Please write to Jennifer Adams, superintendent of curriculum, who is in charge of the review, to express your concerns about the program review. Email addresses for Jennifer Adams and other concerned staff and trustees are available here.
Overview:
ASAC has a number of concerns about the alternative education program review. Some are related to how the review is being conducted. In addition, there is a larger concern about the purpose of the review.
Procedural concerns with the review include:
1) The short length of time devoted to the review. The review was begun at the end of June and the final report is due in January.
2) Although the steering committee has a diverse membership, they will not be writing the report (that will be done by school board staff) or making any recommendations. Their sole purpose is to read and discuss documents that have been gathered by staff.
3) No current students will be surveyed about the program.
The larger concern about the purpose of the review has arisen gradually as details of the review have become more apparent.
1) None of the alternative schools will be visited by board staff, trustees or the steering committee. The explanation offered is that school sites are evaluated by area superintendents and the purpose of the review is not to assess the quality or delivery of the program. Its hard to see what is left when those are taken away.
2) Alternative programs in other areas (for example, in Toronto and Hamilton) will not be contacted. Only written descriptions of their programs will be considered as part of the literature review. As with the program here, the actual quality and delivery of their programs is not considered relevant.
3) The purpose of the review is described as being about coming to a decision regarding the alternative program, without reference to how such a decision should be made. If you find that confusing, so do we.
The first objective of the review (as stated by the board at http://www.ocdsb.ca/au_hi_program-reviews_EAPR.asp) is "to determine the extent to which the current mandate, expectations and practices regarding program delivery for the alternative elementary program in the OCDSB differs from that of the non-alternative programs (e.g., regular English and French immersion)". There appears to be a disconnect between this objective and the structure of the review process.Without knowing how the alternative program functions, it is difficult to see how the review will determine how it differs from the non-alternative program offerings.
Efforts by the alternative schools to provide even more differentiated approaches (such as the alternative French 3/4 class last year at Lady Evelyn) have been frustrated by the board. In the case of the alternative French class, it took a year-long struggle just to allow the class to continue until June. This aspect is not addressed, either. If the alternative program is supposed to be different than the other programs, the board needs to allow for that. On the other hand, staff at the board also say that all programs should meet the needs of all students, which appears to conflict with this.
It appears that the review will be solely on paper and not take into account the lived reality of the program. For example, it is really easy to look at a principle like "parental engagement" on paper and say that happens everywhere, instead of looking at how that principle actually manifests in different schools and programs. This is disappointing and calls into question the entire purpose of conducting a review.
Below are key points that you can include in your letter. Please use these along with your own ideas and comments. Unique letters are taken more seriously than letters that are all the same.
We particularly encourage those of you who have experiences with more than one program within the OCDSB to describe your varying experiences. (For example, those of you who switched to the alternative program from the regular English program or French immersion.)
Points to include:
*purpose of letter: concerns regarding the Elementary Alternative Program Review
*who you are: a parent with a child in the alternative program.
*concerns regarding the structure of the review: the short length of time being devoted to the review, the minimal role of the steering committee and the limited formal consultation with stakeholders
*concern about the purpose of the review: the specifics of the program, its quality and how it is delivered, are not being considered; other Ontario alternative programs are not being contacted (as with the program here, it seems like the actual quality and delivery of their programs are not seen as relevant); the purpose of the review is described as being about coming to a decision regarding the alternative program, but it's hard, given the above, to figure out what that decision will be based on.
*the first objective of the review (as stated by the board) is "to determine the extent to which the current mandate, expectations and practices regarding program delivery for the alternative elementary program in the OCDSB differs from that of the non-alternative programs (e.g., regular English and French immersion)" -- without knowing how the alternative program functions, it is difficult to see how the review will determine how it differs from the non-alternative program offerings
*efforts of the alternative schools to provide even more differentiated approaches have been denied by the board; the review does not address this
*the review will be solely on paper and not take into account the lived reality of the program: for example, it is easy to look at a principle like "parental engagement" on paper and say that happens everywhere, instead of looking at how that principle actually manifests in different schools and programs
*try to end your letter with a question, so that a response is required
