1984 Legislative Session: 2nd Session, 33rd Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 1984

Morning Sitting

[ Page

3783 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Education estimates. (Hon. Mr. Heinrich)

On vote 15: minister's office –– 3783

Mr. Heinrich

Mr. Rose

Mr. Nicolson

Mrs. Wallace

Mr. Kempf

Ms. Brown

The House met at 10:01 a.m.

Prayers.

Hon. Mr. Hewitt tabled the sixty-second annual report of the liquor

distribution branch along with financial statements for the fiscal year

ended March 31, 1983.

Orders of the Day

The House in Committee of Supply; Mr. Strachan in the chair.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF EDUCATION

(continued)

On vote 15: minister's office, $186,000.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: There was a question raised by the member

for Nelson-Creston (Mr. Nicolson) at the close of yesterday's session,

and I would like the opportunity to respond to that question if I

could. The question was: to our knowledge, was any consideration given

to student profiles before exams — for example, IQ tests and average

grade 11 marks for each student? The response which those in the

ministry have prepared is as follows. The question refers to the

practice of IQ tests being used in the province to determine how many

As, Bs, etc. were to be allocated to each subject area. The problem

with this approach is that the question of standards is never really

addressed. What happens in using the IQ method is that normal

bell-curve distributions of letter grades are determined in advance,

regardless of whether or not students meet the standards of achievement

in each subject. The approach we are using is a criterion reference

approach, where standards of achievement are defined in each subject

area by subject-matter specialists. We do not predetermine letter-grade

distribution using questionable measures of intelligence. If it

happened that physics teachers of the province were able to bring all

students to the A level of achievement, then all physics students would

get A marks, and they would deserve it. I hope that that answers the

question.

MR. ROSE: I regret that the minister got into this with the

member for Nelson-Creston (Mr. Nicolson). I'm quite sure the member

would like to go back at that, and I'm sure he will. But it really

disturbs the flow of the subject matter, because I wanted to briefly

respond to the minister's paper on secondary school graduation

requirements that appeared at a press conference about half an hour ago.

First of all, I would like to thank the deputy minister for making certain

that I got an advance copy. I appreciate that courtesy; I think it's very

important. I have had a chance to glance at the paper and really no more than

that. I notice that it's a discussion paper anyway. Nobody could really

attack a discussion paper, and it's my intention to do that this morning.

I congratulate the minister and the ministry for taking this initiative, because

for the past two years we have been so concerned with salaries, fiscal frameworks

and cutbacks of various kinds that we really haven't been concerned with

anything much having to do with education or learning. It's nice to hear

and to learn that there is this change of direction. presumably because the

ministry feels it's got this distasteful part behind them.

I have a number of concerns, and I think it's important that I

express them now. After all, the minister did call for public input,

and since I regard myself as a member of the public, I thought I might

give a little bit of input here. First of all, I would like to know

whether the minister intends to hold public hearings around the

province on this subject, and if so, how many.

MR. CHAIRMAN: If the member wishes to repeat the....

HON. MR. HEINRICH: You're through?

MR. ROSE: No, I'm not through. I'm waiting for your answer to determine the next question.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: On public hearings?

MR. ROSE: Yes.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: The matter of public hearings is something

we have discussed. We have not made any decision as how best to field

the concerns which are going to be raised by the community at large;

but it's a matter that I think we have to seriously consider. The House

is now sitting, making it somewhat difficult for the next little while;

however, it's our intention to secure as much information from those

who wish to advance ideas as we are capable of receiving.

I might add that a considerable amount of time is going to be

required, because under this discussion paper we focus on the

graduating class of 1987. I think that's an important point, Mr.

Chairman. You can ask for information, but when it comes down to making

any actual changes in the system, it's not that easy to do and does

require some period of time. Hence the focus on the graduation class of

1987. We are concerned about those students who will be going into

grade 10 in the fall of this year. They will then have the opportunity

to review the courses which they would take in grade 10 for grade 11,

preparing for their graduation. That gives them a suitable amount of

time. I think it's only fair that students be aware of the thrust, the

idea, the concept which we have introduced today in the discussion

paper. That's going to give us further time past the end of May.

On the concept of public hearings, though — I'll be very candid with

the member — we haven't determined exactly where, when and how, but

there will be some discussion on that.

MR. ROSE: Mr. Chairman, there are some people who feel,

first, that maybe there isn't enough time, even by 1987; and secondly,

that maybe you're starting at the wrong end of the education system.

You're starting at the top, which is like fixing the roof when perhaps

the foundation might need some attention. But that's a matter that will

come out. I hope, though, that the minister does proceed with public

hearings, because I think there needs to be far more opportunity for

the public to express themselves than is allowed for in this response

form at the back of the paper. That was my next question. There has got

to be more to it than that, because if there is only a response paper,

it doesn't offer very much for

[ Page 3784 ]

public expression. We don't even know whether the

responses to the questionnaire will be made public. The ministry has

embarked on a course and intends to go ahead with it, and the only

guarantee that the public has to have their views on education

expressed is by the widest possible public exposure. By that I mean

going beyond people sending in responses to a questionnaire, so that

they can have the debate out in public about what they want for the

future of their children. I assume that is going to be happening. The

minister is nodding. He hasn't got the thing put together the way he'd

like to in terms of where he is going, and when, but I assume that he

is going to have public hearings of some kind. May I assume that?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: One of our ideas in this area is that it

would be rather a healthy change for school boards to conduct hearings

in each of the districts of British Columbia, for the very reason that

the member has raised. It is rather nice to be able to talk about some

of the substance in the education field — other than dollars — which we

have been struggling with. We would encourage school boards to do that,

but they haven't been formally advised. It is out for consideration and

I would hope they would carry on hearings and inform their public as

well.

MR. ROSE: What about the ministry?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Yes, the ministry will be involved; it has to be.

There is one other factor in here, Mr. Chairman, that I would like

to raise, and I made reference to it three-quarters of an hour ago. The

public is often under the illusion that the public school system needs

some work done on it. If the public takes the time to look at the

curriculum for grades 11 and 12 which is available and which many

students now take, I think they will be suitably impressed with the

work which is being carried on. I might add that what we are addressing

under this paper is a matter of structure. I think that's important. In

my view this will be a very healthy exercise. It's been some time, I

suspect, since the public has had an opportunity to really see at first

hand what the curriculum is for grades 11 and 12.

MR. ROSE: Well, I don't know. There's a tremendously ancient

philosophical argument about whether form determines content or vice

versa. That the ministry starts fiddling with the structure doesn't

mean that the content's going to be superior. I think we always have to

be on guard about that. I'll leave that for now. I'm pleased that

there's going to be the widest possible public debate, and that will be

encouraged.

