aboriginal. We have basically four designated affirm ative action cl assifications within the fiiSt category, the most populous being the women classification at 463- this is April now, this is coming in disabled 20, and visible minority , 14. (Mr.

Bob Rose, Acting Deputy CbairpeiSon, in the Clair) Mr. Lamoureux: There are supposed to be objectives that the government bas, and not knowing necessarily the time frame of what it is he just finished indicating to me, I am wondering if the minister could state to the committee what the objectives of the department are for this area. Mr. Manness: I am not sure we have quotas per se. I can tell you what the objectives are . We are responsible for our manageiS who are responsible for implementing affirm ative action strategies and maintaining commitment to the affirm ative action program.

The government does not have specific targets. We never have bad. This government does not deal in that fashion.

1370 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 9, 1994 Mr. Lamoureux: The minister indicated, the numbers that he gave me were 24 aboriginal, four designated affirm ative, 20 disabled, 14 visible minorities and 463 women. Where is be drawing this from? Is this just an overall report from the Department of Education, or are some of these more recent in tenns of hiring replacements in vacant positions? Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chailperson, in keeping with the general objective, we keep track of these numbers and ask people to declare where they might fall.

So these are our running tabs of where we believe and how it is we believe we are meeting the objectives. Mr. Lamoureux: Maybe the minister can indicate how many staff years would have been filled over the last year. Mr. Manness: I cannot provide that at this moment, in spite of the urgings of my bench mate from the House. I just cannot do that. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chair person, maybe the minister could take it upon himself to get me those actual numbers.

You know, if you are talking about implementing an affirmative action program, we should get some sort of indication other than, here is what we curre ntly have. That does not give us an indication whether or not you are committed to affinnative action. If you indicate to me that there are so many positions that have been filled, and out of those positions-then there might be something there. I would just indicate to the Minister of Education if be could provide that infonnation, it would be most beneficial. Mr.

Manness: We will do our best to give a little bit more definition, in response to the member's question. The Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Rose): l.( d)

(2) Other Expenditures $55, 900- pass. l. (

e) Financial and Administ rative Services

(1) Salaries and Employee Benefits. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Acting Deputy Chair person, in this area here, I was wanting to get some · sort of a better idea from the government about actua l costs, if you li ke. Under Ac tivity Identification, it says that it represents the government by acting as a liaison between the department and a variety of other departments , gov ernment agencie s, organizations and individuals. There have been, in the past, responsibilities dele gated down to the Department of Education, possibly from other departments.

One of the constant criticisms that I have received is the fact that the schools are performing some responsibilities for which other departments should be responsible for. I am wondering if the Minister of Education could comment on that. •

(2220) Mr. Mannes s: I think , Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the member is kind of misunderstanding what this unit does. I mean, the issue he brings up is important and should be part of discussion that is coming forward, but this is purely financial and administra tive service. This is the controllership function that every department has to have in place, or otherwise you have chaos. Somebody has to be in control, and we have no choic e but to-this is Mr. Glen before us negotiating with the Department of Northern Affairs, National Defence with respect to the Brandon school situation.

This is preparing Treasury Board submissions. This is the real routine, but a very important area of departments . Mr. Lamoureux: So, again, just for clarification, this is not the area in which the minis ter would be able to indicate what sorts of costs are going towards a program- Mr. Manness: That is the next section. Mr. Lamoureux: The next section? The last time I took the minister at his word, he told me, not now, Kevin, to stand up. Well , I will save that question then for that point in time. Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolsele y): I wanted to ask about one of the Expe cted Results of this department or this

section of the department, and that is the "centralized, comprehensive , integrated inform ation system ." I wonder if the minister would like to perhaps, first of all, introduce us to that topic . What is expected in this year? - -

- May 9, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1371 The minister may be aware that I have asked questions on this in earlier years, particul arly dealing with the million-dollar pilot pro ject which supposedly was on the book two years ago, which was conducted in conjunction with a number of school divisions and which did not seem to go anywhere. It did not seem to have any final conclusion. So I am interested to see it here again on the books, and I am interested in knowing what is to be recorded, what the ultimate pwpose of this. Whom is it being designed for?

