HALIFAX, FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 2015

 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON SUPPLY

 

11:27 A.M.

 

CHAIRMAN

Ms. Patricia Arab

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Good afternoon everyone. Welcome to the Subcommittee of the Whole on Supply. We are continuing with the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development today. We left off with questions from the Liberal caucus and we are going to start with the NDP caucus for the first hour of this day.

 

The honourable member for Truro-Bible Hill-Millbrook-Salmon River.

 

            MS. LENORE ZANN: I appreciate you coming back here today. There were a few questions that I didn't have a chance to ask yesterday, and just for your own interest, I'll probably be going for about a half-hour.

 

We talked about the hub school model yesterday and I know that the meeting did happen last night and there was a big article in The Chronicle Herald today, of course, about that and I know that people that I have been talking to, they met and they admitted that the hub idea was not the idea of this government and that the minister did not want to interfere with the process that's already in place. But if the board says no then they would like to know what's going to happen next, because they're not prepared to give up on this model. They feel that it will work and they said that everything in the minister's response to the Freeman report allows for a hub model - even if you don't want to call it that, even if the minister would prefer to call it something else. So she would like to know, is it lip service to break the status quo in education or is this government playing chicken with the school board?

 

School boards seem to be the bad cops for whatever the government in power wants and so as I mentioned earlier, when I first got in government, our local school board brought me in, along with my colleague at the time, John MacDonell, and asked us specifically to go back to our government and say hold off on our moratorium on closing small schools. They were adamant that they wanted us to stop doing that and to let them close the small schools that they had decided that they wanted to close, and that is now five or six years ago. What could the minister say to these people, these constituents who are so passionate and caring about these small schools, in light of what happened last night?

 

            HON. KAREN CASEY: My answer is no different today than it was yesterday: the decision to close schools rests with the school board and the opportunity in the guidelines and criteria for hub is clearly laid out. Communities come before the school board with their proposal, and that has happened; the board will make their decision and it is their responsibility.

 

            MS. ZANN: Thank you for that answer and I suppose we will now need to wait and see what the school board actually decides and then see if there is anything the minister can do to try to help these smaller communities have their plans implemented, because as I said, there has been a lot of work. You recognized that yesterday and I really appreciate that there has been a lot of work done by these community groups and they do not want to lose their small schools. They feel that that would hollow out their communities and that it will be the death of the community. They've lost their co-op; they've lost their bank; they still have a liquor store, interestingly enough, but the school is arguably the bloodline. It's the heart and soul of a community.

 

My father, for one, has always believed in small schools. He says it's always nice to have a school where the principal actually knows the names of the kids, all of the kids, instead of just being numbers or faces that they don't recognize. I hope that in June, when that decision is made, the groups can come to the minister and ask her for further action to try to help save their schools.

 

            One of things that I did want to ask you about as well was the fact that there was a motion in the House the other day asking: "Therefore be it resolved that the House of Assembly support the significant investment made in the Nova Scotia education system in the 2015-16 provincial budget, primary among them the over $20 million reinvested into classrooms to improve student outcomes and better prepare our next generation for career opportunities."

 

When we talk about reinvesting $20 million, I noticed that in the last Budget Estimates, when I was not the Education Critic at that time but I happened to be sitting in the House, the minister admitted that the previous NDP Government had not cut $65 million as was said in the Liberal platform but in fact that it was only $13 million. Could you please explain where you're getting the $20 million from?

 

            MS. CASEY: A couple of comments that I would make. First of all, before we leave the hub model, the member said we wait and see; absolutely we wait and see. It's a decision made by the school board. I'm optimistic that the presentations that were made were put together well by the communities, but it is a board decision and they will render that decision on June 10^th.

 

With respect to the investments in public schools, perhaps the member could table where she's saying I admitted that it was $13 million. I have no idea what she's talking about but I did clearly table, on April 11, 2014, that the total funding that was taken away from school boards during the NDP 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14 did total $64.740 million so we rounded that off to $65 million. That's where the $65 million comes from; that has been tabled and we've made a commitment to begin to reinvest that. I mentioned yesterday we reinvested $17.5 million of that last year and $20.4 million of that this year.

 

            MS. ZANN: Well, I think we just need to get a copy of Hansard from the Budget Estimates last year because in the Budget Estimates, when the minister was asked about how much had been cut by the previous government, she said $13 million. So we could both look up the Hansard on that.

 

            Earlier this year, the Nova Scotia Teachers Union addressed concerns about the number of violent acts reported by teachers in schools. The minister had concerns about the way these acts were reported and said she didn't want to alarm parents about the state of our schools. Has the department fixed this reporting process for acts of violence in our schools and are there any budget implications for this fix?

 

            MS. CASEY: First of all, we will certainly be checking Hansard as well, but we can also check Hansard and provide the member with a copy of what was tabled on April 11, 2014, which very clearly identified the $65 million, and I would be happy to give the member a copy of that or she can go to Hansard and get what was tabled at that time.

 

            With respect to the violence in schools, one of the things that we recognize is the importance of safety in our schools and that's safety for our students and all those who work in our schools, and all those who visit our schools. One of the things that the previous government had done was to look at how these - I really don't want to use the word, but I will use it - severely disruptive behaviours would be captured and recorded.

 

            The data that boards have is what they have given us and which we have used to determine what is happening in our schools and what we need to do to ensure safety in our schools. The way the incidents are reported, when we reviewed the detail on that, it was obvious that interpretation, again by teachers who were recording and reporting, varied, and what was considered by one teacher who may have clicked on "physical violence" was nothing compared to a real act of violence that may have put somebody at risk or affected the safety that we strive for in all of our schools.

 

            It was that comment or that article that was written in the paper that has prompted the member to ask a question, and there is absolutely no question that safety of our students is priority; safety of the people who are in our schools is a priority, and what we are looking at with the school boards is perhaps a better way for teachers in particular to record incidents of inappropriate behaviour or unacceptable behaviour so that when you pull out "violence," you do truly get acts of behaviour that could be deemed as violent.

 

            However, having said that, when the data was pulled from the boards and they provided it for us, we confirmed that with the data that we had, and we were looking at less than 1 per cent of the acts that were identified as being related to cyber-bullying. We also identified that most of those incidents are between Grades 7 and 10, and this is information that we absolutely need in order to be able to address and respond to that.

 

            We have, as I mentioned yesterday, determined that the process that was in place for codes of conduct was very confusing, led to a lot of misinterpretation, and implementation varied across the boards. So we will have one code of conduct for the province. All schools will be asked to implement that. We believe that will take away some of the confusion and lead to more clarity and also work with the in-servicing that we will be doing with teachers and principals to ensure that they understand what is deemed to be unacceptable behaviour and the reporting mechanism that they have, we hope, we believe, will clarify and be more specific in what it is that teachers are reporting.

 

            MS. ZANN: Does the code of conduct also include dress or is it just to do with violence and other issues like that?

 

            MS. CASEY: There will be a wide range of behaviours that are identified. As I said yesterday, we were working with teachers - these are the people on the front line - to make sure that what we put forward as a draft is open for their input. We'll also be including principals in that so that both teachers and principals, who are the front-line people in implementing any code, clearly understand what it is that we believe is acceptable or unacceptable.

 

            MS. ZANN: You mean in regard to a dress code, specifically?

 

            MS. CASEY: This is not a dress code, this is a code of conduct.

 

            MS. ZANN: Yes, that was my question, if the dress code was included in the code of conduct, to see whether or not certain items of clothing would be considered part of that. Is that a separate issue, the dress code?

 

            MS. CASEY: The whole notion of dress code has not been addressed in this particular ministerial policy. If that's something we need to look at with our school boards, with our superintendents, and with our teachers - we will certainly have that conversation.

 

            MS. ZANN: One thing I'm sure the minister did notice was that last year there was a big kerfuffle about dress code and who is allowed to wear what to what school. Some schools were allowed to wear short shorts and others weren't; some schools are allowed to wear spaghetti straps and others weren't.

 

            The other question is, coming from a Status of Women perspective, is it in keeping these days that spaghetti straps - the reason apparently that that was put in place was because people didn't want to see women's bra straps. Has there been any discussion about a change to dress code to come up with modern standards today?

 

            MS. CASEY: I think the whole notion of dress code is something that goes far beyond the classroom and it is something that is part of what we do in our society, what is appropriate, what is acceptable. Any changes we make or any guidelines that we prepare for our schools will definitely have to be developed through a co-operative approach with our teachers and our principals and our school advisory councils.

 

            MS. ZANN: I would suggest that if we are talking about codes being right across the boards that it should be the same for dress codes right across the boards for all the schools. One thing I would like to note is that there has always been the discussion about school uniforms and some people are for school uniforms, some are not. I noted that when I was in Australia growing up as a kid, everybody had school uniforms.

 

            My mother, as a teacher at the Truro Junior High School for 20-odd, 30 years, said it was really interesting that in the 1970s you couldn't tell the rich kids from the poor kids because everybody wore tattered jeans and T-shirts and they all looked the same. She said when the 1980s came along, when all of a sudden designer jeans, designer tops, designer clothing was popular, all of a sudden you could actually tell the rich kids from the poor kids and it made a huge difference. In fact, it also increased crime and violence in the schoolyards because sometimes kids would be bullied and their clothing and their shoes, their sneakers, would be stolen and things like this.

 

            I just wonder, has there ever been any talk recently, in recent years, about a dress code that would address possible uniforms in the Nova Scotia school system?

 

            MS. CASEY: During my time, no.

 

            MS. ZANN: Is that something that you might like to address or discuss with school boards and teachers?

 

            MS. CASEY: Any decisions made regarding - any codes we put in place in our schools will be in consultation with teachers and principals, parents, school advisory councils. If there is a request to consider dress code, to consider uniforms, there's certainly a lot of research that would have to be done in order to respond to that.

 

            I think the message should be clear that with homework, with the code of conduct, and with other ministerial policies that we are putting in place, the goal of those is consistency across the province.

 

            MS. ZANN: I appreciate that answer. You were mentioning yesterday about the minister's panel that had been put in place, with the Honourable Myra Freeman as the chair for that panel. You mentioned on that panel there was a former teacher, a parent, and a student who had graduated and gone on to have a successful business. Is that correct?

 

            MS. CASEY: In the minister's panel report that was presented to me it did include the names of all those people who were on the panel. I mentioned those yesterday. They're there in the report for the member to read.

 

            MS. ZANN: I also noticed that yesterday you mentioned that there were no active teachers on that panel because the government felt it would be self-serving for teachers to be on the education panel. The former teacher that was on the panel, was that Ms. Freeman or was that somebody else?

 

            MS. CASEY: No, it was not Ms. Freeman, it was a former curriculum consultant who worked with the Chignecto board.

 

            MS. ZANN: I would just like to dig into that a little bit more because being a former teacher, there have been a lot of changes to the system, as you know, and even when my own government was in power and they were discussing cuts to education, many times around the table I would say, as a caucus member, costs may have gone up in our system but there is probably a very good reason for that because we don't use chalk and blackboards anymore, we use computers and laptops and many other digital instruments that are actually a lot more expensive.

 

            The fact is that talking to teachers they tell us the system has changed so much in the last five, 10 years. It's rapidly changing. I don't understand why the minister would feel or why her government would feel that it's self-serving for teachers to be on an education panel that is about education today. Can you explain that please?

 

            MS. CASEY: Just a couple of comments if I could. The member is talking about when her Party was in government and appears to be acknowledging that the costs of education are increasing as we look at doing things differently. I'm not sure what role she played but I would suggest that her voice might not have been heard because it was her Party, when they were in government that cut public education in 2011-12 and 2012-13 and 2013-14. I would agree with the member that costs went up but I can't agree with a government that cut $65 million out of public education.

 

            The second thing I would like to comment on is the comment about teachers and teachers' participation. I'm not sure if the member was here yesterday or not but we went through very clearly the numbers of people who had responded to the education panel. I would prefer to hear from 3,000-plus teachers through their responses than to place one teacher, active, in a very difficult role to sit on a panel that receives the input from 19,000 Nova Scotians. I think that's a very unfair position to put any active teacher in. I wanted to hear from active teachers in the community and I'm very happy that we had 3,164 teachers respond.

 

            MS. ZANN: In response to that, yes, I was a backbencher in that government and yes, I was against all of the education cuts. In fact, I spoke quite loudly around the caucus table about my displeasure and that's the place to announce your displeasure about anything that government is doing. I think it's our jobs as MLAs, if we disagree with something, with a mandate or a path forward that our government is going on, if we think it's a mistake, it's our jobs to say so. It's not our job necessarily to say so out in the public but it's our job to do it around the caucus table, and that's why I'm always trying to encourage our colleagues on the other side of the House, who are now in government, to speak to their government about their displeasure about anything that the government is saying because that is the place to do it. Sometimes we are listened to and sometimes we are not but it is our jobs to express our feelings, especially on behalf of our constituents.