[10:15]

1 have some other concerns. I would like to ask the minister whether

he's concerned about the proposal in here that asks children — young

men and women — to make irrevocable career choices by grade 10. While

we deal with that and the minister has an opportunity to hear from his

officials, I'll carry on. Is the minister concerned about the lack of

flexibility in the specialty courses in grades 11 and 12? A student

can't just take one of those from now on, if this proposal goes

through; he'd be required to take prerequisites. If he hasn't got those

prerequisites, no matter how much he would want a particular course in

grade 11 or 12, he'd be unable to take the specialty courses. It seems

a bit ironic, if not contradictory, to be going into a time when we're

expecting to change careers three or four times in our lifetime — if we

don't blow the whole world up — and at the same time as we're expecting

that flexibility in the workforce, to be limiting it in the secondary

schools. I want to know if the minister is concerned about that.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: The fact is that choices are made now. It

seems to me that when you examine the curriculum.... If you look at the

proposal, there is the opportunity to take, for example, applied arts

and science but still take some of the courses under arts and science

to ensure that they would be able to secure admission to a

post-secondary institution. There are many students who take

prerequisites now. What this particular paper does is try to address a

large number of students who shop around and take a number of courses.

It seems to me that it makes eminent sense to suggest that there ought

to be some form of major as we go through the school system, so that

when somebody graduates they won't have a handbasketful of courses,

which many do; there will be some consistency in what they have in fact

studied. Those choices are now made. All we have to do is look in the

system now. How do people secure entrance to a post-secondary

institution? One of the big items in the paper which we are proposing

— and social studies for grade 11 be the only compulsory subjects

and phys ed. I just think that we ought to be able to tighten that up a

bit. Having said that, we also must recognize that a good number of

students already take the minimum which we are suggesting and more. But

those are students who don't really require very much guidance; they're

the top 8 or 10 percent. We don't worry about them. But I'm talking

about a large number in the middle who we feel ought to take advantage

of the opportunity that is there.

MR. ROSE: The minister can make all the noise he likes about

whether or not this 8 percent takes these courses anyway. We all know

that — that's nothing. Because he's cutting down the electives from six

to three, he's forcing those people into other courses. Some of the

courses that they have to take — and they'll be looking ahead — will

require certain prerequisites, which limits the courses even in grade

10. I know the counterargument to that: the buffet approach mentioned

here in the paper, or the dog's breakfast, a smorgasbord of electives.

I know the objection to that. The point is that this is a proposal for

a much more structured, much more demanding and much more highly

academic program for most children. That may be what the public wants.

Maybe that's a good thing, but let's not let it escape notice what's

it's actually doing here.

Let me mention a couple of other concerns. I'm concerned about the

funding. On the one hand it looks as if the courses of the kind that

more people will be taking will be cheaper, actually. It doesn't take

same: a few textbooks and some maps, right? So if you force more people

into electives such as math and other things like that and get them out

of the gym, you don't need big gymnasia and that sort of thing. On the

other hand, the accent on technical training — computers and that sort

of thing — is going to be more expensive. What assurances do we have

that the ministry has considered those things? Is the fiscal framework

[ Page

3785 ]

prepared to fund them? I noticed in science, which

is being emphasized here.... Will the school districts be given funds

for science? I hear all the time that the elementary schools don't have

science equipment; they are certainly not up to standard. There have

been recommendations to improve those. So if we are going to make the

academic program much more intense, we certainly have to be able to

fund it. The directions clearly have been just the opposite over the

last two or three years.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Chairman, with respect to the last

point raised, we have been aware for some time that dollars will be

required. We know that. On the earlier point, the framework generates

so many dollars per student. That's recognized at the beginning. Any

changes coming in are not going to affect the amount of money which is

advanced into the system under the framework.

Are you busy, Mr. Member?

MR. ROSE: No, I'm not. They're just bothering me. If they go away we'll be fine.

MR. HOWARD: We're asking him to interpret what you're saying.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: I see. That's fair comment, Mr. Chairman.

I repeat. Number one, we have been aware for some time that funds

will be required to accommodate any proposed increases in science if,

in fact, they are implemented. Remember, this is a discussion paper.

We're looking for response. I think it's only fair to let the public

know what the feeling of the government is in this particular

direction. That's why it's there. I'm not being cute about it. It's in

the paper and it's right on top of the table.

Number two, the framework makes provision for students. It's

primarily enrolment-driven. So there's not going to be any reduction in

history, social studies or math. The big items in schools are

laboratories — the labs for sciences — and some of the technologies

which are offered, particularly in the area of computerization. We find

that some of the present electives in the system are the most expensive

courses in the schools and often, I am advised, have the lowest

enrolment. That's something which we are going to address. But I don't

want the member to be under any illusion that we are advancing

something and not knowing that there is a dollar sign attached to it.

There is.

MR. ROSE: This is my final observation and concern on this

subject. I wonder if the minister is aware that the proposals look a

great deal like the 11-plus system of Britain that was abandoned some

20 years ago as pedagogically unsound. Take grammar schools: they are

the arts and sciences proposal — for the bright ones. Then there are

the technical schools. They are for the applied arts and sciences

program for the medium ones. For those who are academically incompetent

there are the secondary modern, or the career program. I wonder if that

minister has been struck by that resemblance to that program abandoned

in Britain 20 years ago.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Well, it's not my last one....

MR. ROSE: I know that. but we're doing fine here.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: I can give an unequivocal answer that it's

not modelled on anything from Great Britain. I can advise you that I

have not examined anything from Great Britain at all. We're looking at

a school. We're looking at one school, and there can be movement

sideways among the three proposals or categories which we have

advanced. We're talking in theory right now, because it's a discussion

paper, but if somebody were to take subjects listed under applied arts

and sciences and then suddenly said, "No, you know, I think I can do

better than that and I want to be admitted to a post-secondary

institution, or as a matter of interest I would like to take a more

difficult course," they can move over and take electives under the arts

and science. They may very well say: "Look, I'm career-oriented. I want

to get right out of applied arts and science and move over to career

preparation." That's available, and it's within one institution. I

don't believe that that opportunity is afforded students under the

British system.

MR. ROSE: Well, it's not easy here.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: We agree on that.

MR. ROSE: Just one other thing: I hope the at the minister is

going to restore the money for counselling so that students can make

informed choices. One of the big problems, though, in Britain and

elsewhere.... I think it was Vance Packard who labelled the American

high school as being one of the most undemocratic, class-ridden

institutions in America. However, I don't want, if we can avoid it,

with certificates or various other little labels, to return to the

class system that once prevailed in the high schools. I want the

minister to assure us that that is not going to happen and that this

program will not have us rushing headlong into the 1960s.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Headlong into the 1960s?

MR. NICOLSON: I thank the minister for his response to my

question yesterday. However, he has confirmed what I suspected, which

is that somehow the government has come up with the solution to a

problem that has eluded educators since the time of Socrates — the

perfect test. Somehow the minister has come up not only with a perfect

is saying that the A standard is determined by the achievement in this

particular test, and that students.... I just knew, somehow, that your

ministry would try to sidetrack my question and put it all in terms of

the IQ test. I have the courage to use the term IQ test, as a

professional educator who taught physics, who marked physics in

government exams several times and who one year in my two classes of

physics 12 — and it is pretty unusual to have two classes of physics 12

in a school of around 500 students, but I managed to do that — managed

to get two-thirds of them a government scholarship with their physics

mark. So that's the background I'm speaking from. But I will say that

as highly as I might think of my own achievement as a physics

instructor, I don't pretend that I could ever begin to construct the

perfect standard for physics achievement. I want to ask the minister:

had each item on each of those exams been pretested for a reliability

coefficient before it was placed on the exam?