Who will have access to it, and whether in the case of this particular expected result, whether it is still in the pilot pl anning stage or are we now moving to completion of a program which was peihaps begun two years ago? Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chailperson, the member asks a vecy good question. This is an area worthy of question, but I would think it probably follows more appropriately under the next section, 1. (0 Management Inform ation Services. Ms. Friesen: Just speaking for the record. I was replying to the minister in saying that on page 28 under the item that we are on now,

section l. (e), that this is listed. I am happy to discuss it in a later section, if that is more app ropriate, but it does say that it is here. Mr. Manness: Leadership of it is here. The cost associated with the pro gramming is in the next section. So we can discuss it here or on page 31. It makes no difference. So let us move into it now, then, Mr. Acting Deputy Chailperson. Certainly this is one of the large initiatives of the department.

It is going to tty and be ready for the ed reform document, but it is also going to try and give education per se a greater insight at any po int in time into a student's perform ance, indeed, a student's activity within education. Probably outside of education there will be a close-and the reason I remember this, when we were in Treasury Bo ard, the reason we accepted the concept was that we had to have a better undeistanding of our students as they came forward from the communi ty.

Not only was this dealing with educational expectations, but, importan tly, some of the social requirements and/or realities of that student. We just sensed we had to have a better profile of our students at any point in time. Unless we moved into the modem age, pro grammin g-wise , we just did not know. I mean, we have a lot of our students today who are moving around from school to school in the period of time. There is an element of financial control here that can be used too, but that was not the main reason that we brought forward this program . There will be accountability questions.

It will set into place an allowance for providing a database for provincial tests once they come into being. But the pwpose of ms is to provide again centralized, comprehensive and integrated information regarding school divi sions, schools, school personnel, school facilities, courses and students. We sense that, unless we have this in place, we will not really ever get to the crux of more effective programmin g. It has been a desire within the department; my predecessors have been pushing it hard. I look at one of my predecessors, the member for Roblin-Rossell (Mr. Dedcach).

In his capacity as minister he saw the benefit, and we have been building this slowly in the place over the course of the last three years. When completed, we expect the system will provide the department with information in the following areas: student tracking inform ation, and I alluded to that, teacher workload information, educational staff counts, student perform ance, as I mentioned before.

It will provide some key indicator information important to the department, as we do a diagnosis of what changes should be brought forward in programming and ev aluating educ ational accountability and, as I have said before, results. So these indicators will change, but again, as I have used already some of the example s, it will allow us to track student mo bility, outcome analysis of, again, specially funded progra ms, student achievement versus socioeconomic factors-and I know the member is more than interested in that dynamic. So it just has a myriad of opportun ities, in our view, to evaluate and react

1372 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 9, 1994 to the results more meaningfully. Today we are reacting to a system that some would say should have been reacted to 15 years ago. I dare say, if we had had a database like this, we would have reacted more quickly. Of course, this is what is happening in the modem world. It is happening in the corporate world; it is happening in public sector service; it is happe ning across the country-across the world, I should say.

There is no reason why it should not happen in education, because inf ormation is knowledge , and knowledge, hopefully, will allow you then to make a reaction, an informed reaction, if you are to make one more quickly. Of course, that is what the parents are calling for ultimately today: a system that is evolutionary, not in the context of a generation, but in the context of their own children being in school. I do not blame them . Ms. Friesen: It raises a number of issues. Perhaps I will start with one of the issues I raised earlier, and that was what happe ned to the pilot pro ject.

Where are the results from that pilot project? Are they available to the schools that participated? Are they available to the public? What lessons were learned by the department in that pilot project? Mr.

Manness: Well, yes, the first phase was completed , and, of course, we did not learn an awful lot out of that because we would have had to fo llow it with another couple of phases, but the first phase basically gave us a database of inf ormation on divisions, schoo ls, courses and sub jects, and what we went after, of course, were courses and sub jects , and that is what we learned basically in the first phase of the pilot. If the member wants a copy of the pilot and the results from that, we will provide that. •

(2230) Ms. Friesen: Yes, I would be interested in seeing that. Would the minister also have the inf ormation available at the moment on the cost of that pilot proje ct? Is it in1eed the $1 milli on that has been suggested? Mr. Manness: It was done several years ago. We will endeavour to-we did it in-house . It was not even an add-on. We did not even go to Treasury Board for a separate allocation for it. We just did it some years ago, but ultimately when we get this whole system into place, it is not going to come cheap ly, but it will be in place for generati ons. Ms.