 

            One thing I made sure to do when I was a backbencher in that government is not once did I ever stand up and say I support cuts to education because I don't. I come from a family of educators and I know the importance of education and I will always champion that, including today, which is why I'm not questioning you about why we're spending any more money in the system; I think it's very important that we do. I also know many teachers and I know teachers often feel that they are not included in some of these important panels, the active teachers, and they would like to be; they would like to have their voices heard and be part of the panel that gets the information and then makes the decisions that makes recommendations to government. I think it's fantastic that 3,000 teachers responded online but I also think it would have been nice to have a couple of teachers actually on that panel - active teachers.

 

            Along that line, I would also like to talk to you about the eight actions that the minister would like to change. One of them included removing principals and school board members from the Teachers Union. I know that this is part of the collective bargaining issue and it sounds like the minister is going to be talking to the union about that particular issue. I've also heard from several teachers across the province who have told me that they have been abused by either their principal or school board management. What exactly is it that the minister is going to be talking to the union about in this regard and how does she see moving forward in her best of all possible worlds?

 

            MS. CASEY: As I did say yesterday, every action in the Action Plan went through a lens of - is this in the best interest of kids? That was the first lens we put it through. The second lens was how can we do these and how can we make this happen? What are some of the challenges in making them happen? What are some of the obstacles and what are some of the rewards for making these happen? We came down with eight that are in the Action Plan that do require either co-operation or negotiation with the Teachers Union because they, in some way or other, are tied into the collective agreement.

 

One of those, as I mentioned yesterday, was having administrators and teachers in the same union. I think we'd be hard pressed to find any place in this province where management is a member of the same union as the employees and the people they are supervising. It does present a very challenging situation and it can present a conflict. I've heard that from both teachers and principals. The president of the Teachers Union is well aware of my concern; she has, I hope, read this. I believe she has and she knows that that's a concern and she also knows that we will not be able to move forward on that without one or the other, co-operation or negotiation.

 

            With respect to those teachers who are administrators, it is absolutely important that they have a voice and they have an advocacy body that can advocate on their behalf. The conflict is when it's the same body that is advocating on behalf of the teacher. I've talked to the president of the NSTU; she knows that's what my concern is.

 

            MS. ZANN: Thank you for that answer. Also, I noticed that you're concerned about linking teachers to teaching the right subjects, not based on seniority. That also ties in as well, slightly, with poor teacher performance. What do you propose regarding both of those things?

 

            MS. CASEY: One of the things that we are working toward is standards for teachers to meet. The other thing is working with school boards, and with teachers directly, on their professional development, recognizing that the assignment that they are given in schools, to the best of the ability of the administration, should be aligned with their backgrounds and their experience.

 

            We recognize that in some situations that may be a challenge, but we also recognize that it is in the best interests of students to have somebody in front of them and the class, teaching them the subject for which they have knowledge and expertise. We would want that match wherever possible. We also recognize that the professional development for teachers who are given an assignment which, out of no fault of their own, may not be in their area of study, the professional development that is provided for them and that they're willing to work on, should be directly related to that.

 

            These are things that are in the mix. These are goals that we're working toward. Again, we're working toward those because we believe that is in the best interests of students. We believe it will improve the learning and teaching environment - learning for students and teaching for teachers.

 

            MS. ZANN: What is the timeline on that? When will your eight concerns be addressed and when will you be negotiating with the union about these things?

 

            MS. CASEY: The NSTU contract expires this summer and negotiations will begin. I'm not sure when those begin, but the contract expires this summer.

 

            MS. ZANN: I'd just like to also move on to your four pillars now. I noticed that you were saying yesterday that you have concerns about school boards - the structure of elected and unelected officials. I do note that the Premier came to Truro recently and spoke to the chamber of commerce at a breakfast meeting that I attended and mentioned that there are going to be changes to the school boards.

 

            Could you elaborate a little bit about what those changes might look like and what you would like to see? Again, in your best of all possible worlds, what are you suggesting?

 

            MS. CASEY: I'd like to repeat something that was said yesterday, and that what is in the minister's panel report that came to me, came from 19,000 Nova Scotians. I was at arm's length with that. I did not participate in that. They are not my opinions. They are not my information or my reaction or my comments. When that was presented to us, it was clear that Nova Scotians had concerns about structure - again, structure within the elected board and structure within senior management. In order to get more information about the structure, about any concerns that may be there, it was important to go to a third party, which is the Auditor General of the province, to do an audit of those boards to determine if, in fact, there were legitimate concerns about the structure of the elected board and the senior management. The Auditor General has begun that process and has made contact with the boards. At this point, that will be part of the initial audit.

 

            MS. ZANN: Well just following along with that, the Premier did make comments at the breakfast for the chamber of commerce in Truro telling us that there were changes coming to the school board structure. He didn't elaborate, but he said that it's not going to be looking the same as what it is now. Can you give us a hint, a clue, about what sorts of things you're actually looking at, your government is looking at, or your department is looking at?

 

            MS. CASEY: I will await the results of the audit.

 

            MS. ZANN: When will that audit be concluded?

 

            MS. CASEY: The Auditor General has made initial contact with the boards that are being audited. I do not have his timeline, but when he has completed his audit, that will be made known.

 

            MS. ZANN: Yes, I'm also aware that the school boards had hired various people, in one case a former principal; they paid them money to go through the list of school board positions and explain what their purpose was. This was done a few years ago, actually, so it sounds to me that perhaps the school boards were aware that something like this was coming because I had been told that this was already in the works and that they were preparing, in order to prove the importance of each of their different jobs within that school board.

 

            Regarding curriculum, teachers are anxious and frustrated and the teachers I have spoken to across the province now are sick of the curriculum constantly being changed, with new books and new programs. It seems like every year there is something new being put upon them where they are having to learn and come up with a completely brand-new program.

 

            The curriculum you are working with right now, when was this particular curriculum introduced, or have you introduced a new one yet that you are planning to introduce?

 

            MS. CASEY: I think it's important to note that the pillars in the Action Plan were driven by what Nova Scotians told us and 3,000-plus of those were teachers. One of the concerns teachers had was with the number of outcomes they were expected to help their students meet. The change that we are making in the curriculum is driven by teachers. It is teachers who are providing the leadership on that, and it was at their request that we look at not changing the curriculum but looking at how we can better streamline the curriculum so that it is achievable within the time frame they have with their students.

 

            MS. ZANN: I am relieved to hear that answer because it sounds to me like they are really up to their eyeballs and beyond with the work they are expected to do. Speaking about outcome-based, in your opinion, what is the reasoning behind the outcome-based system and does it actually work?

 

            MS. CASEY: If you don't have something you can measure, then it's pretty hard to determine whether you continue it, whether you modify it or whether you discard it. When we are looking at what we expect to achieve out of anything we do, whether it's curriculum or whatever, we'd be folly to not look at what it is we expect at the end of the day. If we expect students' performance to be improved, we expect learning of knowledge and skills to take place, then we expect that the curriculum that we have and that we're asking teachers to teach and we're asking students to learn, has to have some clearly-defined goals and outcomes, whatever you want to call them, so you know whether the child has been successful and the teacher knows whether they have been successful.

 

            We do have a goal, an outcome, an achievement, whatever you want to call it, that we strive for and we look towards that and then we measure to determine how effective we've been with the teachers, how effective they've been at helping their students achieve that, and with the student how successful they have been in achieving that.

 

            MS. ZANN: What would you say then about the fact that there are many students who are unable to achieve the outcomes they are supposed to achieve? I know there are many IPP programs now, which didn't exist when I was going to school, and I'm glad to see that. Again this certainly adds to the burden of work on teachers.

 

            How do you foresee moving forward? Also, if you want to take into consideration inclusion and these types of issues, how do you see that playing out with the whole outcome-based theory?

 

            MS. CASEY: I think it's important to acknowledge that not all students are able to achieve at the same level. We also recognize that there are many different learning styles, and so the teaching strategies and the supports that we put in our schools and in our classrooms have to be there to assist those students who may have some difficulty and may have a different learning style.

 

            A number of years ago, the IPPs were introduced. We have collected some data last year, which was alarming because the number of IPPs was continuing to grow and the number of students was continuing to decline. So we began immediately to look at the cause of that. Do we have more students who need an IPP? Are they being reviewed every year to ensure that the needs that caused a student to be on an IPP in one year still exist the second year? As I said, is it a life sentence? We've gone back to look at that to make sure that the guidelines that are being used for IPPs are meeting the needs of the students, that they are continually being monitored, and that at the end of the day we've provided the best possible support for that student.

 

            Teachers are very much involved in that review. Teachers have asked questions about IPPs; parents have asked them. Go back to the minister's panel - things were raised there which have caused us to act to make sure that we understand that what we're doing is in the best interests of kids and if it is not, we will change it. There are adaptations that happen in the classroom all the time with students, based on their learning needs and based on their learning style.

 

            I think it's important to note that constantly monitoring and not being afraid to make a change if it's not in the best interests of kids is absolutely the direction we're going and that is being led by the teachers in this province.

 

            MS. ZANN: I would say that that is so important to listen to the teachers. They need to be heard. They're the ones on the ground. They're the ones in the field. They're the ones who are dealing with this on a day-to-day basis. What I also hear from teachers is that the school boards are oftentimes removed. Many of the people in the school boards were teachers at one time but they're not dealing with the issues on the ground. They're not dealing with all the behavioural issues that these teachers have to deal with these days.

 

            As we know, it's changing rapidly. Children's minds and the way that they are behaving are changing, possibly because of all of the technological gizmos - for want of a better word - that they're using and also I believe, too, seeing films and television where people are dissing others and being disrespectful. I know it's very difficult for teachers in the system right now to deal with this. There are only certain things that they can do that they're allowed to do without getting in trouble themselves, and some of the kids know this, and they know that they can get away with a lot. I think that everything that we can do to try to support our teachers in their jobs is so important.

 

            Another thing that this leads me into is when you discussed the idea of inclusion itself and how I remember when it was first introduced, the teachers told me that they agreed to have inclusion if they were supported financially with enough backup and support of assistants to help them to deal with having different children in the classroom who would need special attention, special needs. They said that in the beginning they had the support, but bit by bit it has been eroded.

 

            In your opening remarks you did mention that you're taking a look at that model, and you're taking a look at changing the model of inclusion. Could you expand a little bit more about what your vision is for that and what you would see as being something that would work better in the system today?

 

            MS. CASEY: I think it's pretty obvious one of the first things we've done was rather than reduce the funding to public education and to school boards we've increased it because we recognize - and I mentioned this yesterday - the funding is now a hybrid model of enrolment and programming. Because we have more students in our school who have more special needs, we are much better at early identification. We need to be better at early intervention and you cannot do that and cut the funding from public education. That is one of the reasons why we made sure that our government did not follow the trend that had been set.

 

            So boards are getting more money. Some of that is targeted towards special programs; some of it is targeted towards special education. One of the things that boards and teachers complained about was the fact that with reduced funding to the boards there were fewer EAs in the classroom to help support the child with special needs. We are trying to reverse that trend and reinvest money back into the schools so that every student, regardless of their ability, gets a support that they need, in order to be successful and reach their own potential.

 

            MS. ZANN: While I appreciate the minister's answer, I do have to say two things about that: one is that the teachers I've been speaking to have said that it has been happening from the beginning, so it wasn't just in the last government but the Progressive Conservative Government before that where they started seeing erosions to those support systems.

 

            The other thing that I would like to say is that as an MLA, when I was approached and told that there were not enough EAs in certain schools in the CCRSB system, I brought that to the attention of the minister of the day who then asked her folks at the department to ask the CCRSB board why there were not enough EAs because they had been given the funding for those EAs and they were supposed to be targeted. They were told by the board, no they didn't need any more EAs.

 

There was a complete disconnect between the board, the government, and the teachers, and that is a huge problem. When you have teachers on the ground telling the MLA we need more help, we need more EAs, and we're being told that their hours are cut, their days are cut, they're not available, and we're being told it's because of cuts to funding by the government, then you go to the government, the minister herself, and say there are problems here; this needs to be addressed. She goes to the school board and says do you need more EAs, how many do you need? We're prepared to make sure it happens, and then is told by the board, no there's no problem, we don't need any more EAs; I say that's a huge problem. How does this disconnect happen between schools boards, government, and teachers?

 

            MS. CASEY: I would only say, all the more reason to target money to school boards.

 

            MS. ZANN: I agree with you but I have to say also when there is the money and they're being told there is the money, and they're being told any EAs that we need we're going to put in the system, and then the school board is saying we don't need any more EAs, that's a disconnect, that's a complete disconnect. I had parent-teacher associations telling me directly that they needed more EAs and yet the school board was saying the very opposite thing to our government; that's a problem. I don't know if you're going to come up against that but if you ever do, believe me, it's a headache and it shouldn't be happening.

 

            The other last thing I would like to talk about is quality teaching and leadership. This was the fourth pillar that you're discussing. We need to create an environment where teachers can do their very best; I completely agree with that. I think that it is very difficult for teachers to do their best when they have such a wide variety of students. As you said, you really want to be able to help streamline some of the very brightest and talented students who sometimes are falling a little bit behind because there is so much attention being put on other students in the classroom who need extra help.

 

            Where are we going with this, what are your main suggestions; and what is your vision for this to try to create a thriving environment where teachers can actually do their very best for the students and for themselves, their own mental sanity and physical stamina?