[ Page 3786 ]

[10:30]

HON. MR. HEINRICH: The examination questions were not

protested, as you suspect they were not. That information is now being

assembled. I think that we have to raise this point on the first round.

There are some concerns which are now being raised, and those are the

matters that are going to be addressed.

I tell you what I would like from the member. He is obviously

somebody who has a great deal of experience in a particular area, in

physics specifically, and I would like — and I mean this sincerely —

some learned comment from him as to what he would suggest we could do

to make the system better. I ask for that because there were a lot of

people involved. In the preparation of those examinations there were

involved physics teachers who were specialists. They were the ones who

prepared those examinations. They are just the same as you and I and

everybody else: they cannot prepare a perfect exam.

As I mentioned yesterday, it went through a number of committees,

starting with the preparatory committee consisting of teachers. It was

then advanced to another committee involved in measurement and

accuracy. It then went to a third committee to determine the accuracy

of the examination question and the acceptable answer. After that was

concluded, it went back to the preparatory committee. Now when we get

into the field, after the examination was written.... A group of

physics teachers looked at that examination and said: "All right, we

now have to put in some cutoff levels with respect to As, Bs, C-pluses,

Cs and so on down the line." They made that determination in advance of

marking the exam. They looked at the level of difficulty of the paper,

then they made the decision. They were then marked, and there was also

double checking on marking to ensure that once marked.... They would go

back and randomly select papers again to ensure that other markers

would mark those papers.

If there's a problem.... I can't specifically respond to the concern

that the member has raised. I don't have any experience in marking

physics papers, and my ability in physics wouldn't exactly have made me

a scholarship candidate in the classroom of the member for

Nelson-Creston. Although now is not the appropriate time, I would like

him to give us some help, if he thinks he has something to help us, to

avoid getting into a problem which he thinks we will get into if we go

in the direction which we are now going. I want him to know that the

information is now being assembled, and I am sure that those people who

were involved in the preparation of the physics exams may very well

have the same concern that the member is now raising.

MR. NICOLSON: Mr. Chairman, I thank the minister for his candour. But

it comes down to this: we are not using a reliable testing instrument for what

we are measuring. I am not saying that one has to use an instrument.... There

are real problems in testing the validity and reliability of every item on a

test prior to actually implementing its use. It tends to get you into just using

multiple-choice. If you're going to have some subjective testing, you have

to make up the type of questions which over the test of time have been fairly

reasonable questions. It would appear that what was done here was that various

committees that constructed the tests created their expectations, and these

expectations are from a very small group. There was not complete cooperation

from the BCTF in volunteering their members for this, from what I gather from

the minister.

I'm talking about the students — not the teachers. Let's just look

at the sum of the As and Bs in the various courses: algebra, 20;

biology, 35 — this is according to exam standards by adding up the 13

17; geography, 22; history, 22; physics, 23. My advice to a student

would be that if you're going to.... You're going to have to take

there are ways of avoiding that. It would seem to me that the best

thing for a student to do would be to take biology and chemistry,

because the expectations of the marking committees do not appear to be

as demanding in biology and chemistry as they are, for instance, in

Only 1 percent of the students were awarded an A and only 10 percent

were awarded a B.

The normal kind of curve thing, which seems to be followed overall

in the other cases, would be to give about 5 percent As. That would

literature to give out one A across that whole group. I doubt if there

large high schools. So it would be almost the toss of a coin as to

whether one of them would earn an A, based on those teacher

expectations of the marking committee.

Obviously the expectations of the teachers taken collectively around

the province was a little bit higher. They saw people who elected to

would venture that that would be the case. People who elect to take

grade 10 and 11 achievement as a grade-point average and look at their

overall grade 12 achievement on exams and then try to get some sort of

comparability toward those and the pool of students who take other

electives It's very serious. Entry into colleges is very competitive.

To be personal about this, I have a son taking grade 12 courses, and

he wrote some of these exams. Luckily for him, he took biology. He

chose to write biology this time, and he got a pretty good mark. Based

on this, I should have counselled him away from some other subjects.

It's nice to try to bring up standards. I'll also get on a bit of a

personal note here: when I was in my second year of university — my

first year of engineering — I was taking a thermo-dynamics course. Out

of a class group of about 150, I got the third highest mark, which was

23 percent. You have to have a 60 percent average to even get into

engineering. Yet that is the kind of thing that happens with teacher

expectations. We had a teacher; it was his first year out from England

— he was from Oxford or Cambridge or someplace — and I guess he had

very high expectations for us. It's rather amazing that out of about

150 students, only one person got a so-called passing grade of over 50

percent. That student got about 60 percent. The next....

MR. MOWAT: This is your life.

MR. NICOLSON: Well, I guess I expose myself to that kind of

attack by doing this, but if I can't draw upon my life experience and

try to share it with this House on what I consider a very serious

matter, it is.... In fact, students in

[ Page 3787 ]

grade 12 who are entering post-secondary education

or the workforce and taking that kind of step in their life take this

as a very serious matter. And I take it very seriously that if you look

beyond what was going on in the ministry at that time — if there is

some research into this — and look back to the work of Dr. Conway, who

used to be in charge of statistics and measurement in the Ministry of

Education, you will find that they abandoned the system of setting

these so-called standards and expectations, and they went to some way

of distributing marks equitably so that students were not making this

choice of going into another program. What is going to happen is that

students who are otherwise getting....

Let's say a straight-B student: a straight-B student somehow finds

that while he's a straight-B student, he's only a C student in physics

or French but he's an A student in biology, because they're giving out

35 percent or 36 percent of the marks in biology to A and B students

There are about half as many As and Bs in French, according to these

exam standards, and 23 percent in physics. I'll tell you that those

groups tend to select themselves.

Now to come back to what I said earlier, it's a little bit of an

idle boast to say that I got two-thirds of my students a government

scholarship, because the first couple of weeks of teaching I used to

have all kinds of dropouts, and a natural selection would take place.

There weren't too many D and E students left in a class after the first

couple of weeks, even in physics 11. There was more selection in

physics 12. What I'm saying, then, is that you do not have a

homogeneous group in each of these subject categories.

What we are going to here is a system that was in place back in the

1940s. I don't know when the classical little change in philosophy took

place, but I know that by the time I took education courses in the

early 1960s it was a fairly classic lesson in testing and measurement.

It appears to have been missed here, and what I see.... Okay, what's

the prediction? The prediction is that we are going to discourage

students from taking the courses here such as.... Well, the worst

would be in French. Geography and history, at 22 percent, are probably

where they belong, and physics at 23 percent — I'm sure you'd find that

it's a very select group.

