News from the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario that the last locals (contract teacher and occasional) have tentative contract settlements went out at 22h30ish EDT Wednesday. Given the time involved, that means most of these deals likely came together with under three hours before the deadline.
No media hits in southwestern Ontario yet, but we'll see if it made it in time for the morning papers.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Off to D.C.
Another short hiatus from later tonight (keeping an eye on TVDSB and ETFO bargaining) until Monday evening. I am attending the National Education Writers' Association conference in Washington D.C. over the next few days.
The EWA is blogging the convention -- if you stick to the K-12 topics you can get an idea of the sessions I've been attending. Check back next week for my impressions of this U.S. education reporters' conference.
The EWA is blogging the convention -- if you stick to the K-12 topics you can get an idea of the sessions I've been attending. Check back next week for my impressions of this U.S. education reporters' conference.
GRC stealth
The Ontario Ministry of Education released its governance review committee report April 22. I think I can count on one hand -- er, one finger -- the number of media hits this has generated. Kudos to Laura Cudworth for staying on this report and following up locally. I personally haven't read the report yet, but it's on the bedtime reading list for the next night I am struck with a bout of insomnia.
More SIF fun
Apparently the Ontario Public School Boards' Association (OPSBA) really doesn't like the School Information Finder. The association wrote a letter. The topic was also up for discussion at a recent series of regional OPSBA meetings. The flavour of its hatred? Some member boards in the association wants the site taken down, period.
This as media (and no doubt the blogosphere) continue to either a) wonder what all the fuss is about, really. Or, b) lambaste Minister Kathleen Wynne for taking away the "school bag" feature that allowed for comparison of schools.
I'd be curious to see what sort of traffic the SIF generates. We already know the site was down shortly after it was first launched, reported at the time as due to the volume of traffic. That would make for an interesting Freedom of Information request for someone with some time and the requisite $5.
This as media (and no doubt the blogosphere) continue to either a) wonder what all the fuss is about, really. Or, b) lambaste Minister Kathleen Wynne for taking away the "school bag" feature that allowed for comparison of schools.
I'd be curious to see what sort of traffic the SIF generates. We already know the site was down shortly after it was first launched, reported at the time as due to the volume of traffic. That would make for an interesting Freedom of Information request for someone with some time and the requisite $5.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Bargaining update
News today the Algoma District School Board has reached a tentative settlement with its contract teachers represented by the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario.
This means the Thames Valley District School Board is the only district board left in Ontario without any type of settlement for its contract teachers. *sigh*
The federation and Ontario Public School Boards' Association agreed Friday to extend their mutual deadline for the provincial framework (PFA) funding until the end of the day Wednesday, April 29. The TVDSB and ETFO-Thames Valley have a full day of bargaining set for Wednesday.
Given the board and federation are the only ones left to figure out how all this works, should they both be smacked upside the head and lose out on the $2.7 million (plus) in the PFA? This reporter increasingly thinks the answer should be YES.
This means the Thames Valley District School Board is the only district board left in Ontario without any type of settlement for its contract teachers. *sigh*
The federation and Ontario Public School Boards' Association agreed Friday to extend their mutual deadline for the provincial framework (PFA) funding until the end of the day Wednesday, April 29. The TVDSB and ETFO-Thames Valley have a full day of bargaining set for Wednesday.
Given the board and federation are the only ones left to figure out how all this works, should they both be smacked upside the head and lose out on the $2.7 million (plus) in the PFA? This reporter increasingly thinks the answer should be YES.
On busing and consortia
First story on this issue to cross the desk, regarding a pilot project by Renfrew County boards to stagger bell times so buses can be double-run. Not a novel concept in and of itself, as many other boards across the country already do this. It does provide a launching point for a short history lesson and some comment.
Some three to four years ago, after decades of some boards haggling it out and coming to no agreement, the province mandated school bus consortia be formed across Ontario. It arbitrarily drew lines around the province and boards were told to begin the process of forming new corporations to manage all school transportation within each consortia's boundaries. Most consortia would have representatives from at least one English public and English Catholic board, along with their counterpart French public/Catholic boards. The governance of the consortia was, despite the size of the pot of transportation cash each board brought to the table, mandated that each board have equal ownership of the corporation.
Many of these consortia are now legally established corporations, with directors and education and whatever superintendent-level administrator responsible for transportation sitting as directors. Some consortia are in the first year of a three-year plan where they first bring together all the mapping and route planning without making any significant changes. In this stage the consortia are also harmonizing all the various boards' transportation policies, such as determining who is eligible for school bus transportation and who has to walk. In year two and beyond, each consortia starts rationalizing routes so that instead of two or three buses travelling down a road picking up students for individual schools, one bus picks all of them up and drops them off at each school along the way. The goal is fewer buses and lower transportation costs.
For 2009-10 this initiative is being given a few kicks in the rear end by the folks at the MinEd. Boards have been told they must reduce transportation costs by one per cent through route optimization. If they don't do so, the ministry will simply reduce their funding by an equivalent amount.
Sounds easy, right?
Add this to the mix and now it sounds a little weirder.