 

            MS. CASEY: I would like the teachers in this province to understand and recognize - and I believe they do - that every action in the Action Plan is designed to improve the learning environment in the classroom. Whether that is under pillar one, two, three, or four, the whole document is designed to make a better learning environment for the student, a better teaching environment for the teacher. We are responding to some of the things that teachers told us that were troublesome in their classroom. Code of conduct is being reviewed; their input is there. The number of outcomes is being reviewed; their input is there. Review of IPPs; their input is there. New guidelines for that are there.

 

            We are engaging teachers every step of the way because we listen to them and we know what it is that they need, they're telling us. But they're not only telling us, they are helping us put together the documents that we will be asking every teacher in the province to use, to ensure that we have addressed the concerns that have been raised by teachers.

 

            I value teachers. I understand their concerns, and it is my responsibility to make sure that we respond to those, but we're doing it by engaging them. They will see their fingerprints on this. They will be able to be proud of something that is happening in the school because they were part of that.

 

            MS. ZANN: I would agree with her; I think that teachers, nurses, and home care workers are some of the hardest working people in this province. They give their all to their jobs. They give their all to the people they work for, for the students and the people, the patients and seniors, anybody who is living at home and needs their help. I think that they need to be honoured and appreciated and their voices need to be heard, constantly. I would highly recommend that for any other recommendation panels or anything like that, teachers should be at the table.

 

            I do have concerns that the capital plan does not necessary correspond with what school boards have identified as their most urgent needs in terms of new schools or renovations. Could the minister please provide us with the information of where on the school board's priority list the projects on the capital plan fall?

 

            MS. CASEY: I'm not sure if the member is talking about the tangible capital assets - the TCA - or the maintenance capital.

 

            MS. ZANN: I'm actually talking about in terms of new schools and renovations and there are board asks.

 

            MS. CASEY: Each year the school boards are asked to submit to the department their list of priorities for needs, whether it is a new capital project - being a new school, a new build - or whether it's a renovation. The boards are asked to do their long-range plan, to look at their facilities to determine what their priorities are. They submit them to the Department of Education.

 

            Out of that list of priorities the department is able to identify which ones they are able to accommodate, within the envelope that the government has. It's interesting that in 2013, when we formed government, we looked at the capital plan that had existed with the previous government, commitments that had been made by the previous government to build new schools, and we recognized the importance of honouring those commitments.

 

            Communities had been told they would get a new school and we felt it very unfair to change that so the new projects that had been announced by the previous government are still part of the capital plan, and within the envelope that we had we were able to respond to some of the requests from some of the boards.

 

            In addition to the capital new builds that were submitted, we have the other process that I mentioned about maintenance capital, which allows us to respond to boards, again on their priority list, for repairs to between 50 and 60 schools. The process of setting priorities is done at the board, through their own processes, and then they submit their request to us.

 

Unfortunately, and I don't know how this happened, but I will use a school in the member's constituency, Bible Hill Central Elementary School. That school was one that was announced when I was the minister in 2008-09, and it was approved; it was announced. Not one thing happened with that new school in 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013. We came into government and that school was still sitting there as a new school that had been announced five-plus years prior.

 

Immediately I made sure that project got acted on, that we started the site selection process, and we are now into the steering team looking at designing that. I have no idea why that school fell off the radar under the previous administration.

 

MS. ZANN: Well actually I was at the announcement in Bible Hill at the current Bible Hill Central Elementary School where I used to attend, with Darrell Dexter, the Premier, the day that we announced that it was going ahead and they were starting to look at locations. I know that the vice-chair of the school board had put that one on his list but it was not number one on his list. In fact, the Cobequid Educational Centre is on the list and I notice it's now off the list for the renovations that it needs. That was one that seems to have disappeared. The other one is one that's not in my riding but it's the Cobequid Consolidated Elementary School, it's called Cobequid and it's in Old Barns, and I can't seem to see that on the list. They've been talking about wanting upgrades in that school for some time. Can you actually tell me if that is on the list for renovations this year?

 

MS. CASEY: Perhaps the member could tell us, is she talking about new school projects out of the TCA or is she talking about maintenance capital?

 

MS. ZANN: For the Bible Hill school I'm talking about the brand-new school that's going to be built. I was there at the announcement with the school board and Darrell Dexter; this is a few years ago now where we announced that and the locations were announced there. They were searching for locations; they finally decided to use the location that the old school is already built on, which is the school that I went to when I was a kid, and I was very pleased to see that.

 

The other question I was asking was about the Cobequid Educational Centre which has been asking for upgrades for some time. It's an old school. It was built in 1972, and they have a lot of flood issues and wet, damp cement issues. They need some upgrades, and also another school called Cobequid, I think it's Cobequid Consolidated Elementary School, but it's in Old Barns. I'm just wondering, is it on the list for renovations and upgrades, either of those schools? I haven't been able to find it and I know they're on the list for the board.

 

            MS. CASEY: I do have to correct a statement that has been made here: the site selection process for the new Bible Hill Central Elementary School began under our government. I'm not sure what announcement she and her former Premier made at that school; perhaps it was re-announcing something that had already been announced, but the point is five to six years went by and there was absolutely no movement on a school that a community had asked for and the government of the day had approved, so I think we need to have that corrected.

 

            The second thing is if the member is talking about Cobequid Educational and Cobequid Consolidated Elementary, those schools were both on a list for 2014-15 capital repairs and did receive the money that they had asked for.

 

            MS. ZANN: So you're saying the work has already been done?

 

            MS. CASEY: Yes, I'm saying that it was requested and it was approved and then it's the responsibility of the board to ensure that the tenders go out and the work gets done.

 

            MS. ZANN: Well I'll be sure to look into that, as you know I'm the very new Critic for Education so I'm attempting to find all these things in these budget documents so I can get up to speed with my new portfolio.

 

            I just want to say one last thing, which is I want to thank the member for all of her answers. I noticed that there was an announcement yesterday about the P3 school expiry date for Sherwood Park in Sydney. The expiry date is November 30^th and the province signed a lease with the developers but not the school boards and so apparently there are three options the minister can choose from: (1) not to renew the lease and the building is vacated and no longer used as a school; (2) renew the contract for another period of time; or (3) buy the school outright from the developer. Has a decision been made about that?

 

            MS. CASEY: The member is speaking about Sherwood Park. We have a number of P3 schools. One of those leases expires the year before the rest so this is an extension to the expiry date so that they all come in together in line on the same date; it's an extension of the date for expiry.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: The member's time has elapsed. Would the minister like to take a break? Okay, we'll take a short recess.

 

[12:29 p.m. The subcommittee recessed.]

 

            [12:33 p.m. The subcommittee reconvened.]

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I call the subcommittee back to order.

 

The honourable member for Pictou Centre.

 

            HON. PAT DUNN: Madam Chairman, it's good to be back here to get a chance to ask a few questions, especially some questions that are dear to my heart because they're the nuts and bolts of what goes on within the classroom.

 

            Over the next few minutes I'll be talking about substitute teachers, snow days, school discipline, professional development days, and report cards - things that are very important to the school system and so on. Just one quick question: with the announcement of the school in Dartmouth South - I think it was replacing two former schools that were in disrepair or whatever - I'll just get you to comment on that.

 

            MS. CASEY: Thank you for the question. As the process for new schools unfolds, boards do some assessment of the facilities that they have in their board and then they determine the priorities. They submit those priorities in order of priority to the department and then the process begins, first of all: what can the government afford, what can the province afford within their envelope of capital dollars, and then work with the board to see how urgent the need is for that. We sometimes look at how often the board has submitted that, which confirms that it is a priority.

 

            With Prince Arthur, it's an old, old building and it's in the heart of a residential area. The elementary school, which is across the street, down the hill, is similarly an old school. There was a request from the Halifax board to combine those two student populations into one school and build a new school to accommodate both the elementary and junior high.

 

            That was approved and then the next part of the process, of course, is to look at a suitable site and the site selection committee is struck. It includes people from both Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal and people from the school board. It may involve people from the municipality but they're looking at how you can accommodate that new school so that it is maintaining the integrity of a school in that community and it meets the needs of the students.

 

            In south Dartmouth with Prince Arthur, the site selection committee came up with a site that was still within the heart of the community but it did involve some municipally owned lands. We began immediately to work with the municipality to try to acquire those lands. The municipality recognized the importance of keeping the school in the community.

 

            Sometimes it takes a while for those negotiations to unfold, but at the end of the day the site has been chosen. It has been announced and the next step is for the steering team to come together to begin looking at the design of the building.

 

            It's important that we keep these things in order because sometimes the topography will determine the design of the school so you need to know exactly where you are going to be building it before the architects and engineers come in to look at possible designs. That process has taken place and the site has been announced. The community is happy. It's really within a stone's throw from where the current schools are and we're looking forward to the process moving forward.

 

            MR. DUNN: Again as we look around the province, we certainly have schools that are reaching the point where they'll have to be replaced in one form or another. I'm sure as revenue is provided over the next few years, some of them will.

 

            I could think of a school that I worked in for 17 years. It was built in three sections: the first section was built in 1925, the next one in 1953, and then 1986. It is known for its leaks. But again, there are other facilities around the province that are leaking. The new correctional centre in Pictou County, just to show you what kind of a winter we had, the new correctional centre had leaks in its roof. The Wellness Centre had leaks and I think New Glasgow Academy had leaks, so it just goes to show you the harsh types of winters we have. It doesn't have to be just old buildings that are causing problems for the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal.

 

            I'm going to get you to make a comment on - you touched on it yesterday - the Brilliant Labs. I realize the revenue is not there to have Brilliant Labs all over the province in many, many schools, so my question is, what kind of access will students have who are in the communities that don't have these Brilliant Labs?

 

            MS. CASEY: The Brilliant Labs that I mentioned is something that is new and exciting. When I had an opportunity to be there for the launch of this I couldn't help but make a comment about brilliant minds, as well, because the students who were there were just absolutely delightful, engaged, bright - far beyond, I would say, anyone in this room with respect to technology. (Laughter)

 

            MS. MACDONALD: I thought you meant minds.

 

            MS. CASEY: Who's behind me? You know I didn't say brilliant minds in this room, I said advanced in technology in this room. But the important thing is that this is something that is in the schools in New Brunswick; it is something that we've learned from best practices there. It's something that we know that industry is here to support, and so we wanted to make sure that our students had an opportunity.

 

            A model that I like to follow is that you do a few things well, you introduce it gradually, you make sure that you have all of the kinks worked out of it, so to speak, and so we are prepared to put a Brilliant Lab, first of all, one in every board.

 

            Your question is a fair one. How do kids access that? The second part of that is there will be a mobile Brilliant Lab, almost like probably in your days when there was . . .

 

            AN HON. MEMBER: Be careful.

 

            MS. CASEY: I know, I'll be careful. Long before your time, member, there would have been a mobile shop that went around for what we called industrial arts at that time, a mobile public library that went around. So we want to use that model to get that opportunity out to our schools.

 

            The other one is what they call makerspaces, which means you pack it up, you go into a school, you set it up, you dismantle it, and you take it somewhere else. Those kinds of options are there which will, again, broaden the scope of schools and students that will have access to the Brilliant Labs.

 

            I will just tell you this little story from when we were there at the launch. There was this little girl there, I think she was probably 12 or 13 and she had a carrot, a banana, and a piece of celery. She had those wired up to some music so that you could play the banana, the celery, and the carrot to get music. You could tap the carrot and you'd hear a note, and you tap the celery and you hear another note. You know, I think she was 12 years old maybe.

 

            There was another little fellow there who was in Grade 3, I believe - since we're taking swipes at others I'll take one at myself. I realized as we talked that I taught his father in school, so that dates both he and I. He was a bright little kid and he had some Lego that he had hooked up to a hoist. He had a little air tank and he would pump the air tank full of air and then he would engage the lever and it would cause the hoist to lift up and carry the weight that was on top of the hoist, all made out of Lego.

 

            Those are the kinds of opportunities that can be created through this particular initiative. As I've said we've got little sponges out there that want to soak that up and we want to make sure that they get an opportunity. We're making money available for teachers who want to engage in projects that are aligned with the Brilliant Labs. We're starting small. We're trying to monitor it as we go, but we do have a model in the neighbouring province that is successful. I think over 200 schools in New Brunswick have them, whether it's mobile, whether it's makerspace, or whether it is actually in the school. We have them and we can learn from them, because I'm sure they've had some growing pains as well.

 

            MR. DUNN: You mentioned that there is one in every board so the mobile ones, is there one in each board, a mobile, or just a few of them or a couple of them?

 

            MS. CASEY: CSAP will have the mobile unit as well as Cape Breton, and part of that is due to the geography. CSAP, of course as you know, schools all over the province, and Cape Breton has a pretty large geography, so that's where we've started with the mobile.

 

            MR. DUNN: I'm going to move on to substitute teachers. There have been some days I would dearly have loved to go in and substitute but wasn't able to lately. Anyway there has been a significant increase in the number of unfilled absences, when teachers are out. Of course they can be very stressful situations, especially if you're an administrator in the school and the morning is young, and all of a sudden you realize that you have to start changing classes and asking guidance counsellors, vice-principals, and other staff who may have a free period to fill in and so on.