I say that using IQ is not a good measurement of an individual, but

it can give you some pretty rough ideas about the potential of a group.

Using the actual letter-grades achieved in grade 10 and grade 11, or

going back to grade 7 or wherever — but don't spend too much money on

collecting the statistics — and looking at the actual records of

achievement of those students and then creating a profile gives you, I

think, a more realistic expectation than a small group of five or ten

physics teachers could come up with. I wonder where they came from.

Were they actually in the classroom or recently retired or people who

were between jobs, or a combination thereof? Probably a combination. If

that test was anything valid, it would not have been necessary for

about six of the test items in the physics exam and several items in

the biology exam to be thrown out. In fact, if those tests were valid,

you would not have had creeping into the biology exam language that has

fallen out of use in that science. That would hint to me that somebody

very long retired was a part of the construction of the biology exam;

somebody very much not up to speed was involved in that for such a

question to creep into that test.

[10:45]

So I take the minister's offer, and I would certainly be pleased to

sit down with a committee of some of the people in the testing and

measurement branch of his ministry to voice my concerns, but I think

that this first step.... Well, really, some remeasurement would be in

order. I would recommend that these tests be rescaled and recombined

and a new set of marks go out — although I guess that would be almost

impossible now because it would require not only that certain areas go

up but that others go down, and that would be pretty unpalatable.

Mr. Chairman, that more or less summarizes what I have to say, and the minister might wish to respond to that.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Chairman, very briefly, we recognize

what the member is saying and we appreciate his concerns. I'll put an

invitation to you right now: you're always welcome to speak to those

people in the ministry who are involved in this particular area —

anytime you wish. However, there is something more that we are prepared

to invite you to if you wish to attend. There is going to be an

informal session in the latter part of March or perhaps in April, at

which a number of people will be present — their names are Messrs.

Levirs, Meredith and Evans; maybe the member will recognize those three

gentlemen — plus ministry staff. The meeting will be held here in

Victoria to discuss the very subject which the member has raised. If

the member wishes to make contact with my deputy, Mr. Carter, in the

fourth week of March to get the date and place, he is welcome to attend.

MRS. WALLACE: Mr. Chairman, I hadn't really intended to talk

about exams, but in reviewing some of his life experiences my colleague

from Nelson-Creston brought back vividly memories of government

departmental exams, as we called them in those days in the province

where I went to school. The exams began at the grade 8 level at that

time, and my memory of them and their results is that I had a great

time from grade 8 on because I never had to do any work. I had either

the fortune or the misfortune to be able to read a textbook one day,

regurgitate it the next day and forget it on the third day, and that's

what I did all through high school. I didn't do any work and I really

knew nothing when I got out of high school, because I had forgotten

everything I had crammed for the exams.

Interjection.

MRS. WALLACE: Yes, perhaps it is a very unfortunate thing to

have that kind of ability, because it certainly doesn't make for a

sound, well-rounded education. I had to really scratch and expand my

knowledge when I went out into the work field and realized that I had

to know something and be able to apply it. I took correspondence

courses and did all kinds of things to upgrade my education, in spite

of the fact that I had passed those departmental exams. We didn't have

As or Bs in those days; we had percentage marks, and mine ranged in the

90 percent field all the time, no matter what the subject. That is what

exams do to people who have that ability; it doesn't make for a

well-rounded education. It encourages teachers.... I can remember

teachers giving us the departmental exams from preceding years, and

very often those questions were repeated on the next year's exams.

[ Page 3788 ]

You study for the test, you teach for the test, and the rest of the curriculum is incidental.

I just wanted to make those few remarks regarding my feelings about

instituting government exams, as is now being done. It is a

retrogressive step. I think those standards can be set within the

individual learning institution and you can have a much broader field

of education if in fact you are proceeding to teach the whole subject

throughout the year. I believe children are much more receptive to

that. I know of one instance where a teacher had decided to deal with a

socials class curriculum by dealing with each country at a time: the

art, culture, geography and history, all sectors of that country,

country by country, rather than dealing with it as that particular

textbook set out, according to the history, geography, art and culture

and so on. That particular class was actually recreating a country.

They were dealing with all facets of it, and learning very well. They

were very interested in everything they were doing, country by country.

When test time came around, certain teachers said to certain classes

that weren't doing this: "We have gone so far in the textbook, so our

tests will be on history — or geography, say. We won't be dealing with

art, culture or other things for all countries." Some of the children

in the other class, who would have been having a different test, became

concerned because they hadn't covered those subjects. They talked to

their parents, the parents talked to the principal, and eventually that

class had to be dropped because of the pressure put on the principal of

that school as a result of the parents' concern that their children

were not learning the same things as the other children. By the time

the year was over, they would have covered the whole curriculum; and

they would have covered it in a way that was much more meaningful and

with much more understanding about each country on the part of those

children. But because of that pressure, because of the test — which

wouldn't have been applied to that group.... It was pre-understood that

it would be a different test. Because of the public pressure from the

parents, as a result of the students communicating, that whole program

had to be dropped. That was most unfortunate. As I said, I didn't

really intend to talk about that.

Some time ago — back in May, I think it was — an organization of

which I am a member, the Business and Professional Women's Clubs,

presented a brief to the Premier. In that brief they included a

resolution on education. I'll just read the last few paragraphs of the

background paper:

"We therefore urge the government to provide

sufficient funds so that every child in this province will have

available to her or him instruction in life and recreational skills'so

that each one will be adequately equipped to face a world of declining

employment opportunities.

"Skills such as home economics, art and music may be necessary in the world of the future, along with computer technology."

They're talking about a very broad-based educational program that

has to put some real emphasis on leisure-time activities. We're facing

a situation, whether we like it or not, in this highly technological

age, in which we will find that more and more people will not have

permanent jobs or will be working shorter hours. There is a real need

to develop alternative interests. That's particularly true when we have

so many who have no jobs at all. There must be opportunities for not

just young people but for all people to expand their knowledge, to

develop those life skills, to have some interest to fill their lives,

which otherwise would be very bleak and difficult to face. That's just

not happening as a result of this minister's program.

I have two school districts in my constituency. One of them is in

the 4,000-10,000 bracket of enrolment; the other is in the zero-1,500

bracket — a very small school district. They are Cowichan and Lake

Cowichan respectively. In the Cowichan School District they have been

able to run a very tight ship. The minister will agree. I know he has

told me in discussions we've had that that budget has been well

managed. The district has been well managed. In fact, the estimate that

I have is that they expect that by the end of 1986 they will only have

to cut 0.17 percent from their budget — which is pretty close on, Mr.

Chairman. What has that small percentage meant to that school district?

I can tell you some of the things it's meant.

We have a large Indian population in Cowichan. We have two

alternative education classes for children. One of those classes is

completely gone. If ever we needed to provide incentive for young

Indian people to become involved in and stay in the educational system,

it is now. We talk about high unemployment rates. The unemployment rate

on the Cowichan Indian reserve is in excess of 50 percent. We really

need both of those courses. One of them is gone.