Friesen: I assume that many of the costs of that particular program were in fa ct borne by school divisions , so that when the minister says that it was not an add-on here, I assume that in some cases in school divisions in the preparation of the material, in the preparation of the answers to questions that the department posed, that was wher e the costs wer e incurred, because this particular pilot project, as I unde rstand the minister, dealt with the schools rather than the individuals and that what we are looking at in the second phase now is a transition to looking at individual students and individual programs .

Mr. Manness: Well, this is a partnership at work. I mean, the school divisions want this information also, and we have partnered quite well with other institutions. I can think of the assessment model we brought in. That was a partnership between municipalities and the government, and we took a larger share of the cost for a while and now the municipalitie s, once we are done, are taking back their traditional share.

Yes, it might have been some incumbency upon a division to delegate a responsibility of providing inf ormation to the department, but ultimately this inf ormation will be used to the betterment of all, and so as a leader this department took the chal lenge, but schools were very, very willing participants because they saw the long-run benefit to themselv es. Ms. Friesen: My issue was not with partnership or nonpartnership, but it was trying to estimate the cost of a pilot proje ct. There is a number which is floating around in gossip term s. I do not expect the minister to have it now.

He did seem to me in his response to be suggesting that this had been done at minimal costs , and I was simply suggesting that there was a broader sharing of those costs than the minister was indicating. I want to look at the second phase of that project where, as I understand the minister to say, we are - -

May 9, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1373 now moving to look beyond the school and the division to develop a planning tool, a database for the records of individual students and teachers and workloads and program outcomes. Could the minister perhaps elaborate on that a little more? Are we, for example , looking at developing a student number which will accompany a student throughout the Manitoba system? Mr. Manness: Mr.

Acting Deputy Chairperson, staff infonn me that, to give meaning to a system such as this, one bas to seriously contemplate the concept of a student number, no differently, I guess, than a driver's licence in many dimensions , and a health number, social insurance number, Wheat Board number. Today, if you want to be identified, you are almost always identified by number. My university student number was 55-; I forget mine. We are just beginning the process of buil ding. We have an awful lot more wOik to do here.

This, again, is not our No. 1 priority, and yet we just see bow its time bas come and bow it should be part of, ultimate ly, the whole refonn system . Ms. Friesen: At the end of this pro ject, whom does the minister anticipate will be using it? It is a p lanning tool for the department Will the material be accessible to people outside the department, for example, school divisions, perhaps other public planning bodies in the province ? Mr. Manness: We have not crossed those boundaries yet, but I cannot anticipate how this could be anything but public information. I am talking about the base.

I am not talking about specific students in the sense that there are student numbers to deal with as compared to individuals. I would think to have full value this should be fairly accessible to all wanting to help out the process of education. Ms. Friesen: One of the issues that we looked at last year and that I never found a very satisfactory answer to was the issue of aboriginal students and the counting of aboriginal students in the provi nce. We dealt with it in the context of the Native Education branch, but, as I remember, the pilot project did look at the question of aboriginal. I asked that question.

Now I am wondering if the department is going to continue with that question or whether it is going to come at that issue of deciding upon the numbers and needs of aboriginal students within the Manitoba system in a different way. Mr. Manness: I am told that the member asked the question more or less the same last year. The member was troubled with the lack of definition around the response, using her words. I do not know if I have much more to offer. Certainly, at this point, we are not contemplating trying to set up a subset within the global population, if that is what she is alluding to.

We just have not set into place any methodologies around that identifying group. Thus, today, is the member saying, well , could you contemplate doing it in the future? Well, I will have to listen to the argum ents. But those certainly have not in any way been presented to me at all. I say honestly, if they bad, I would say so. They have not. (Mr. Deputy Cbaitperson in the Olair) Ms. Friesen: The issue was again an issue of planning for which this p roject obviously bas a significant function.

A department which bas a Native Education branch, whose purpose is to serve native students, one would anticipate, might have a need for knowing where the native students are, what levels they are at, what the graduation rates are, what the social and economic needs and academic needs of the students are in different parts of the provi nce. So it is related to the provision of native education through this dep artment. How are those two elements going to be connected? Is there any prospect in this pl anning tool here of being of some use to the development or furthering of aboriginal education in the provin ce?