 

           I know there was one day - and this would be an exception - but one day in CCRSB there were 28 classrooms without a regular or a substitute teacher, again an exception but I'm sure there are other days where there is a fair number that would cause some stress.

 

            We have teachers giving up their preparation time and so on, and sometimes schools have to do everything to look after the students and look after the curriculum, combining classes and so on. I think, according to the director of human services, the issue that we find ourselves in is pretty well common right through the province. I guess I'm just going to ask you to comment on that. Can you foresee some sort of long-term solution for that?

 

            MS. CASEY: The whole scenario that you have painted is one that no administrator ever wants to face, but it's a reality. Even though you say that it does exist in all parts of the province, I think there are some pockets within the province where it is more pronounced, and I would say that would be rural Nova Scotia because, first of all, you don't have the critical mass of teachers, substitute teachers who are living in that area for some, and you would know in particular with Chignecto-Central and Cape Breton and other boards that it's a long drive from point A to point B.

 

            The whole question of supply and demand that I talked about yesterday, do we have enough substitute teachers and do we have them where we need them? I would contend that we don't have them where we need them. It's no different than any profession. We talk about doctors in rural Nova Scotia, I think our ratio is probably as good as or better than any other province, but the concentration is in Halifax area, for obvious reasons: because of the university, the specialty hospitals, and so on.

 

            The challenge is, how do you get the bodies that you need in the places that you need? I think we need to be fair to substitute teachers: some of them will say no to a school because they want to go to another school and we can't control that; we can't tell them where to go. There is a process in place in the school boards where teachers identify themselves and I believe they can even put on that their schools of choice. I would expect there are some schools where it's not a high priority for teachers to go, so that presents an even bigger challenge. I guess the elephant in the room might be retired teachers who are substituting and as principal, if I had a call at 8:30 a.m. like you've described that someone is not coming in, and I have a classroom full of kids and there is a retired teacher down the road who can come up and substitute, I'm going to get her in there.

 

            The challenge is if it is a long-term substitution, or if it is a term position, and if we have young people on the substitute list who could and would take that, we are suggesting strongly to principals that they consider those new young people for some of the long-term substitutions.

 

            I know that substitute teachers, teachers who have retired, many of them don't want to retire; they love what they're doing, they love the kids, they want to be back in there, and they are some of the best teachers we have had in our schools. As a principal you know the quality of teaching that they can provide, so you bring them in because it's probably easier for you as an administrator to have somebody in that classroom that knows the ropes and the kids know the limitations.

 

            I don't want anybody to think that I'm opposed to retired teachers substituting but I would like principals to perhaps give more consideration in the long term to bringing in a new, beginning teacher who can get some days accumulated, who can get that term status - and as we know, term status is like gold for these young teachers; they need it, they want it, because it puts them at a different level when they're making application for posted positions.

 

            It is an issue, it is a challenge. We're working with principals to try to resolve that. To go back to comments I made yesterday, we're looking at teachers who are qualified, the programs that they're taking in the B.Ed. program to qualify them. For example if my background is in Social Studies and English and you need a French teacher, it doesn't matter how long my name has been on the substitute list, I can't do the job and you would not call me in because I can't do the job.

 

            We have to make sure that, again, supply and demand and the teacher training institutions are well aware of what the needs are in our schools.

 

            MR. DUNN: You certainly touched on my lead-up second question dealing with substitute teachers and that compounds the problem with retired teachers, some of them being available. Some schools have retired teachers returning and they're actually teaching as many as 60-plus days. When I talk to some substitute teachers, of course, we both realize they get pretty frustrated, the fact that they know that there are retired teachers in there, teaching.

 

            I can understand sometimes retired administrators will fill in for administrators when they're off to admin days and conferences and so on. The substitute teachers are in such a delicate and precarious position where they have to survive, they have to live; they have to do all the things that everyone does: look after their home, pay bills, and so on. They see retired teachers and some of them even get quite upset over the fact that this is allowed to happen.

 

            I can also look back to when I was an administrator and it was often nice to have them available, to have them come in, especially with their knowledge and expertise. They just came in and did the job, like you just mentioned earlier.

 

            I'm just going to see if you would comment on that a little bit further because of the frustration they have in some areas where maybe there are too many retired teachers taking the place sometime where substitutes could be in there - I'm talking short-term stuff.

 

            MS. CASEY: We could probably talk about this for a long time because I'm not sure that any one of us has a solution to it. At this point in time, it is the principal at the school who does hire the substitute teachers, and they do make that choice.

 

            I think what we're realizing is that they don't always make the choice that maybe you or I would make, but they make it. There's some reason why they make the choice as to who they call, and at this point we're not questioning why they've made that decision, but we are encouraging them to look beyond the retired teacher list and go to some of those young, bright teachers who need and want a job. The reality of it is they have bills to pay. That's not to say retired teachers don't have bills to pay, but it's pretty hard when you're a young teacher with a bill to pay and you're looking at a retired teacher who is on a pension. The two just don't add up.

 

            So at this point, as I say, we're encouraging principals to look toward hiring more young, bright teachers because if we want those teachers to eventually be in our classrooms, they need to get some practical experience. We talked yesterday about how teacher training programs may be too much focused on theory and not on practice. So this is the way they get their practical experience - by doing some substituting and getting the flavour of what happens in the schools so that when there is a term that comes up, they bring some experience to it. They also have that experience to rely on, when they're making application for jobs.

 

            The other situation that we create, and you've mentioned it, is with administrators. If we want to have any kind of on-site training program for teachers who are aspiring to be principals, what better way to give them some experience, by allowing them to do the administrative tasks in the school, rather than bring in a retired administrator. I think there is room for conversation there, to build that next generation of young teachers who have practical experience and young teachers or middle-aged teachers who want to be administrators and give them a taste of what it's like.

 

            It's often easy to look at the job and wish you had it. Well, get in there and experience it and you may change your mind - you may still like it. I don't think we're giving opportunities for that leadership to develop in our schools if we continually bring back retired people to do that. So there is a balance. It's something that, as I said, we need to continue having conversation on that. We also need to work with our principals to ensure that they understand the importance of filling those positions.

 

            From a young teacher's perspective, it does not look very fair when you look at a school, you know there is a job there, and you have a retired teacher on pension coming in and taking it.

 

            MR. DUNN: I couldn't agree with you more with regard to practice as opposed to theory, and the hands-on is so valuable. This is probably not the stage for it, but I can remember back - involved in the master's program, M.Ed. in Administration, and speaking to professors and saying, in my opinion, there's just too much theory and that we certainly needed more time in the classroom.

 

            I think there is an advantage to administrators if they have spent a fair bit of time in our schools working prior to going into administration. I guess back at that time it seemed to fall on deaf ears with regard to the practical aspect of it, as far as being prepared.

 

            I'm going to move on to another area, if it's okay. This one is dealing with student conduct. I'm sure this is another topic that we could probably talk about until the cows come home. Anyway, I'm just thinking of my years in the career and since that, talking to teachers and guidance counsellors, administrators, and so on. I know you have heard the same sort of consistent frustration that schools have. I keep hearing from them and I felt it was somewhat like this in my last few years, that there's just a lack of teeth to provide any consistency in things like attendance, punctuality, organization, responsibility. To me it seemed to just keep eroding and eroding; it just didn't translate over into the reality of jobs and life-related careers and so on.

 

            My question would be - through your Action Plan, I know that certainly will be part of it and you'd be looking into it. My hope is that there will be some teeth to it where - perhaps if I can give you an example. I felt approaching a school discipline committee that it got to the point where I was wondering if I should even go because we did our homework at the school and we did it very well, to the point where we needed outside assistance. It would seem that I would spend more time at a hearing, defending what we did, as opposed to what we thought should be happening.

 

            I guess as we continue to work over the next number of years with regard to student conduct, I would really like to see administration and teachers have a - I think you mentioned in the Action Plan this will be a consistent one from one end of the province to the other and I like that, everyone on the same page, but when push comes to shove, administrators will have some sort of backing and support, within reason, that they can get the job done and look after their schools. I'll leave that with you.

 

            MS. CASEY: If the member is okay, I'd like to just go back and make one more comment about - when we're talking about administrators and developing new people to take on those administrative jobs. We have the leadership consortium; I went to their graduation last year. That was a group of really aspiring administrators who gave their own time for professional development - summers and weekends. There were teachers there from all ends of the province.

 

            They went through a really intense leadership development program because they want to be the future administrators in our schools. Some of them are currently administrators in our schools but they wanted to be better. I guess I'm just bragging, first of all, about the opportunity for them to go through the leadership consortium and also the quality of the teachers and administrators who were in that program who will be the leaders in our schools and our schools will be well-served with those people at the helm. I just wanted to make a comment because, again, that is trying to groom people for future jobs.

 

            With respect to the code of conduct, as we've said, we are looking at one code across the province; behaviour that is unacceptable in Sydney is also unacceptable in Yarmouth, and the consequences are the same. We have teachers who are helping us with that, and we'll be working with principals and teachers on the implementation of that.

 

            The challenge you mentioned regarding going before a committee of the board and needing to feel supported is very real and it's a problem. We have teachers and principals who do their best to work with a child to provide as many alternatives as possible, to change the behaviour, as many supports as possible, to understand the circumstances of that individual, and there are various means of intervention to provide that support. But at the end of the day the teacher has to make a decision whether that student's presence in the classroom is disruptive to the entire class and if it's safe for that person to be in the class. Then they go to the principal and they need to know that the principal understands and supports and accepts that they have done whatever they could in the classroom.

 

            Classroom management is more of a challenge, I would say, now than it ever was before because we have a lot of students who, sometimes out of no fault of their own, bring some challenges to the classroom, some challenging behaviour, some attitude, some family and social issues that are troubling those young people, and those play out in our classroom. We have to be understanding of that and responsive to that but we have to recognize that that is not conducive to a positive learning environment.

 

            When you get to the principal you need to know that there's support there and the principal needs to know that you've done everything possible. As it is now, beyond five days for a suspension out of school, that has to go to a committee of the board. I think that may be what the member is talking about, about the work that has been done at the school before a principal ever takes that before a suspension committee of the board. The principal needs to know that there is support at that level for what they've done at the school.

 

            It's an education, really, for all the players there because again, if we're making decisions that are in the best interest of the student and going to help that student, there has to be some consistency. The fact that prior to, we had, as I said, a provincial code of conduct, a board code of conduct and a school code of conduct - had the potential to muddy the waters and lead to confusion and interpretation. The new code of conduct is intended to eliminate that confusion and to make sure that everybody clearly understands what is acceptable and what isn't and what the consequences are and what the process is. That's why we're working with principals and teachers. We will also have work to do with school boards, because at the end of the day if it's more than a five-day suspension, right now it goes before a committee of the board.

 

            The boards have been notified that there will be one code of conduct. They are aware of that. They will be in-serviced on what that code looks like because they will be part of the implementation of that.

 

            MR. DUNN: I'm glad you mentioned that the teachers and so on will be involved in that. To me, if it's going to work, that's critical. I know you agree with it, that those front-line workers are involved in it.

 

            I think sometimes we will think too many is too many, but in this case I think the more from elementary, from middle school and from senior high school who are involved in at least having a say into the creation of this here and the success of it, is really important.

 

            Just maybe a quick comment on in-school suspensions and out-of-school suspensions. Just to let you know where I'm going - I guess we're with in-school suspension. I'm just not sure how that is actually working, outside of keeping them in school and keeping them busy and so on, and also it takes up some time that EAs would have been with other students, maybe one on five, one on one, or whatever. I guess I want to know if you know at this particular time where the school system is going with in- school: is it going to stay, is it going to be changed or whatever?

 

            MS. CASEY: That will be very much part of the code of conduct and a very important part because it's not our goal to have students out of school. Many students, if they get an out-of-school suspension, are not getting the supports that they need to change their behaviour. We need to be able to provide that in-school support in some way.

 

            It's true that takes up human resources because if someone is having an in-school suspension, and it's to be constructive rather than punitive, then there needs to be some care taken as to how they spend that time when they're in school on a suspension. Where they are, what they're doing, is it realizing what you wanted them to learn from this, and in particular to make sure that they don't get behind in their academic program. That does take resources and that's where we will certainly be working with the principals, as I said, to see how we address that.

 

            I go back to the need to ensure that the classroom management is strong and effective so we're not quick to give an in-school or an out-of-school suspension; in fact, the out-of-school should be a last resort. It should be absolutely a safety issue that would cause a principal or a school board committee to have someone removed from the school. That's not our goal; our goal is to try to help them and in-school is somewhere in between.

 

            I remember the day, and perhaps you do as well, where there were in-school suspension classrooms so the kids didn't get sent home, and for them it was a holiday and they lost out on the academic program that they should have been doing, and they came back and the teacher had to try to catch them up, bring them back up for the academic studies that they would have missed. We have to determine how we can best provide the program yet maintain a positive learning environment for all the kids in the class. Sometimes there does need to be an individual removed from the class, but not without supports.