Our music courses are completely eliminated. We are not teaching

music in Cowichan any more. This is only to deal with a 0.17 percent

decrease in the budget. This is the kind of effect that very minor cut

in a very well run school district is having on the quality of

education in that school district.

Summer school is completely gone. This means that if a young person

happens to be in the category that fails one of those government exams,

they lose a whole year, because there is no way that they can pick up

that course at summer school. That summer school is gone.

[11:00]

Swimming is gone. There are no more swimming classes. Certainly a

lifestyle class. Field trips have had to be cancelled in order to

supplement the transportation budget. The minister and I have had many

discussions about transportation in Cowichan. The board is presently

charging, in the south end, $4.50 per child per week to travel on

school buses. Now $4.50 may not sound like much to the minister, but

that amounts to $18 per month per child. And if you have three or four

children in school you are looking at $75. If you're on social

assistance or even on UIC, as so many of our people in Cowichan are ––

30 percent of them almost — that's a lot of money. So what's happening?

Those kids are walking or biking or getting to school as best they can,

because they can't afford that. They're having to cross a four-lane

highway. The hazards, the minister would agree, are drastic. Even to

bring that down to that amount, the school board has had to cut out

field trips. There are no more visits to other parts of the province,

no more trips to the museum or the Legislature. These are things that

serve to broaden the basic education of young people. If there are to

be skiing trips or skating excursions, the expense of that has to be

borne by the school or the parents. What we're doing, Mr. Chairman, is

creating a class society within the schools. Some parents can afford to

pay those expenses, can afford to contribute to school endeavours, can

pay that extra transportation cost for the child to go on a school ski

trip or skating or swimming excursion, and other parents can't. That's

a fact of life. Those children are being segregated into a class

society within the school. That

[ Page 3789 ]

is not right or just in this province — or anywhere. It concerns me very gravely that that is happening.

Classes are slightly larger. One school in Cowichan is being closed

next June: the Crozier Road School, a fairly new school with a good

gymnasium and playground facilities. Secretarial time has been cut. The

one thing they have been able to maintain is Charles Hoey, with special

aids there. That is an extremely great institution. I'm sure the

minister is aware of Charles Hoey School and what it does for

exceptional children. It's an excellent institution. It's still

carrying on, at the expense of some of these other things, because that

school board is determined that Charles Hoey will not be disrupted.

Those cuts are the result of a 0.17 percent reduction in budget.

[Mr. Ree in the chair]

Now let's look at Lake Cowichan — the small district — zero to

1,500. They are facing an 11.55 percent cut. Can you imagine what that

is doing to the educational quality in Lake Cowichan? Sure, their

administration costs were high. They recognized that, and they have cut

back. They reduced the number of trustees from seven to five. They

closed one and a half schools last year, and goodness knows what's

going to happen next year. They'll probably even have to close the high

school, which means the kids will have to go into Cowichan. The

delivery of every program is affected. The people who are living in

Lake Cowichan are being denied access to equitable education

facilities. They are trying desperately, but facing that kind of cut,

it is just impossible to maintain that quality of education — to

maintain the sort of thing that the business and professional women are

talking about in their brief to the Premier, whereby we must ensure

that the quality of education is not infringed upon. We're talking

about educating a future generation that has to face a highly technical

world. We're talking about educating a generation that will have to

deal with some very complex problems, and we're not providing the

quality of education that those young people need.

We're particularly discriminating against the small area where

population has been declining. Certainly that's been happening in Lake

Cowichan because of the horrendous blows they've had in the forest

industry, with mill closures and cutbacks. A declining population,

facing a cut like that, and trying to continue to educate their

children. Many people are in receipt of social assistance or UIC;

there's a very high unemployment rate. That's the kind of reality

that's out there in the educational arena. It's a direct result of this

government's determination not just to hold the line but to cut back.

At least there should be an increase to represent inflation, but that's

not there. You cannot provide services in 1984-85 with '83-84 dollars,

or with even less than '83-84 dollars. At least that inflation factor

should be included.

It's short term certainly, and probably not as important as what

we're doing to the children, but putting off maintenance means it's

going to be more costly to maintain those facilities in later years.

We're talking about having to increase the pupil-teacher ratio. That's

certainly a two-edged sword. You're cutting the funding to the point

where you are doing away with secretarial staff. You are limiting any

teachers' aides because of the cuts in funding and at the same time

you're mainstreaming. I don't object to mainstreaming, but if you're

going to mainstream you have to fund for it. You don't cut back, you

don't make a larger class. You don't ask that teacher to deal with

exceptional children who need a lot of individual attention and can be

very disruptive in that class, or to deal with a larger class with no

assistance.

That's what's happening under this minister. The quality of

education is being eroded drastically. The minister sits there and

looks at the bottom line and the dollars and cents, and talks about

full-time equivalents and cutbacks of 0.17 percent or 11.55 percent, or

whatever his computer spews out, and somehow doesn't realize that he's

talking about the very lives and the very futures of young people in

this province. I am extremely disturbed that this minister is not able

to grasp what he's doing and is not able to go to cabinet and encourage

them to increase the support that is so badly needed for the future of

young British Columbians.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: A few points have been raised by the

member. First of all, examinations. I acknowledge the reasons advanced

with respect to those who can perform well on external examinations, to

the detriment of classroom activity during the school year; hence the

acknowledgment and the waiting and the use of 50 percent. That argument

has been made for some time; consequently, we looked to 50 percent

classroom performance and 50 percent external exams.

With respect to the issue of life and recreational skills, while I

recognize the interest expressed by a number of districts in this area,

I think we now have to consider, under our current economic

environment, the matter of priorities. When we add all of the items

which the member referred to — summer school, swimming, the field trips

— while they are desirable and helpful, just how much can we expect the

public school system to deliver with the dollars which we have made

available?

The member may argue that I am only concerned with the bottom line.

Well, I am concerned with the bottom line; I make no apologies for

that, because the public, generally, has said that they agree with the

amount which is being advanced to the system, but they can't let us

have any more. The biggest contributor to the public education system,

as far as funding is concerned, is non-residential and consolidated

revenue. Recognizing that consolidated revenue is primarily made up of

personal income tax as well as royalties from a number of resource

areas, and recognizing that those areas have been in decline, it was

incumbent upon our government to recognize the problem and do the very

best we could with the funds which had been made available.

I have never denied that there is going to be some pain suffered in

all districts. I think it is important that we respond to the school

districts to which the member has referred. I'll first deal with

Cowichan, School District 65. In 1984 we are talking about a budget

which is 99.6 percent of 1983 — that's 0.4 percent. The enrolment has

declined from 1975, when there were 7,832 students, to 7,153 in

September 1983, which is roughly a decline of 700 students. That was

recognized.