Mr. Manness: We are just into the developmen t of this system in very rudimentary terms. I mean, '93-94 was the ft.rst year we really began to do some measuring. Perhaps eventually in due course we will attempt to do in-depth analysis by breakout of some dimension. I am sure if this system is properly built, as we are trying to do, it will lend

1374 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 9, 1994 itself to some specialized measurement But right today we are just trying to build the system . Ms. Friesen: Do you anticipate includin g the federal schools in Manitoba in this? Mr. Manness: Unless we can get into some data base-s haring protoco l with the fe deral government , which they have been pretty reluctant to do--l mean, in some other social areas, we have tried to see whether the fe deral government would share information and have been flatly refused.

Not in education areas, but in some of the social programming areas, we have been trying to determine commonality of client with no support whatsoever from the fe deral government. I would have to think that is not going to change . Ms. Friesen: What is the planning horizon for this project? When do you anticipate that it will be available for use by the department and by the other areas of public policy that you anticipated bef ore? •

(2240) Mr. Manness: We are having an add-on come on every few months , but I would have to think we are still two, three years away from legitimately being able to say this system is up and running in a fas hion that we want to see it. Ms. Friesen: This is going a little beyond this line , but I wonder if we could look at page 31 and identify the cost of this particular program. Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it is the lion 's share of appropriation l. (e), and I believe that for '94-95 I think I saw the number $993,000. · So it is virtually all of that. Ms. Friesen: Fine. Thank you. Mr. Plohman: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, has the assistant deputy minister's office changed in terms of its role of the reorganization? Mr. Manness: No, it has not. Mr. Plohman: So the objectives and functions listed in the reorganization book on this are just more detail of the same thing that we see in the Supplementary Estimates. I was looking through this and seeing that objectives are much more delineated here in detail and specifics than we have here . Is this just an attempt to provide mor e specific inf ormation to the department or to those who are being communicated this inform ation as opposed to any change in role?

I understand that the minister is saying , yes, that is the fact. I just wanted to ask if the inf ormation that is contained in here reflective of this ye ar's management thrust, or is this based on the last year 's and has been updated for this pa rticula r yea r since the reorganization took place? Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we would always try to improve re porting. You always try to improve to provide more inf orm ation rather than less. Yes, we are trying to enhance the financial controllership function.

The member reads the Provincial Auditor's report, and he knows that every few years the Provincial Auditor comes around to another department and finds a couple of areas where enhancement of reporting and/or methods of accounting can be improved or changed, and that is reflected in the additional inform ation . Mr. Plohman: Is this office involved at all in the work of interdepartmental committees, for example, the ones dealing with the co- ordination of services? Mr. Manness: The short answer is no. Mr. Plohman: That is it right now. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr.

Deputy Chairperson, I wanted just to go back to that one question I had asked earlier. I am not entirely convinced-when I read through the objectives it talks in terms of: to provide leadership in all areas of departmental financial administrative requirements. Then I go under Activity Identification: and represents the government by acting as a liaison between department and a variety of other departments, gover nment agencie s, organizations and individuals.

What I was trying to ask the minister, I think, is quite relevant to this particular area, and that is the impact of other departments on the Department of Education and potential in some of the offloading that has occurred in the past. One , for example, that has come to me in the past was the medical services fo r special needs children,

whereas the responsibility is given to the Department of - -

May 9, 1994 LEGISLA11VE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 1375 Education, yet the funds do not necessarily follow. Just looking at it, again, it just seems that because this is the area where there is supp osed to be liaison between the different dep artments, this might be the most app ropriate time, not the actual dollars, but we are talking about the concept. Mr. Manness: Again, I ask the member specifically to his issue of interrelationship with other departments , for sure it is not in this area, it is in the program area, but I will try and be more specific as to what be sees here.

The member has hear d me talk about assessment, reform, the very basis of education and finance. Whom do we interact with? The Department of Rural Develo pment. This is a financial area, right? We interact with the Department of Finance on a number of education -we ll, for instance, Department of Finance even on the Public Schools Finance Board. I mean, all that money that is brought in by way of education support levy. So we are interacting with the Department of Finance. We are interacting with the Department of Gov ernment Services on leases.