 

            MR. DUNN: It's a really difficult situation for schools when they're involved with some of these behaviour problems. I guess some schools feel that they do need more resources to be able to adequately look after these students and provide them not only with education, but some of the other guidance that they need to have for outside school.

 

            I'm going to go to another topic right now just for one question. It's dealing with social promotion. Social promotion has just caused a whole set of new student performance problems and I guess a couple of questions: will social promotion be altered to reflect the realities of today? What really happens when someone actually leaves school and gets out into the workforce and so on? I'll just leave it there as far as getting a comment from you with regard to that because a lot of people involved in education right now that I talk to - and I'd have to say a lot of ones that are retired, they talk about this too - they certainly have their very strong opinions about social promotion and just want to see where we are now and into the very near future with regard to that.

 

            MS. CASEY: The whole issue of students leaving school without the knowledge base or skill set that will allow them to be successful is one of the strong messages that we received through the minister's panel. We heard that from business. We heard that from post-secondary institutions. We heard that from the general public - that students were able to leave the school, graduate from the school without perhaps the quality of education that those on the receiving end would have preferred.

 

            We have heard from universities that say we have to have a foundation year because we have to bring these kids up to the level where they can begin to do their first year of university. That's a sad commentary on public education: universities are having to put in a prep year really because the public school system failed. We heard that loud and clear. We heard it from employers who said that some of these kids coming out are really not able to complete a resumé, to communicate effectively in the written form.

 

            We recognized that that's not doing the student a favour at all. That's why we've looked at - where do we tackle this? Where do we start? Because we cannot change what the kids in Grade 12 now know that they should have learned in Grades 7 and 8. We can't change that. Unfortunately, we've had a system where they've been able to progress through to the point where they may be graduating and we have made adaptations. We have had students on IPPs. We talked about that earlier. Do we have too many kids who are put on an IPP and it's a life sentence? When they leave in Grade 12 there's a big stamp on their transcript that says IPP and it closes the door for those kids who may not have needed that if the proper supports had been in place all along.

 

            So we're going back to - where do you begin? I said this yesterday, if we have students who leave Grade 3 and they can't read, we're setting them up for failure, in my professional opinion, because when do they learn to read? They go into Grade 6 and the teachers expect them to do some research or to write something, and we're asking them to do something they can't do. If we ever want to force kids to be disengaged, that's exactly what we do.

 

            So when we're looking at implementing actions within the Action Plan, we're focusing on Primary to Grade 3 to start with so that when the kids leave Grade 3 they can master the reading skills that they're expected to have at the end of Grade 3. That's why we are changing the allocation of time for reading and math in our Primary to Grade 3 - because if we believe that's where we need to strengthen the skills and we're not able to do it the way we're doing it now, we believe that fewer outcomes, more essential learnings, rather than a whole range of outcomes that are difficult for the teacher to achieve and for the student to master. Let's do a few things well. Let's teach kids the basic math and literacy skills that they need so when they leave Grade 3 - and Grade 3 is kind of a critical point here - they can apply those skills.

 

            If you look at the Action Plan, we've divided up the public schools into Primary to Grade 3, Grades 4 to 8, and Grades 9 to 12. Primary to Grade 3 is critical because that's where they get those basic skills. Grades 4 to 8 is where they can apply those and where they can be introduced to some new opportunities and new experiences, but you can't introduce them to it if they can't read. So we are looking at it as those three chunks and our focus has to be on those Primary to Grade 3s. We are anticipating that more time and more concentration on math and literacy and fewer essential outcomes will translate into better skill development.

 

            I want to go to a program that many people have heard me speak about and that is Reading Recovery. We recognized that Reading Recovery was a program that worked well for the lowest 20 per cent of the students in Grade 1. We were able, through that program, to take some of those kids who arrived in Grade 1 and couldn't read and to put them with a teacher, a Reading Recovery trained teacher, who was able to identify and focus on their particular needs and during the course of a block of time, try to bring that student through to a place where they had those skills in place.

 

            It was one-on-one in most cases, which is what really works. That is one of the strengths of Reading Recovery. It also allowed those kids, when they went back to their regular classroom - this was a pull-out - they didn't feel lost. They didn't feel that everyone else could do something and they couldn't. We have evidence to support the significant change and improvement for those kids.

 

            You would have heard me be critical of the previous government because they discontinued Reading Recovery. It was a research-based, evidence-based program that we have the evidence here to say that it was valuable; we needed to continue it. I'm happy to say that one of the first things we did when we formed government was reinstate Reading Recovery because we believe it is one of those programs and one of those tools that teachers need and that students need to help bring them to a point where they can move forward with the rest of their peers, learning to read.

 

            The comment was made a few years ago when I was debating this that they didn't all reach this magic 16, in a scale of between 1 and 16, so it wasn't successful. My argument was that if you can take a Grade 1 child and move them from a 1 to a 15, in my books that is success. But the rationale that was used to discontinue it was, well they didn't get to 16 so it didn't work. We know that is false, that is absolutely an unfair statement to make about the program, so we have reinstated it.

 

            My point here to the member is, we are trying as many things as possible to make sure that we don't have students moving through without having the skills they need and without being ready to tackle the challenges with reading and math that they will have as they move into that Grade 4 to 8 and then polish them off in 9 to 12.

 

            MR. DUNN: Just a couple of other areas there, how much time is left, Madam Chairman? Three hours, thank you. With regard to - and again I am perhaps on shaky ground here but are teachers not allowed to give a zero to some type of an assessment? I guess, if that's true, I'm sure it's going to be dealt with within the Action Plan but it's certainly - I don't want to call myself old school but when I think of that, it troubles me; it troubles me and it troubles a few teachers I talked to about that and I'm sure there are others I haven't talked to. Just maybe a comment from you with regard to that, where we might be going with that.

 

            MS. CASEY: One of the ministerial policies that you will read about in the Action Plan is homework, and again, it's trying to bring some consistency. When I dug around in the department, or had staff dig around in the department to find homework guidelines - and a guideline is absolutely nothing more than a guideline and it allows for interpretation and different implementations - they were ancient and they provided so much flexibility that everyone in this room could read it and interpret it differently.

 

            We have discontinued those homework guidelines, effective in September of this coming year, and there will be a new homework policy, not unlike what we're doing with the code of conduct; it is uniform, all across the province, every school, every teacher, and there is no room for misinterpretation.

 

            Teachers, again, are working with us on the whole question of giving homework. Why do you give homework and how much do you give? Those are all questions that we're posing with the teachers. We all have an opinion about that and some of us have an opinion based on our past experiences.

 

            We've all seen homework abused and I think, unfortunately, that has led people to think well you can't give any homework but if I've mastered a skill, and you give me five pages of homework to do directly related to that skill that I've already mastered, I'm not sure that is anything more than busy work. But if you've introduced something to me and you've given me 10 questions to take home and practise and bring back and become part of the next day's instruction - that is constructive homework.

 

           I think what we give, when we give it, and how much time we expect students to take in their evening for homework, all have to be considered. There are so many more things that our children do now, after school and before they go to bed. As far as their social life, they're involved in so many sports activities, dance, and music, and those are all important parts of that child's holistic being. We're not interested in interfering with that but somewhere along the line there has to be some connection between what's happening in school and accountability for the home supporting what's going on in the school.

 

            There is no easy answer but we believe that if teachers give us their input into the value of homework - when, where, and how, and what benefit it is to the student - we believe that we can come up with a homework policy that does address some of those.

 

            As you know, we have read about the situation in Alberta, I think it was, where the teacher was dismissed for giving a zero. What are we teaching our students if they're asked to do a book report in Grade 11 and everyone brings it in but you? No, everyone brings it in but me, so when I get a mark at the end of the year it doesn't reflect the fact that I didn't bother doing that. I didn't take responsibility for my own learning. My parents may not have even known I had to do it - I think we have better ways of communicating - but I don't think that teaches anything about responsibility and accountability, and that is all part of this mix. I think the key is what we give as homework - when and how long we expect students to spend on homework.

 

            I have a little grandson who is in Primary, and I know that the excitement of school kind of wanes as kids get older, but he can hardly wait to come home because once a week he brings home some books that he has picked out in his classroom - and I'm sure many Primary teachers do this - brings them home and sometime before he goes back the next Monday, there is an expectation that he and his parents read these books. Either they read them to him or he reads them to them. What better way to help show that there is a connection between what happens in school and what happens at home and that parents know what's happening in the classroom and they support that? I think we start out with the best of intentions but somewhere along the way it has broken down.

 

            MR. DUNN: I couldn't agree with you more, over time somehow it eroded. I think of my own six kids who went to school and I don't think there was once in all those years from P to 12 I had to say to any one of them at any time: go do your homework. I credit that to my wife, not me; I'm not opening up the door for you. Anyway I talked to a few friends about it and they'll tell you they don't have any homework. What they do, they do in school and that's it and away we go. I sort of shake my head.

 

            I mentioned the zero thing; there is another one, and it will probably fall right in the same pattern that you are talking about, and it's the fact that I am a teacher, say at the high school. I'm in a semestered school, January is coming, last week exams are on, and Mr. X doesn't have to pass - oh, I had an assignment due for January 15^th, Mr. X doesn't pass it in. Exams come, still didn't pass it in, and we're getting near the end of the week where I have to get my evaluations in and so on.

            I'm sure it doesn't make any sense to you; it certainly doesn't make any sense to me. I'm sure it will be addressed, too, all those types of things that are happening through erosion. I don't know, I've had people outside of the education system say: whoever created that or allowed that to happen - I won't finish that statement but I'll just let you comment.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: I'll have to stop you there. The member's time for this hour has passed.

 

            The honourable member for Halifax Chebucto.

 

            MR. JOACHIM STROINK: I wanted to touch on something that's close to my heart when it comes to education. We've had many discussions about this, primarily when you were wearing that other colour, bluish tinge, when you were something like - no, I can see why. We had long discussions as I was the chairman of the board of the Learning Disabilities Association, plus I sat on the executive of the LDAC, Learnings Disabilities Association of Canada.

 

            I guess we all know that within our school system it is a big struggle to figure out ways that we can best support learning disabilities. I think some of that came out in the education review of how to deal with the integration of all aspects of learning within the classroom. I would like to start our discussion there and we can see where it goes.

 

            MS. CASEY: I think if we look at our belief in inclusion, including all learners in the classroom, recognizing that we all learn differently, we may need different supports to take us through that learning process, but that at the end of the day the success of all students, I believe, depends on our ability to diagnose or accept a diagnosis, the early identification and early intervention.

 

            One of the things that I think we are able to do better now than we did before - and part of it is due to the fact that birth to school-age entry is now part of the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development - a lot of learning disabilities or any other disabilities are identified early on. Previously, students arrived in Primary and they presented themselves with some disability but the teachers did not know how to diagnose; that's not what they've been trained to do. Therefore, if they didn't know what the challenge was, they didn't know how to respond to it.

 

            I think the early diagnosis - one of the things that we've talked about is screening of kids ages 18 and 36 months, trying to find out if there is something that the Primary teacher needs to know before the student ever gets there and that there may be some intervention before the student ever gets there. We have failed so many kids because that never happened. Primary teachers were saying: there's just something here, I don't know what it is, but they had not had any background in their teacher training.

 

            I worked for three years with the Education Department at Acadia, which was supposed to be specializing in special education. I had teachers coming out into the schools to teach and they never had to take any courses in their B.Ed. program related to any kind of learning disabilities, learning challenges, so they were not prepared. The teachers who were in the classrooms were not prepared. Kids presented themselves there and then there was a mad scramble to find out that we've got to do some assessment here to determine, so we know what program best works or what your learning style is. A disability in learning has absolutely nothing to do with ability; it has to do with how you learn. We all learn differently but the teacher needs to know how you learn so they can teach to you differently.

 

            We've recognized that and I believe students are in a better state of readiness to learn when they come to Primary now than they have been ever in the past. We are working more closely with other agencies to ensure that if there is a diagnosis, and if there is a recommended strategy that can be used, that that information is not kept in a silo somewhere in another department but it is shared with the school, looking at transition meetings, so that the professionals come together to share that information so you are not spending time in a Primary class, while the school is trying to understand how you learn.

 

            MR. STROINK: I think we're definitely on the right path for seeing that within the review process, which was very well recognized that we needed to create better support.

 

            I want to touch on the early identification because as you alluded to, if we can spend some time in early diagnosis of children then they have a better chance of succeeding in the classrooms with early diagnoses. I want to get a handle on where we sit, as a province, in that area of early diagnosis. I know we're not moving down the path of mandatory screening but I want to see what the thoughts are there.

 

            MS. CASEY: I want to speak a little bit about two things. What we call the EDI, the Early Development Instrument, is an assessment that is done by the Primary teachers. Now this is not pre-Primary, this is done in Primary. The first time it was done was last year, in 2013-14.

 

            It is an instrument that is administered by the Primary teacher to every Primary student and it tests areas like language, cognitive skills, emotional maturity, communication skills, physical health, and social maturity. There is a broad range of areas that are assessed there and it's used across Canada. It's used, I believe, in seven other provinces. It was developed by McMaster so it is research-based and it's evidence-based, and it is an appropriate instrument to be used.