The cost per pupil in the area in 1984 — this is an important figure

in Cowichan — was $3,253. I would then like to go and look at Lake

Cowichan, where the enrolment has declined from 1,482 in 1975 to 1,114

in 1983, which is a decline of roughly 368 students. It is a small

district, and I recognize the reasons why there have been some declines

as well — you raised the issue of forestry. The cost per student in

this small district, if you want to compare North Cowichan with

Cowichan....

[ Page 3790 ]

MRS. WALLACE: Lake Cowichan.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: I beg your pardon, Cowichan with Lake

Cowichan. If you look at the cost per student when we take everything

into consideration for 1984 — Mr. Chairman, I hope that the member

would hear this particular figure — at Lake Cowichan the cost per

student is $4,203 all included. That's the amount being advanced in

1984, including the phase-in allowance.

[11:15]

The provincial average is $3,259, so it is roughly $950 more per

student, with an enrolment declining from 1,482 to 1,114. I also

recognize, Mr. Chairman, that small districts like this still have

those mandatory expenses involving a district office. It would be

rather interesting if, in fact, somebody advanced the idea...and I'm

not saying this, but you know the issue of amalgamation is important,

and perhaps this is one way we can add...

MRS. WALLACE: Are you sure you're not saying that?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: I am just raising some of the items which

are now coming to the top of the barrel when we see these problems. Now

it seems to me that when we find a school that could have 1,114 people

in it — one school in one district — and we have a whole district out

there with all the accoutrements, it might be something that we ought

to consider. We ought to look at it. I think you would agree with that

point. Perhaps all the money which is already being spent in Cowichan

could answer the problem and allow more money into the classroom. But I

leave with you, Mr. Chairman, the cost per student in Lake Cowichan as

compared to the cost in Cowichan. I think that's an important issue. By

the way, the drop for Lake Cowichan under the framework, and without

looking at the additional moneys generated within the district or the

phase-in allowance, is 3.4 percent for 1984; but we also had a decline

in enrolment of, I think it was, 268 students.

I am not going to dispute that there is some hardship. People may

have to adjust their desires and perhaps focus on what I think we all

agree to be the priorities. I can't really say much more than that. I

recognize the concerns which are being advanced, but I'm not going to

stand here and say that there is an instant solution. There isn't. The

only thing I can say is that, as much as possible, all districts are

being treated equitably the first time around.

MR. KEMPF: Mr. Chairman, I won't take up much of the time of

committee this morning. I want to speak for just a few moments on

independent schools and their relationship to the new exam system.

However, the minister's last few words brought up a couple of points

that I'd like to read into the record. As a northerner I certainly do

agree, as I believe the vast majority of my constituents do, with the

shakedown that is taking place in the public school education system of

our province. I think it is long overdue. I believe that for some time

now our public school system has in fact been seriously out of control

in relation to student-teacher ratios, the amounts of money that are

spent and have to be paid by the taxpayer, and the education of our

students and children in British Columbia. There was a definite need

for change, and I commend the minister for moving in that direction.

However, I would caution the minister, and I am sure he is aware, that

there is a vast difference between what has gone on and is going on in

the education system in the urban areas of British Columbia and in the

rural areas. There is quite a difference in enrolments, for one thing.

Contrary to what is happening in Victoria and Vancouver, our school

enrolments in the northern part of this province are on the rise.

Therefore I believe that has to be a strong consideration when speaking

of restraint in the public school system of British Columbia.

As the minister is from the north, I probably don't have to remind

him that there are additional costs pertaining to the educational

system that school boards in the northern part of this province have to

bear. One of those very real costs is that of transportation, because

of our vast distances and our very harsh weather conditions. I think

that has to be a prime concern of this minister when considering the

dollars that are allocated to northern school districts as compared to

those in our large cities.

I'd also like to suggest that more attention be paid by the

minister, when speaking of restraint, to the area of administration.

Although we're practising a lot of restraint in our educational system

in British Columbia, we're still spending far, far too much money on

administration. I think we've got to pay far more attention to that

particular budgetary item, Mr. Minister.

What I wanted to speak about this morning was the question of

independent schools, particularly in respect to the examination program

where it pertains to independent schools. I've spoken to a number of

independent school people in my constituency and in other areas around

the province, and I believe that I'm correct in saying that they are in

agreement — not total agreement, but I would say certainly the majority

— with a testing system. They're not concerned that the academic

standards of their schools be tested. I think they're willing to put

those academic standards up against any public school in British

Columbia. But it is my understanding that there still remains a very

grave concern among independent schools in this province for their very

autonomy. The members opposite were not all here back in 1977, but I

remember very clearly the opposition NDP running from this chamber when

the vote came on the independent schools act. I believe there still

remains in the minds of independent schools people a very grave concern

in regard to the present exam being offered by the Ministry of

Education. I accept that concern, because it can have a very grave

effect on the very reason those schools came into being in the first

place, which is that they have a very real philosophical difference

when it comes to the education of their children. I think we as

legislators have to understand that.

I would like to read parts of a letter. I have received many, and I

think it is indicative of the feelings of the people in the independent

schools system. It's a letter that I received a copy of; it's addressed

to the hon. minister and dated January 24, 1984. It reads as follows:

"Dear Mr. Heinrich,

"Several times you have been approached by representatives

of the private schools in this province regarding proposed government examinations

in these schools. Your refusal to consider a different type of exam as the ones

used in public schools to be set up jointly by your department and representatives

of the Christian and other private schools seems to indicate that you are determined

to impose the same so-called neutral philosophy on private schools that prevails

in our public school system. It is our opinion

[ Page 3791 ]

that parents, first of all, are responsible for the education

of their children. Parents who pay their share of public school taxes, besides

the 70 percent of the operating costs of private school and the 100 percent

of capital costs of that school, have the right to choose which philosophy should

determine the nature of that school's curriculum. You ought to be well aware

of the fact that academic standards are not the issue here at all.

"Your department has monitored academic achievements

in private schools for several years now, and, as mentioned earlier, we

have no objections at all to exams. Mr. Chairman, I believe that to be

true. I don't think independent schools people have any problem with an

examination system which will prove the academic standards of their

students coming out of their schools. It is my understanding that

independent schools still have a very grave concern predicated on their

philosophy and on the present exam that's being perpetrated upon them."

My questions, and there are few, of the minister are these. It's my

understanding that prior to seeking further discussion — and I think

this is fair — the independent schools people are willing to have their

students write the June exam to see what grades they will achieve. In

so doing, I think they are being very fair. My question to the minister

is: having written that exam, if there is still that very real concern

for the content — the philosophical content, if you like — of that exam

among the independent schools people of British Columbia, will there be

further serious consultation with the independent schools people with a

view to putting together an exam which will in fact recognize the

philosophical differences?

Interjection.

[11:30]

MR. KEMPF: All subjects. The member interjects, and I know

this is a very touchy subject with the NDP, because they have no use

for the independent school system at all — none whatsoever. They've

indicated that, and they have shown that on the floor of this House.

They would like to get on the bandwagon at this time, because they

think it is popular. They have shown their interest in the independent

school system of this province time after time, but I won't talk about

that this morning.