All money matters; that is the essence of the reference of interaction. 1be one area that he is dwelling on is a program area and it has nothing to do with the financial sector which is dealt with here. Ms. Friesen: I am taking my cue here from the objective of the department which talks about financial control accountability reporting. I wanted to ask about Workforce 2000 and the financial accountability under Workforce 2000, particularly the recent newspaper

article which suggested that the minister 's concern about abuses in the program were certainly warranted, at least in the case of one individual. I wonder if the minister could perhaps take us through the reporting of that particular abuse. How did it come to the minist er's attention and how was it dealt with under this department 's responsibility for accountability? Mr. Manness: The central controllership function of government is housed here, but Workforce 2000 has its own controls in place . The member wants to talk about how we found out.

We found out because one of our consultants in the field was suspicious and reported it internally to within, I gather, the Workforce 2000 internal audit We in this particular branch look at the global funding, and I gather Workforce 2000 has to report to us as to how their cash flows are in maintaining the global funding, so this division here has kind of a distant view on the global ma crosense on Workforce 2000. Yet, this group here, to the extent that they are concerned about there being enough mo ney in place, can certainly call forward Workforce 2000 people to report.

I say to the member, this particular branch is a fair distance away, cash flo w, revenue, expenditu re, but not case-by-case review and audit. Ms. Friesen: This

section of the depart ment, however, does evaluate departmental accounting and financial mana gement activities, including financial reporting, so perhaps we could pursue that under that line. How has this

section of the department evaluated the accounting and the reporting and the evaluation of Workforce 2000? •

(2250) Mr. Manness: We are, I guess, the mentor of the department and we tell all the program areas how it is they should set up financial controls and foster that development in a new program area. And government, in its more centralized internal audit function, of course, anybody can call upon internal audit to review these progr ams. All they have to do anywhere in a department is report to the deputy and the deput y, of course, will call internal audit and this is what happened, of course, with respect to the case cited in Workforce 2000. Ms.

Friesen: I understand from the minist er's responses of the particular case in question, could I go then to the broader policy questions of the -pre sumably once an individual case like that has been brought to the minister 's attention, there is then a question of how this could have happened in the broader policy sense, could the minister explain to us what changes have been introduced

1376 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 9, 1994 into the Workforce 2000 accountability procedures, as a result of that case? Mr. Manness: From memory, I have to indicate that the systems obviously were in place because it was brought to our attention by one of our staff ers, one of our training consultants, who reported it very qui ckly and internally. The government internal audit team went up very quickly to question certain of the employers to see whether there were any trends or consistencie s.

I asked for that inf onnation and was troubled with what was fo und as far as some of the looseness and demanded that we take it to the law enf orcement people and see whether or not they had a case, and they sensed that they did not. lntemally, we have it in place and the Provincial Auditor has said so. All one has to do is look on page 49 of the last report. Our internal structures are in place. This proves they were in place. Indeed, no money is paid until we see claims and billings or at least proof that money has been paid out already, so the question is, is there proper accountability?

As the Auditor says, and I quote on page 49: "The program provides appropriate accountability rep orting to program management and to the Legislature on the financial activities undertaken and the results achieved ." I guess what we found out in this latest example is that we have a pretty goo d system of accountability in pl ace. Now at the intake leve l, that is a fairer question on criteria, and that is fair game.

But as far as the accountability system that we have in place and when you take into account that there are literally hundreds approaching thousands of files, to this point we have not been, by my estimation at least and many others, bilked at all. The one case where it was building, it was one of our alert staff ers who caught it before there was any damage done , thank goodne ss. Ms. Friesen: So the minister then is quite confident that there are no other abuses. Mr.

Manness: Well , as confident that my children are going to be home at two in the morning when they said they would be at home at two in the morning. I mean, how do I know with certainty? I know that the independent thitd party, in this case, the Provincial Auditor, who has passed judgment on our procedures and our methodology for trying to maintain the integrity, as I have said, of a good fa ith model, that it has passed the test. If the member is going to say, well, I will emb arrass you, I will make sure that I catch you, so do not ever swear that this is the last time.

Well, I am sure she will have another day in court or in the court of the Legislature when she will be able to try to emb arrass me again because something else has surfa ced. We are talking literally of several millions of dollars very thinly spread over literally hundreds if not thousands of training opportunities and files.

I think to question whether or not all the funds have gone in the right direction, that is a fair question, but the extent to which, once that decision has been made and whethe r or not they have been wasted or whether somebody is taking advantage of them, I honestly believe that it has been one of the very good

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-5-23b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 5th hansardpdf 23b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	181d378e782e89a2a5b02ee59114cbe1a8319ada

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).