 

            The shocking thing that we found, when it was first administered, was that 26 per cent of the students who are assessed on that instrument in Canada display some vulnerability. That is huge. In Nova Scotia, it's 25 per cent.

 

            This is where we get early identification that there is something wrong, but then you have to sort through that and say, okay now, how do we change our program? How do we provide supports so that we can address that? It may be a communications skill. It may be cognitive, it may be whatever, any one of those, but out of that whole range, those results were alarming.

 

            As I say, we're trying to address the identification, but what we've done - and it's with the early intervention programs that we have, we made an announcement this week - but there are 17 different boards around the province that provide early intervention to children who have been diagnosed with some challenge. Many of them are identified through IWK. If there is no intervention, those kids have been moving along and entering Primary without any intervention, and it has translated into a wait-list across the province of close to 300 kids.

 

            It was our government that announced, in our platform, that we would be investing $2.6 million into early intervention. Our most recent announcement is - and here is how we're going to spend $1.2 million or $1.3 million. What we did is we took those 17, which were operated by a volunteer board and providing programs out in 17 communities, and we put together a task team. They were here in the Legislature yesterday. We put together that team to say: what can we do to address some of the concerns about accessibility? Do families know about this? How do we look at consistency and how do we look at quality?

 

            They came back with a recommendation that said they believe that in order to address those three things - accessibility, quality, and consistency - was to have one volunteer board that would still oversee the 17 delivery sites, but it would eliminate some of that opportunity for inconsistency. That was huge because that does a couple of things. It allows some centralized management of the delivery.

 

            We had said we want to eliminate the wait-list so we announced, I think in January or February, that we would be hiring, through these boards - actually, we would provide the boards with the money to hire - early interventionists who would reduce the wait-list. Staff went out and they looked at caseloads, they looked at where there was a wait-list, and immediately began the process of posting positions that would respond to the wait-list. I do want to share this with you: the programs where we would be advertising for more early interventionists were in Amherst, Pictou, Truro, Sydney, Halifax, Sackville, Mahone Bay, Port Hawkesbury, and Antigonish. Those are areas where our staff went out and said: do we have enough interventionists here or do we need more?

 

            We immediately told the boards in those areas: you go out, post your ad, start the interview process, and you start to hire. As of April 9^th - and I'm sure it is probably updated by now - but as of April 9^th all the positions had been posted and interviews were held or had been scheduled to be held. Four new interventionists had been hired and others that were somewhere in that interview process were saying that there would be people on the ground, starting to work with kids in mid-April, definitely early May. So we are very close to getting that team of interventionists in place, based on a caseload of one to 20, and we think 20 is the maximum caseload, staff have been able to say: with the additional positions and with the wait-lists we have in these particular areas, we can eliminate the wait-list.

 

            I'm very proud of that because we learned that there are students - there are children, not students yet - there are children on that wait-list and they age out before they ever get any service or support, and then they present themselves in the Primary class. What we're trying to do is make sure that the intervention before they ever get there puts them in a better state of readiness when they get to the classroom.

 

            MR. STROINK: That's very exciting to see that concentration because I think that will create a better teaching environment for kids and for the teachers because they'll be able to get kids focused on a curriculum that will work for them in the classroom and they'll be able to learn. I guess the best part of that is it would hopefully keep them off the IPP. As you alluded to earlier, and I think for many people, if you're stuck on IPP it's a death wish for your future education, outside of the school system that is put in place.

 

            I want to touch on that because, as you alluded to, we have a problem with the IPP. There is no re-looking at a child's education way of learning while they are on that IPP so you set them up for failure through their whole life.

 

            With some discussion, where do you see this IPP program going within the next few years, to ensure that kids don't fall through the cracks or, more importantly, get off IPP so that when they are applying for university, they don't have that black mark on their transcripts?

 

            MS. CASEY: I shared earlier that we got the results of the survey about numbers of students on IPPs. My immediate, spontaneous reaction was: we have fewer kids in our schools and we have more kids now on IPPs than we had two, three, five years ago. Why is that? There was no answer to the why, immediately, so what I said to staff was: we need to look at the criteria that is being used in schools to - I hate to use the word "qualify" - to identify a student needing an IPP, so we've started that process.

 

Within the Action Plan, I think we had identified 23 actions we wanted to have in place by September. One of those is actually - and I will read it to you - "Develop provincial criteria for placing a student on an IPP." So again it's that whole consistency. The criteria that are used to determine whether you need an IPP or whether I need an IPP, the basic criteria should be the same. Your needs and mine may not be the same, but the criteria that are used and what sources of supports have been put in place before an IPP is developed, or what kind of programming you need, based on the needs that you have.

 

            The other thing that I said is, none of that will happen without the parent at the table because if this is to be successful, then the parent who in many cases has more information about the child than anybody else, their voice needs to be at the table when other professionals are talking about the future programming for their child. There is no exception to that. The parent has to be there.

 

            We will be challenged on that in some cases where the parent isn't willing to come in, but we'll deal with that on an individual basis. If this is to be a team conversation and a team decision about what's the best programming for you or for me, then the parent has to be involved in that process. So developing those provincial criteria will take away the opportunity for misinterpretation. It will be applied consistently and the parent will have to be part of that conversation.

 

            MR. STROINK: Unfortunately a lot of the lack of support for education for kids with learning disabilities really falls in rural areas of Nova Scotia where there is not a lot of support; there is no Bridgeway Academy or Churchill or anything like that. As Bridgeway Academy is growing to other campuses across the province, and there are other supports - I guess I'm kind of leading toward the whole understanding of where the tuition support program is going to fit within this model of expansion with all of these little private schools in order to create a better support system for these kids. Tuition support is a very interesting solution. I just don't know how it fits into the model that we have with their expansions.

 

            MS. CASEY: Hansard is a wonderful thing. It records everything you say. So I have no problem repeating what I said in the past when I was a minister back in 2006 to 2009 where I was certainly supporting the continuation of - and in that case, the expansion of - tuition support. I stood in the House and said that until we can do as good as or better than the programs that are offered through our designated schools, I will continue to support tuition support programs. Initially it was two years and we extended it to three years to four years. I still believe that.

 

            Ideally, we would be able to meet the needs of all students in our schools, but I'm not so proud that I can't admit that we're not. I'm not so proud that I'm going to deny our students an opportunity to get the instruction that they need in another setting. So do I support tuition support? I do. Would ideally we have it? No, but I've seen so many success stories out of the tuition support - Bridgeway, Churchill and Landmark are the three that we support - that I'm not going to consider the importance of that.

 

            I do, however, recognize that we need to work closely with those three designated schools to ensure that the quality of program that's delivered is comparable to what we're delivering in our public schools. We may find it is, we may find it isn't; we may find they're better than we are, but we also have to recognize that those schools are able to charge tuition to the family to support their operation. At Landmark East in particular the tuition is much higher than Bridgeway and Churchill.

 

            In order to assist families who make the choice to go, we provide the tuition support. With the exception of Landmark East, the tuition support plus the supplement that the families are able to access, pretty well closes the gap on the tuition so it is affordable for most families.

 

            Bridgeway has taken their model to other places around the province because one of the criticisms back in 2006 and 2008 was that it was limited to kids who are in the Valley or who are in metro. I know that Bridgeway is in Yarmouth; I know they are in Truro and they have a business model that allows them to do that. So I do support it. I do think that we need to monitor the quality that's being delivered in those schools and that we honour the original intent: it was to be a short-term intervention, and with that concentrated, small class, one-on-one direct instruction, the gap that was there could be closed - and in some cases it is - and the student comes back to the public school. That is the intent; we can't forget that.

 

            There are some parents who want it to be forever. That may be their choice but we have to determine how much we can afford to support that, through tuition support. I will say this: it is the same amount of money that we would normally be giving a board, as far as per student, so we have to recognize that as well.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: We're going to take a very short recess. We'll be back in a few minutes.

 

            [1:57 a.m. The subcommittee recessed.]

 

            [2:04 p.m. The subcommittee reconvened.]

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I call the subcommittee back to order.

 

We will continue with questions from the honourable member for Halifax Chebucto.

 

            MR. STROINK: How much time? How much time have we spoken?

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: About 25 minutes.

 

            MR. STROINK: Okay, perfect. I just want to wrap up my questioning from the importance of the IPP and Bridgeway and tuition support and everything like that - I'm alluding to the whole concept of inclusion and where the understanding and the stigma behind people's differences in learning - from dyslexia to ADD to ADHD - has become a real struggle in society. What happens is we are dealing with mental illness within the classrooms on a mental illness strategy. A lot of this could be avoided if there was not so much stigma attached to ADD or dyslexia. People who have those things, those different learning techniques, struggle and end up being depressed and end up with mental illness.

 

            I take the sad story of the boy, the high school student from Dartmouth High who ended up committing suicide because he just couldn't understand that he had ADD and what that meant to him on a daily basis.

 

            I guess asking the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, with this new strategy in education, how do we ensure that the stigma is addressed within the classroom, that it is in some ways a different way of learning but it's a gift we have to learn differently and with that, how do we excel within society with that different way of learning?

 

            MS. CASEY: Thank you and I appreciate the question and the connection between what we have in our plan, which is talking about the learning environment and also the whole notion of inclusion because we recognize that we do have a number of students in our midst in our schools who do struggle with some social and mental issues.

 

            I go back to teachers perhaps not fully understanding, so I think there's a professional development component there for teachers, and I also think it begs the question of working with other departments. Last year we provided $500,000 to the Department of Health and Wellness to hire mental health clinicians to work in our schools. The reason we did that is because they are not educators; they are trained professionals and part of their job is not only to work with students but to educate teachers.

 

Teachers should not be diagnosing but they should definitely be understanding the diagnosis. So we did that last year; we've done it again this year. I think it was over $1 million that we have provided. Again, it is to first of all acknowledge that there is a need, and secondly, how do we provide supports for the student, the family, and the teacher?

 

I think it also all falls into that whole business of including everyone in all the activities that are absolutely possible for them to be part of. When the panel was doing their work, somebody got hold of the word "segregation" and started making a lot of noise about segregation. There was never anything that came in to us or that would have found its way into the report - I guess "congregated" might have been the word that translated in some people's minds to segregation and that caused a whole, perhaps real, level of anxiety amongst some families in our communities.

 

            We want to dispel that. We do recognize that in some situations there are some students who learn better in a one-on-one or small group instruction for part of the day, but not the business of you're going to be congregated into a classroom at eight o'clock and you come out at three o'clock and you go home.

 

            We've had parents who said to us: if somebody could just sit down with him one on one for a bit of time. So we believe the flexibility is there but the overall model is that all students need to be part of the activities that they are able to participate in, in the classroom. We are looking at how we can learn from the mental health clinicians, how our teachers can better understand different learning styles, and how we can best accommodate students who, as you say - sometimes there is a stigma attached. But I can tell you this from my own personal experience, my boys are much more tolerant - were much more tolerant - of differences when they were in high school than I was. So I think there have been some improvements and some information, knowledge over the years that has really helped with that whole business of accepting others' differences.

 

            MR. STROINK: Thank you. I will turn it over to the other side.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou Centre.

 

            HON. PAT DUNN: The next three areas I'd like to touch on: the first one I'd like to have a conversation about is report cards; the second one, just a couple of minutes on high school math; and the third one is on snow days, and we'll see where that goes. Starting off - report cards, high school math, and snow days.

 

            There are two things that bother front-line workers or teachers and staff and so on the most, in my experience talking with them over the years, and that is the fact that, true or false, they felt that they did not have enough input into initiatives coming down from the department to the school boards and so on, or school board-based initiatives. The other one was the report card system of the last number of years.

 

I understand that with the Action Plan there are going to be some changes, I'm pleased to hear. One thing they are dealing with the PowerSchool there, like when you're inserting numbers and so on - so I'm going to come up with a mark for child X and there are projects and tests and maybe exams and maybe an outside type of thing, and child X doesn't pass in a particular project. I haven't used this system, but my understanding is that - I'm in a position where I don't put something in there, although I want to as a teacher, so I take an average of the other three or four things. So child X doesn't pass the project in - turfed to one side - and I look at what else they did and then I'll come up with a mark out of that, which I have trouble with. We'll just zero in on that first - that particular marking scheme, evaluation scheme, if you will.

 

            MS. CASEY: If I could, it takes us back to a conversation we were having about homework in particular and about projects not passed in or what happens with that. Two things: the report card is one way of communicating to the home about student progress. It is, unfortunately, in some cases the only time that the home connects with the school. We have some parents who are very active and they communicate with their teacher. They go online. They see what's going on. They go to parent-teacher meetings and they're very knowledgeable. The report card is, usually for them, just a summary of what they already know because they've been paying attention to what's going on with their student. That's the way it should be.

 

            For those who only rely on the report card, it is sometimes difficult for them to get the big picture. If you're coming in as a parent, communicating regularly, you come to parent-teacher meetings, and I tell you that your son has not passed in the last three assignments; that's important information for you to have. The way the report card is structured, it's difficult for that communication to take place.

 

            I'd like to try to emphasize that home and school communication is absolutely critical. Maybe that is the teacher picking up the phone and calling the parent, or maybe it's the parent calling the teacher, but in the absence of that, a report card comes out and people interpret it different ways.