I just want to know from the minister whether, if after the June

exams there remains a concern on behalf of the independent school

people in this province for the exams being offered by the provincial

government, there will be serious consultation with a view to drafting

an exam. I see no problem with having two sets of exams.

Interjection.

MR. KEMPF: Knowing your philosophy, Mr. Member. you would. I

see no problem with a dual exam system, which will recognize the

philosophy of the independent schools curriculum. I see no problem with

that. I would like to know from the minister if subsequent to the

writing of the June exams there is still a concern in the minds of the

independent schools people, will he seriously consult with them with a

view to drafting the kind of exam that will adhere to their curriculum?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Chairman, three items have been raised

by my colleague the member for Omineca, and they're three valid points.

First of all, transportation costs. I am very much aware of the

concerns of northern communities in that area. When we prepared the

framework, the hard evidence before us were the costs for 1982.

Remember, this was introduced in July 1983, and it is only now, by

February 15, that the school boards submitted their '84 budgets. We

will only have the audited actuals for 1983 by the end of March, so we

relied upon the costs for '82. I recognized those districts which would

have transportation costs of some concern, and I will tell you that one

of them happens to be 57, where the members for Prince George South

(Mr. Strachan) and Prince George North are from....

Interjection.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Well, it's true, and we might as well

throw it right out. I have not heard of a problem from the school

districts of Burns Lake or Nechako, although I suspect it may have gone

to the ministry. I don't recall the letter. But it wouldn't surprise

me, Mr. Chairman, because we do have a bit of a problem in this area,

and it's something which we will be addressing. I hope it will be

rectified for the 1985 budget.

Now in the area of administration, I appreciate the views of the

member. I think what we ought to do, perhaps, is refresh our memories

and go back to the legislation and the thrust of the framework, and the

concern which has been expressed by members on both sides of the House,

to my knowledge, about excessive administrative costs. This has been a

wonderful exercise — the framework — because it has pushed it to the

top so everybody can see what the costs of administration have been,

and where some districts have been prudent managers and other districts

— with all due respect — have not been. But with a little help, and

some direction, through the framework and the policy which we have

introduced involving school boards and school financing, we've been

able to address that issue. The framework provides about 4.2 percent of

the total budget for that area. Now if a school district — and some

still do — spends more than that amount which has been allocated, the

interesting thing is that that becomes public knowledge. People can ask

their school boards. This information which we're providing, and with

which I respond to inquiries from members, points out by function what

the costs are. It's the first time this has ever been done in the

history of the province. It seems to me that all of us are in this boat

together. We represent the taxpayer; the taxpayer pays our bills and

everybody else's, and I think the taxpayer is entitled to know where

those funds go. We don't have an instant solution, but I think, as this

whole framework evolves over a period of three years, a lot of our

questions will be answered.

On the touchy issue of independent schools, a point of

clarification: the member for Omineca has advanced that it involves the

entire independent school system. Well, that's not quite right, because

the concern being advanced is from one segment of the independent

school system, and primarily involves the Christian schools — or

parochial schools, as my colleague corrects me — and statements to this

effect have come to me. Having said that, I recognize the concerns

which have been advanced. It's a problem which we are looking at and

will continue to look at. I don't know if there is any profit in

extending the debate in this particular area, but I want the member for

Omineca to know that I have

[ Page 3792 ]

met with groups from that

particular segment of the independent school system. Many of them have

said: "We prefer not to have them, but we're prepared to go along and

see what happens in June." We agree on that particular point, but that

doesn't necessarily address the issue you have raised. It doesn't

address it totally. It's a problem. Although a very small number are

involved, it is of significance to them. I think we must remember that

we represent everybody in the province. I am looking at it carefully.

MR. KEMPF: I certainly thank the minister, but I disagree

when he says it's just a very small segment of the independent school

system that's taking exception to the exams. I have many types of

independent schools in my constituency, and I've made a point of

contacting them and speaking to them. It's not just the Christian or

parochial schools, as you say; Catholic schools, schools that are being

operated by other groups, are also concerned. They may not be as vocal.

They're not as vocal on many other subjects in the province, but I

think they can probably be considered the silent majority as far as the

independent school system is concerned.

As for the response to the administration costs, Mr. Minister, I'm

happy to see you're riding herd on it. I'd like to see a little tighter

rein, if you like, because when you give school boards the authority

over matters concerning their own expenditures, I think it's like

sending the wolf to tend the flock. It's very difficult to get a handle

on situations such as that. In my estimation, it's rather like having

teachers on school boards in this province — a conflict of interest.

It's like sending the wolf to tend the flock. How do you ever expect to

get a handle on it until that's changed?

One other item before I sit down, and that is in regard to total

school board budgets being made public. Very recently I sent on to the

minister a letter which I received from a constituent of the member for

Cowichan-Malahat (Mrs. Wallace). It's too bad she isn't here this

morning.

AN HON. MEMBER: She's here.

MR. KEMPF: The lady who wrote sent me a newspaper clipping

published back in 1951 or '52, I believe. In those days itemized school

board budgets were published in newspapers for the public to see. I'd

like to see that once again.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Chairman, the member has raised a most

valid point in his second item. I want the members to know that I think

it's not a bad idea. My colleague suggests that we should let the sun

shine in. I think we should advise the House that that point has been

registered. We have been on that and are looking at that matter right

now.

Only one other comment with respect to the items advanced by the

member for Omineca, and that is regarding enrolment. Interestingly

enough, to my knowledge there are only six school districts in British

Columbia where enrolment is climbing. All of the others, it would

appear, are in decline. We know that in 1983 there were more babies

born in British Columbia than in its history, and of course we will see

evidence of that in the schools about five years from now. But I should

tell you that only six.... We've noticed a decline in the school

districts of Burns Lake and Nechako as well. The member might be

interested in these figures. In 1975, Burns Lake School District had

1,987 students; in 1983, 1,681. In Nechako there is a decline, but not

nearly as appreciable: in 1975, 3,349; in 1983, 3,216. In both of

those school districts we have also reduced the funding available for

1984 as compared to 1983, and both districts, to my knowledge, are

managing quite well. I met with some people of the Nechako School

District on Saturday, and their advice to me was: "We're doing just

fine, and we'll get through this difficult period."

[11:45]

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

MR. KEMPF: I'm aware of those figures, Mr. Minister, but I

just wanted to bring out the concern I had for the additional costs

those school boards could incur. We've had a couple of easy winters,

and it has been fairly easy on them, dollar-wise, as far as maintenance

of schools is concerned. That could change very quickly. We have also

had very easy winters as far as transportation is concerned. I know we

have shortened a lot of the bus routes, but I think should we get into

a situation where we have some tough winters, that's going to

perpetrate some pretty severe hardships in getting to and from school

on, in many cases, very young children. I wanted that on the record.

MS. BROWN: I'm going to be going for a long time, so it's up

to the minister whether he wants to take a lunch break now, or

whatever, because I'm not going to be brief What do you want to do?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Go ahead. Get warmed up.