As part of the consortia process, efficiency and effectiveness reviews ("E&E" in ministry parlance) are being conducted across the province. But the reviews are leading to interesting ends. One local administrator responsible for transportation explained it to education reporter as such: If boards are "inefficient" and spend more than their calculated grant on transportation, the E&E review comes in and works with staff. If staff do a good enough job at explaining and rationalizing why the board needs to spend more than its grant, the E&E review could confirm and legitimize this overexpenditire and then, poof, the board's transportation grant is adjusted. If boards, however, are "efficient" and spend under their grant, after the E&E review comes in and confirms this the ministry would claw back the savings.
As the adminstrator frustratingly said, what's the incentive? If the board saves money on transportation in hopes of then diverting that funding to other programs or services where costs are above the grant, the ministry comes and takes the money away. If the board runs over budget on transportation for legitimate reasons, the ministry comes in and funds the transportation deficit. It's a model that encourages boards to spend up to the last penny of their transportation grant (or higher) so the ministry doesn't claw back any funds.
Given these issues, it should be an interesting day when the province moves to complete the consortia initiative by cutting boards completly out of the transportation game. The end goal here is to have the money flow directly to the consortia and have no direct funding from boards.
Some three to four years ago, after decades of some boards haggling it out and coming to no agreement, the province mandated school bus consortia be formed across Ontario. It arbitrarily drew lines around the province and boards were told to begin the process of forming new corporations to manage all school transportation within each consortia's boundaries. Most consortia would have representatives from at least one English public and English Catholic board, along with their counterpart French public/Catholic boards. The governance of the consortia was, despite the size of the pot of transportation cash each board brought to the table, mandated that each board have equal ownership of the corporation.
Many of these consortia are now legally established corporations, with directors and education and whatever superintendent-level administrator responsible for transportation sitting as directors. Some consortia are in the first year of a three-year plan where they first bring together all the mapping and route planning without making any significant changes. In this stage the consortia are also harmonizing all the various boards' transportation policies, such as determining who is eligible for school bus transportation and who has to walk. In year two and beyond, each consortia starts rationalizing routes so that instead of two or three buses travelling down a road picking up students for individual schools, one bus picks all of them up and drops them off at each school along the way. The goal is fewer buses and lower transportation costs.
For 2009-10 this initiative is being given a few kicks in the rear end by the folks at the MinEd. Boards have been told they must reduce transportation costs by one per cent through route optimization. If they don't do so, the ministry will simply reduce their funding by an equivalent amount.
Sounds easy, right?
Add this to the mix and now it sounds a little weirder.
As part of the consortia process, efficiency and effectiveness reviews ("E&E" in ministry parlance) are being conducted across the province. But the reviews are leading to interesting ends. One local administrator responsible for transportation explained it to education reporter as such: If boards are "inefficient" and spend more than their calculated grant on transportation, the E&E review comes in and works with staff. If staff do a good enough job at explaining and rationalizing why the board needs to spend more than its grant, the E&E review could confirm and legitimize this overexpenditire and then, poof, the board's transportation grant is adjusted. If boards, however, are "efficient" and spend under their grant, after the E&E review comes in and confirms this the ministry would claw back the savings.
As the adminstrator frustratingly said, what's the incentive? If the board saves money on transportation in hopes of then diverting that funding to other programs or services where costs are above the grant, the ministry comes and takes the money away. If the board runs over budget on transportation for legitimate reasons, the ministry comes in and funds the transportation deficit. It's a model that encourages boards to spend up to the last penny of their transportation grant (or higher) so the ministry doesn't claw back any funds.
Given these issues, it should be an interesting day when the province moves to complete the consortia initiative by cutting boards completly out of the transportation game. The end goal here is to have the money flow directly to the consortia and have no direct funding from boards.
Orillia Catholic review
The articles on accommodation reviews where the community supports closure or consolidation always catch the eye as the daily clippings scroll past. This This is the Simcoe-Muskoka Catholic board's review of its elementary schools in Orillia and the surrounding area, where the committee is recommending consolidation of two schools into a new facility, with heavy focus on the new facility.
This proposed new school would be for 300-350 pupil places-- a number that depending on where you live can be a small elementary school or a large one. Knowing the area and the distribution of Catholic and public schools, this range is likely upper-middle in terms of elementary schools in the board, but likely would be one of the larger elementary schools in the board north of the City of Barrie. If the board accepts, it would mean a new facility for students where their body count would mean far fewer split-grade classes. The current schools have 100-150 students each, which likely means every class in the school is a split-grade grouping.
This marks about half a dozen reviews highlighted so far on this blog-- and with a 60-day timer on the receipt of each of these committee reports it means a very busy spring for trustees as they both setup their 2009-10 budgets and make decisions on these reviews before the summer break.
This proposed new school would be for 300-350 pupil places-- a number that depending on where you live can be a small elementary school or a large one. Knowing the area and the distribution of Catholic and public schools, this range is likely upper-middle in terms of elementary schools in the board, but likely would be one of the larger elementary schools in the board north of the City of Barrie. If the board accepts, it would mean a new facility for students where their body count would mean far fewer split-grade classes. The current schools have 100-150 students each, which likely means every class in the school is a split-grade grouping.
This marks about half a dozen reviews highlighted so far on this blog-- and with a 60-day timer on the receipt of each of these committee reports it means a very busy spring for trustees as they both setup their 2009-10 budgets and make decisions on these reviews before the summer break.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