 

            I have heard from teachers as well, over the last number of years, the report cards are taking an exorbitant amount of time and teachers are staying up late at night to work on the report card. Parents are telling us, in the past, that the report card was meaningless. So one of the things that we did early on was to talk to parents and teachers about how we can improve the report card. We made some changes, tested it with teachers, and they were telling us that it was an improvement.

 

            It's interesting, one of the things that we changed - and it's how people react differently to the same issue - was we heard when we did our survey that parents were very happy with the numerical value, the percentages that students in Grades 9 to 12 were getting on their subjects. They knew what 75 per cent meant and they knew what 95 per cent meant, and so they liked that.

 

            One of the criticisms we got from parents about the report card for Grades 7 and 8 was that it was a letter grade and they didn't like that; so we made the change. Grades 7 to 12 would all be percentages, numerical values. That was based on input and feedback that we got. If, when their child got to Grades 9 to 12, they liked the percentage and they didn't like the letter grade in Grades 7 and 8, we started giving them percentages in Grade 7. Now from Grades 7 to 12 it is a numerical value; it's a percentage to show their level of achievement.

 

            Right now we are, as you know, making the changes in some of the Primary to Grade 3 curriculum. We recognize that the report card has to change to reflect that. For example, and I have a report card here, which is currently Grades 1 to 3 - because in the Primary report card there are no grades, so I want to just focus on Grades 1 to 3. Right now, on the Grades 1 to 3 report card, it has a category for language arts, math, health, music, physical education, science, social studies, and visual arts.

 

            With the changes we're making in the curriculum, where we're incorporating science and social studies and health into the language arts and math curriculum, we will be developing a new report card that shows those changes. It will still be keeping the language arts and the math, but it will not include health, science, or social studies. We have said that we would maintain the time allocations for physical education and music, but the other three subjects - science, health, and social studies - would be incorporated into language arts and math. The report card will reflect those changes because it has to align with the curriculum in Grades 1 to 3. The Primary one will not change because in the Primary it now simply has the two categories of English and language arts.

 

            Those changes will be made to better reflect what it is we are using as our curriculum and what it is we're using for evaluation for our students. I hope that better reflects that.

 

            Teachers are the ones who are changing that curriculum, streamlining it, reducing the number of outcomes, and incorporating the other subject in. They are the ones who are driving that so the changes in the report card will certainly reflect their work, and it's important that teachers be part of that.

 

            We talked about this before, the whole notion of homework; there is a ministerial policy that will be coming out on homework. I hope we are able to be clear in that about projects, the importance of projects, and how the results of work on a project or homework can be reflected in the student's overall performance. I don't want to revisit the whole homework conversation but if we give homework based on what people believe individual students need in order to enhance the skills they are learning, the homework may not always be the same for every student in the class. We have to understand that I may need practice on 10 of the problem-solving questions and you may need practice on five. That flexibility has to be there, but the report card and the results of our overall mark need to reflect that.

 

            MR. DUNN: In my mind, that move for percentages for Grades 7 to 12 was actually a very welcome and positive move for students, teachers, and parents - all categories.

 

            Did you experience any problem with universities, with any schools having a lettering system at the high school level? If they are giving the evaluation in letters, as far as students trying to enter university and having letters on their evaluation reports, where the universities are in the numerical percentages, did you run into any problems there that you can think of, or did they adapt?

 

            MS. CASEY: The change we were making from a letter grade to a percentage was Grades 7 and 8. We didn't change the Grades 9 to 12 because it was already a percentage and that has been standard for transcripts that are going off to university, so we did not have a challenge or a concern there.

 

            MR. DUNN: Going back to the evaluation part again, as you proceed to evaluate the reporting system, the evaluating system, going back to the PowerSchool, with an example that I gave with the projects and tests and exams and so on, will that be something that you may take a look at and think about changing? Because again, if student X doesn't pass in a particular component, it is tossed to one side and my understanding is that everything else is evaluated. If a student knows that, that's quite a loophole in the evaluation system there.

 

            I guess the question is again, is that something that is going to be looked at and perhaps changed? It is very similar to not being allowed to give a zero to a student and what we talked about before, not required to pass something in or on time. Anyway, that particular evaluation aspect, if you could let me know what might happen in the future through this process of new report cards, evaluation, and so on.

 

            MS. CASEY: There are individual components here that are so interconnected that it's hard to separate them because when you're looking at curriculum changes then those have to be reflected in the report card. When you're looking at homework guidelines or policy, it has to be reflected in the evaluation of student performance. All of that has to come together so that they do dovetail. We've started with the homework now; we're making the changes in the curriculum, making the changes in the report card, and the assessment and evaluation of student performance is the last part of that whole puzzle.

 

            Again, we will be engaging teachers as to what is the best way to evaluate students. What instruments do we use? What do we include in that evaluation and do we include homework in an evaluation of a student's performance? Do we include projects? And remember this is homework done or not done, projects done or not done or not in on time, teacher-made tests. There are all of those things that happen in the classroom and we need to be able to be consistent in how and what we include when we report to parents. We've made a commitment that we're looking at the curriculum; we're looking at the homework now as we speak; and we have in our action for 2015-16 looking at the student evaluation and student assessments.

 

            We need to get a couple of those things in place first and then we will look at what forms, what are all the things that we consider when we look at giving a student a mark, a report, and if there are changes there that need to be reflected in PowerSchool then we will make those changes, but at this point we need teacher input as to the very concerns that you're sharing.

 

            MR. DUNN: Just my last comment - I'm going to mention on report cards that as the process moves along, I just hope that some of those areas that I discussed, like not being able to give a zero and not responsible to pass things in on time, that they'll all be addressed because I think they promote the wrong thing. It's really not the reality of what we should be doing and so on. Hopefully they'll be addressed and the concerns that the administrators and teachers have will fall into place.

 

            Just a quick question that as you're talking I'm thinking of September 2015 and the number of initiatives that are on the table for then. Perhaps a quick reply, teachers often will say - and I think it was mentioned already today - please don't give me any more, I have enough to do now, and I can't manage what I have now. Is it a possibility that there may be too many initiatives coming at the schools in September for them to do a good job? I know you'll want the schools certainly to embrace these changes, and I think we all do. I'll just get you to perhaps comment on that.

 

            MS. CASEY: Just to go back, just a bit of a concluding comment about student assessment and projects and those kinds of things. The concerns that are being discussed here are very real concerns that teachers have, and parents have them as well, and those concerns came out in the minister's panel and will drive our actions, now and in the future.

 

            I do want to address your question about: will we be downloading too much on the teachers and will they feel overwhelmed by what's coming? I understand that teachers have felt a bit of a disconnect between what has been downloaded, either from the department to the board or from the board to the classroom, over the last number of years, and rightly so. If you're going to ask teachers to implement something new, two parts are absolutely critical: one is that teachers understand and have been part of the change, and the second thing is the professional development that they need in order to implement whatever they've been asked to implement, has taken place.

 

            What we have said is that there will no changes that we ask teachers to implement without the accompanying professional development, and it will be professional development before they start the implementation. In fact, we're looking at trying to engage teachers for the balance of this school year and in the beginning of next school year, for the changes that will take place. We've spread those 100-plus actions over the next five years.

 

I will share with the member here and with others here what we're looking at for September. We believe that it is balanced; we believe it's manageable; we believe it will do what teachers have asked us to do, and that is to reduce some of the workload that has been put on them, in particular the number of outcomes that they will be asked to meet in Primary to Grade 3. I don't have the numbers here; I expect staff may have them, but if we're reducing say from 50 outcomes to 25 that is a huge change in what we're expecting teachers to be prepared for and to deliver on.

 

            By incorporating the social studies, science, and health into the language arts and math, you don't have a block of outcomes for language arts and another block for science and another block for social studies; some of those will be combined and so overall there will be fewer outcomes. We believe that's what teachers have asked us for because it will make their workload lighter and more concentrated on what those key essential outcomes are.

 

            If I could just go through what we have said we hope to have in place for September 2015 and some of them - there are 24, but many of them are not directly affecting the classroom teacher. They are indirectly affecting and we believe in a positive way.

 

            We're looking at efficiencies within the department. That will not directly affect the classroom teacher but it should indirectly affect them in a positive way, if we're more efficient. I can tell you that my observation of what has happened over the last seven or eight years is that there is a bit of a disconnect between what goes on in the classroom and what went on at the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, and I would be the first to admit that. Because that disconnect existed, teachers didn't always feel that their input was valued, appreciated, or even asked for. We're trying to bridge that gap and make them feel very much a part of the decision making.

 

            Anyway, efficiencies within the department, establishing a centre of learning excellence at the department, and again that is within the structure of the department. It is designed - we identified the centre of excellence to be the division within the department that has the sole responsibility to drive the Action Plan forward. Again, that is not going to be felt at all by the teacher in the classroom but it is going to allow us to be more efficient.

 

            Establish a minister's forum on teaching excellence - and that's again where we're bringing teachers in. We will establish that team of teachers. That's not going to affect the workload of teachers but it is going to, at the end of the day, allow us to use their input to determine what does teaching excellence look like.

 

            Create an inter-university chair in research to address the achievement gap. That will not directly affect the classroom teacher and their workload, but as a department it will help us identify why we have a gap in achievement across Nova Scotia.

 

            Establish a business education council - no direct impact on the classroom teacher. Observation survey for early literacy, that definitely will. That will be done in Grade 1 and teachers will be trained to administer that. We know that teachers want to be part of that and, again, the PD that goes along with that will be available.

 

            Hands-on learning and technology, and one of the things we talked about was Brilliant Labs. That's a positive; that's not a drain on teachers' time, that's a positive for teachers. Discontinue the homework guides, they should be glad they're gone. The next one is establish new homework guides, again, to give better direction to teachers about what they do with homework, not to download work on them.

 

            Expand Discovering Opportunities 9 - we have Discovering Opportunities 9 in some of our schools. We want to expand that. There will be teachers and professional development in place to do that expansion. Streamline curriculum for Primary to Grade 3, we talked about that. That will impact on teachers in a positive way; it's something they asked for. Include treaty education in Primary to Grade 12. This came from the Mi'kmaq community and it came from the Council of Mi'kmaq Education where they want to see more of their heritage and culture included in the curriculum and so we have made a commitment to do that. We are also doing that for African Nova Scotian communities, and that will be spread across the curriculum, Primary to Grade 12.

 

            Targeted funding for math mentors Primary to Grade 3 - that is a support for teachers and that is a support for students so that is positive. That's not downloading something on them, it's providing support for what they're doing. As part of our math strategy we will be providing early intervention support for students. It's not only a math mentor who comes out and works with the teacher who may need some support in what and how to deliver in math, but it will be direct support for students who are struggling in Primary to Grade 3 with math. Again, that's an added support for the teacher and the student.

 

            Create and distribute a growth and development guide for 4-year-olds - this is a preschool. This is something where we want to provide a guide towards human growth and development for all families. Address the wait-list for early intervention, that's something that we're doing prior to students ever coming to school. Integrate technology and student assessments in the new curriculum - again, teachers coming in and telling us how we are using technology now and how we can better use it.

 

            Establish a transition task force - this is for students who are transitioning out of our public school and into post-secondary or the work world or the path of their choice. Development and implement the school code of conduct, we've talked about that. An attendance policy. Student progress on IPPs will absolutely have a positive impact on teachers; teachers will be part of the consultation as to what the criteria will be so that IPPs can be more effective. Provincial criteria for IPP will include teachers and comprehensive assessment of individual student needs, and all of those are tied into that whole individual student need, IPPs, the best way to meet those needs.

 

            A common instrument to assist with the performance measurement among school boards, one of the things that we talk about here - I've spoken about it many times - is consistency across the province. If we're going to look at comparing our students from one end of this province to the other then we have to be using a common assessment, so there will be the development of that common assessment. I think if you're keeping tally of those 24, any that are directly related to the classroom teacher are designed to lighten their workload and provide supports to them and/or their students, particularly Primary to Grade 3.

 

            I hope the message that goes out is that no, we're not going to be downloading a lot of things on to the classroom teacher, but any changes that we ask the classroom teachers to make will be something they've asked for, something they've participated in, and something they've had professional development in order to do.

 

            MR. DUNN: One last comment. We both agree on report cards, what they have been doing over the past two years, and I think you alluded to that, it's just that it's time- consuming - hours and hours. When I would talk to some teachers who were involved in that, I would say that some of those hours could be used in a better manner, a more positive manner as far as working in other areas of the curriculum and so on to help students.

 

            I'm going to move on just for a couple of minutes, I hope, to high school math. I'm pleased to see the extension of that to a full-year course and the attempt to cap Grade 10 and 11 academic math. I know that cap will probably be reasonable.

 

            The one question I have about the math is - I'm not sure and I think it's a concern. I know a couple administrators I've talked to thought it was a concern. The first one would be, do we have the math teachers available? I agree wholeheartedly that we're going to put a third math in the curriculum, but do we have the personnel available right now or is that something that we know will be available soon, coming out of university and so on, for this extra math?