MS. BROWN: Okay. First of all I want to say that I disagree

with the member for Omineca (Mr. Kempf). I've never been able to

understand why it's okay for doctors to sit on boards that make

decisions about their professions, and it's okay for lawyers and other

groups to do it, but whenever teachers are concerned, we have to

continually listen to people on that side of the House questioning

their integrity and cheering and clapping when comments are made about

the fact that for them to sit on school boards would be like putting

chickens in charge of wolves. I realize I don't know as much about

wolves as the member from Omineca, but....

Interjection.

MRS. BROWN: Or wolves in charge of chickens. That's how my dyslexia manifests itself.

I just want to go on record as saying that I am dissociating myself

completely from the sentiment that teachers should not be permitted to

sit on school boards.

Interjection.

MRS. BROWN: Yes, I noticed he left the room as soon as he said that.

The other thing is that everyone has been talking about examinations

this morning, and I hadn't intended to make a comment on it except to

say that I can see the impact that it is having on my grade 12 student.

My own son is going through it and has changed his entire attitude

toward school as a result of having to face these exams in June. He was

previously willing to take risks and explore and look at other

initiatives and options in the educational field, but he is not doing

that any more. Now he is studying for his exams in June, and

[ Page 3793 ]

although he'll probably end up like the rest of my kids academically

at the same places they are — he's not going to be as educated as they

are, because he will have narrowed his field of interest by his

compulsion to do well in those exams in June. I think that's kind of

sad. I've tried to talk to him about it, and he explains to me that to

him the most important thing is having the kinds of grades that will

make it possible for him to get into the university of his choice, and

that's not going to be possible if he explores these other options and

really tries to expand his interests in the way he was doing before

when he did not have to worry about having to meet specific marks in

certain subjects.

He has also changed based on the results that have come down with

the students on the semester system who wrote. He is doing the kinds of

things that the member for Nelson-Creston (Mr. Nicolson) pointed out.

He is looking at the courses that seem to have the highest percentage

of kids getting As and Bs. Based on that, he's thinking of switching

the exams he'll write, and I think that's unfortunate. But if the whole

point of the exam is to change a direction which students take in terms

of their life goals, then it is going to be successful and you will

find more and more kids channelling their academic planning in the

direction that they think they can get the best grades, rather than

really looking at and exploring other options and directions. I just

wanted to comment briefly on that.

I want to speak specifically about School District 41 in Burnaby. I

had a meeting with some of the trustees and went over some of the

issues which concerned them about the impact of this budget. The

ministry sent out a memo to all of the school districts asking them for

details about critical policy decisions that they would have to be

making as a result of the budget which was planned for the upcoming

year, and I would appreciate it if the minister would respond to some

of those details which were submitted by the trustees of School

District 41 in Burnaby.

For example, they talked about the fact that there would be a decrease in course

options in arts and language instruction. When you take into account

as a second language, you realize what effect a decrease in that particular

course option is going to have on the district as a whole. They said they were

going to be forced to scale down secondary work experience programs. The school

district was very proud of the fact that a number of the students would spend

a part of their academic year actually working in the community, supervised

by teachers in the classroom as well as in the on-the-job situations. That's

not going to be possible anymore as a direct result of the minister's stated

goal to fiddle around with the pupil-teacher ratio and bring it to the 1976

level. Incidentally, it is already higher than the 1976 level in Burnaby at

this present time. We've more than reached the goal which the minister established

for us — to our detriment, I might add.

The other thing they pointed out was that there was going to be

reduced district curriculum development activity due to erosion in

assisting teaching support for skill areas such as math, the sciences

and the languages. These are the very areas that the teachers are going

to have to be developing their skills in, in terms of helping the

students meet the end-of-year exams in those particular areas. They say

there is going to be a virtual elimination of district supervision and

coordination of instruction in specialty areas such as PE, music and

industrial education. Burnaby is a community that's made up of people

who work for a living, and the number of students who use industrial

education classes is quite significant. The supervision and

coordination of instruction in that particular class is very important.

In addition, all students everywhere need the physical education

courses. There are all kinds of studies done — I think one was done in

Prince George, the minister's own area, at one point — that show the

correlation between good academic achievement and the good physical and

nutritional condition of the students. Now we're finding in Burnaby

that those courses are going to lose their coordination and supervision.

The music courses in the school. We're very proud of the level of

music instruction in the Burnaby schools. The bands and orchestras are

of very high calibre. I know that at the Armistice Day service which I

attend every year — November 11, in the armoury — the Burnaby South

band usually plays. It's excellent. They are of a very high quality.

That now is going to be in jeopardy as a result of the impact of the

budget on the area.

Then they talked about the reductions in adult basic education and

The pressure in those two areas is very intense, because there are a

number of adults in the community who use the community education

service. For people who live in Burnaby, education is a lifelong

experience. It's not something that begins in kindergarten and is

completed at grade 12, or is completed when the course at BCIT or PVI

is completed. A large number of the community really use the

population

which we have, and in terms of upgrading skills and preparing to change

jobs, the impact of technological change and women re-entering the

labour market. For a number of these reasons we find that the adult

basic education program is very heavily used in our community.

As a direct result of this budget, there is going to be a reduction

in those offerings at a time when more than ever we really need them in

a time of high unemployment. A number of jobs are being phased out.

Adults are beginning to say to themselves: "Now is the time that I

should be upgrading my skills or changing my skills or looking at other

options. This is precisely the time when the school board is not going

to be able to meet that particular need in the community, as a result

of this budget.

The other question asked of them was about critical policy decisions

in the area of staffing — whether there are going to be additions or

deletions to the staff. Their response was no response to the large

class-size situation, other than less than desired reorganization due

to deletion of any contingency staff allocation. They said that 50

people took advantage of the early retirement incentive program;

coupled with a no-replacement policy, when possible, it has cut out

many of the mid-level supervisory personnel. They did this in order to

avoid disruption in reorganization in January. They also said the

reassignment or non-replacement of curriculum staff development and

pupil services personnel has significantly reduced our capacity to

respond constructively to crisis situations.

Interjection.

MS. BROWN: I think that is serious. There's no point in

saying "aye," because I stated when I rose to my feet that I was going

to be going for more than the 15 minutes that

[ Page 3794 ]

showed on the clock. In any event, at a time when the BCTF is

telling us that really what education is all about is equality and

excellence, we find that we can't achieve this in Burnaby under the

budget as it now stands. Part of the reason for that is this business

of not being able to have the pupil-teacher ratio at a level which is

significant, and certainly not being able to respond constructively to

crisis situations.

On the surface of it, our pupil-teacher ratio doesn't look that bad.

The reason for that is because of the special staff we have in the

schools to meet students with special needs. We welcome the integration

of disabled students and students with special needs into the school

system. We have the staff to meet that. But the result, coupled with

the budget that the district has to live with, is that in other areas

it doesn't balance out.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

The committee, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. Mr. Nielsen moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 12:01 p.m.

[ Return to Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Copyright © 1985,2001: Hansard Services, Victoria, B.C., Canada