 

            MS. CASEY: We touched briefly yesterday on the whole business of math at the high school level. The Action Plan is in response to what Nova Scotians have told us, teachers included, that students are weak in math. We recognize that they have to have a good foundation; that's why our focus is on math at the lower elementary, but we also recognize that we need to try to provide some additional supports for those students who perhaps did miss out through Primary to Grade 10 and are now in Grade 10 and they have three years, and they can't catch up in three years what they've missed in 10 years.

 

            However, we do believe - and getting back to what teachers are telling us - that the academic math 11 - really there was more work to be done in math 11 than they felt they could accomplish in one semester so we extended that to the two semesters. We are looking at extending that math in 2016-17, and part of the reason we're giving that another year- plus is to address the very concern that you have about how school boards and high schools can respond to that extra semester. Do they have the staff on hand that can pick up that extra semester? That will really be done almost on an individual school basis, because for smaller schools that may be a challenge; for larger schools it may not.

 

            The other thing that we're doing - and I know you didn't mention it now, but I know that you tried to ask me a question on this. If you want to save it for QP, that's fine; if not, I'll answer it now and you can ask me again in QP - is capping of the class sizes in academic math 10 and academic math 11.

 

            We looked at class sizes across all of our high schools, with respect to those two math courses, and we found some pretty big classes for academic math 10 and academic math 11. Now, we know that students have to have math in order to graduate. If they are weak in math, but they have to have one to graduate, they're going to pick up a math 10, I would expect, academic math 10. But because it's mandatory and they have to have it to graduate, you have a lot of kids going into that math. The school may only have one section of that math and their numbers may be up in the low 30s, I think we even found one school that had in the 40s.

 

            Then next door to that they may have a pre-calculus, or a calculus class that has 10 kids in it. When you look at that and you think the most independent learners are in a small class of 10, 12, 15, 20 kids, and down the hall you have the kids who are good students but they may not be as strong as the independent learners and they are in a huge class. When you're talking about individual teacher attention time, it's pretty easy to figure out which students are getting the most teacher time, and they are probably the ones, by comparison, who need it the least.

 

            There is something wrong with that picture, if you're an independent learner and you obviously are capable and you sign up for pre-calculus - that's perfect, I think it's great, it's wonderful, and I encourage kids to do that. But I also recognize that the needs of those 30-plus kids who aren't as independent, and perhaps not as ready, are clumped together with very little teacher attention.

 

            So we looked at, okay, how do we provide funding to the school boards in order for them to assign teachers and do the makeup for the classes and we provide funding to the school board for high school students on a ratio of one to 24: one teacher for 24 students. The boards are getting the funding for one to 24 but they're using a global pot of money to determine what courses they offer and who signs up for what courses and so on.

 

            We're saying if we're funding you on one to 24, where we have a problem with math, we're going to cap those math classes in academic math 10 and academic math 11 at 24. That will take some time because schools are going to have to look at not only the question you've raised about the qualifications of teachers on their staff to deliver that because that may mean making another section.

 

            However, go back to the lens that I use for everything in this book: what's in the best interest of kids? That's the lens that needs to be used all the way down from the department, to the board, to the school, to make those decisions. You know there may be some decisions and some tough decisions for a school to make, but if at the end of the day we want to improve the skill set of our kids when they graduate from Grade 12, in particular in math, we believe that this is an opportunity to try to do that, and we're looking for the compliance by the school boards and the schools to cap those classes.

 

            We have identified that; we've given notice, and the capping of Grade 10 academic math is scheduled for - I guess for both of them - is in 2017-18. So we're looking out there. We're doing the two semester in academic math 11 in one year's time and we're doing the capping of the class sizes in two years' time. There is lead time for schools to start looking at that, not only in what sections they have and what courses they offer but also, do they have teachers on staff who have the qualifications to teach that?

 

            The other thing that we talked about is our close conversations with the universities that are delivering B.Ed. programs, to make sure there is going to be a greater demand for your graduates to teach math, based on what we have now as a model in our schools, and they need to know that. That's where we have to work with them to try to ensure that we have that supply of teachers who can do that. We will be working with the boards to see what the qualifications are of the teachers that they have in their employ and what are the challenges with respect to this.

 

            MR. DUNN: In your final few remarks you answered my next question. I was just going to ask about any conversations with the universities with regard to - here's what we're planning to do, hopefully you'll engage with us and help us out, and that will be great if that happens.

 

            I'm not so sure if it will happen where high school grads getting their undergraduate degree and wanting to get a B.Ed., if they'll run into a situation where it will be math courses, one plus, mandatory for them to take where they may not be wanting to go in that field or not. I don't know if that will create a problem or not for students at university.

 

            One more question with math - and I know you have heard this and I certainly have heard it from both teachers actively teaching now and ones who have retired. If you look at the scenario, let's say you're sitting with a bunch of administrators right now and someone will fire the question at you, and I heard it so many times, and I have witnessed it too, and I know you have, a lot of students are having great difficulty getting their two math credits right now, as we speak. I know, from what's going to be happening over the next years, the emphasis on elementary, hopefully that will be gone; once they reach high school they'll be able to adapt and hopefully take all kinds of courses because of the emphasis on the early elementary grades.

 

            In the meantime if you were fired that question from an administrator at a meeting and they're saying no, there is just no way, knowing my students, we can get them three math credits, when it happens, that soon, because of their previous experience coming up through the grades, so there is kind of a gap there. How would you answer that or how would you handle that?

 

            MS. CASEY: I think it's always a good idea to anticipate the questions, to hear from the people who will be asked to implement the changes and to help them understand why the changes are being made. We also recognize that you have to give that time for changes at the school level for the professional development and to ensure that they have the staff hired who can deliver the courses that are required to be delivered. That's why we are pushing that out until 2017-18 for the capping of the classes, and 2020 for changing the mandatory classes.

 

            What we're saying is by 2020 students will have to have three math credits in order to graduate. We believe that's lead time and we recognize that you can't do these things overnight, but if we believe that that's the right thing to do then we put it in the plan and we talk about the implementation of that. If somebody was to ask me that question, I would say we recognize there may be some challenges, that's why we're giving lead time, that's why we're working with universities, that's why we're working with the school board and, in particular, the high school principal who is challenged with what courses do you offer and what's mandatory.

 

            I would say to them, and I would ask you to say to them, our target is by 2020 graduates will be required to complete three math courses in order to graduate.

 

            MR. DUNN: We're going to leave the math for the time being and come back to it in maybe a couple of years' time - no. I wanted to talk about snow days and have a conversation about the implications of that. Before we discuss snow days, just one question comes to mind, going back to all the changes we're looking at and the code of conduct and everything. I'm going to leave the snow to one side and deal with just one question and it's the absenteeism of students in the middle and high school.

 

When the department starts to work with the school boards and the schools with the code of expectations, sometimes I think the absenteeism by students, particularly at the high school level, is more detrimental to what we're trying to accomplish than the actual missing of the snow days and so on. My question is, will there be an attempt to try to solve that problem?

 

            I know you know and I know I can remember as an administrator, scratching your head trying to think, there just didn't seem to be any teeth anywhere to do something to get our students to school. I know that with more credits being required at the high school level, I was really glad to see that because that's going to be part of the solution. If you can just kind of comment on where you might go with that, what can we do? What can be accomplished to help the absenteeism rate?

 

            MS. CASEY: There's nothing more frustrating for a teacher than to have a class of students, a keen group, a lesson well-planned, everything is laid out for a great day, and have two or three students who are absent. Absent with excuse is certainly a reality and we accept that and we work with those students, but absenteeism that's chronic, and that may be without excuse, is extremely frustrating for the teacher. First of all, because you re-teach when those students come back and you have to create time within your day in order to re-teach that. It is a challenge and a burden for the teachers but we have a responsibility to make sure that we deliver the program as best we can to all students and sometimes that is under different circumstances than in a full class.

 

            Part of the - and I do want to separate excusable and inexcusable absences. It goes back to something we talked about, about accountability and about the connect between home and school, and the important role that parents in many homes still play with regard to attendance in schools but unfortunately not in all homes. I think we have to recognize that. In many cases, and you've seen it as a high school administrator, mother drops them off at the front door and they walk out the back door. Mother has gone to work and they have no idea their student is not in school.

 

            They talk about addressing the root cause, I think we have to find out why students are not coming to school. Part of it is that they don't see they have to be held accountable. Sometimes it's that they don't have parental support. Sometimes it's our fault because we may not be providing programming that is of interest, that is relevant, or that they feel engaged in.

 

            We have made some changes in our curriculum to try to address that part of it. We can't go into the home and tell the parent how to raise their child or how to teach them respect and accountability and all those kinds of things. There is an important role for parents in the whole education of their children. What we can do is try to make the school a warm, inviting place for them to be and curriculum that they understand, feel part of, see that it's relevant, and that they are engaged in that learning.

 

            We have taken the approach that we have some students, in particular in Grades 9 to 12, who have no interest in going on to university. That's fine because we need a lot of people who have never gone to university to be our skilled tradespeople and to be our small businessmen and to be a lot of leaders in our communities. We need to provide something that they see as a relevant learning experience for them in school, so we introduced the Options to Opportunities program.

 

We had kids who would otherwise have been absent, chronic absenteeism, or may have actually quit school, who have engaged in and enrolled in the Options to Opportunities program because it was meaningful for them and they weren't sitting in a class believing that they weren't as capable as everybody else. They are very capable but they were in an environment where they could demonstrate their abilities.

 

            We made a commitment that we would expand the Options to Opportunities so that every student in the province had an opportunity to enrol in O2. We talked earlier today about targeted funding and that's one of the examples where if the money was not targeted to school boards, they may have not offered O2; we found that out.

 

            I can tell you that one of the largest high schools in the province, and in your former board and mine, was not offering O2. That was enough to tell me that we need to target the money to the school boards, to offer the programs we believe are important. I believe O2 has saved many kids from that whole absenteeism, which I know is what we started talking about but I'm talking about not being punitive and punishing kids who don't come to school but trying to create an environment where they will want to come to school.

 

            The other thing we're doing is expanding the skilled trades centres. Some of us are old enough to remember vocational schools. They served an important role and provided employment opportunities for so many people who are now our plumbers, electricians, and carpenters, making a darn good living, and contributing greatly to the community and to society. However, once vocational schools were gone, there was that mentality that you had no other path when you graduated from high school but to go to university. There was a period, I would say, probably in the 1980s, that we had a lot of kids going to university who had no interest in going, but what else were they going to do?

 

            We introduced the skilled trades program, which again, provides them an opportunity to work toward their Red Seal while they're still in school and to start getting their apprenticeship hours and to move forward. That's giving some of the kids, who might otherwise have been absent or dropped out of school, some reason to stay, some motivation, and some way to feel good about themselves. At the end of the day, they will be the ones who are providing the services and supports that we need as homeowners.

 

            We have extended the number of skilled trade centres. We now have centres in all boards and we will continue to work with the school boards about what future locations might be so that that opportunity is provided.

 

            If we can encourage more students to stay in school, make them feel valued and welcomed, provide a program that is of interest and relevant to them, I believe our absenteeism will go down. Will we always have a problem with it? We will always have kids who for some reason choose not to come to school. Some of it is of their own making and some of it isn't. I think it's important - again I will use this word - that we don't become punitive in our response to students who are absent. I think we need to look at why they're absent.

 

            Some schools have a practice in place where they contact the home. There are some cases where the parents don't know their kids aren't in school. They need to know that and they need to address that in the home. There are some parents who know and don't care, and that's a sad situation for a child or a student to be in.

 

            We are looking at some absenteeism policy that will help give direction to school principals and classroom teachers about absenteeism, but I think we need to focus on the root cause in many cases and make sure that we have done everything we can to make a school an inviting place to be.

 

            There are some parents who have not had a positive experience in public school and unfortunately that may become the conversation at home. There is not a lot of encouragement from parents to have their kids in school because unfortunately some of them don't value school. A lot of challenges there, but I do recognize how it interferes with a teacher's ability to deliver a program when a number of the kids aren't there. How and when do you provide them the extra support they need? Teachers are very accommodating in providing it for excusable absences and for special circumstances, but they do grow tired of providing that extra time of theirs when there is really no excuse for the absence.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dunn, I want to make you aware that we have two minutes left.

 

            MR. DUNN: At the end of the two minutes I'll be making a request if I can finish off the half-hour, with the other Party not here, but we'll discuss that in two minutes because I'd love to get into snow days and have the discussion, if possible.

 

            Your answer there is bang on with regard to - not to look at it as punitive, but to look at the root causes of high school students missing. You're exactly right, they're in an environment where they're out of their element, they're not comfortable, and what's the easiest thing to do? Just go missing, so I couldn't agree with you more.

 

            Going to snow days, because of where we live we certainly have a problem with snow days. I just want to make reference to - before we get into it - some information here dealing with a new study conducted by Harvard Kennedy School assistant professor Joshua Goodman and just a couple comments that he makes. It was interesting, one of the things he has said was he finds that snow days do not impact student learning. In fact, he finds keeping schools open during a storm is more detrimental to learning than a school closure. He makes another reference with slack time in the schedule, the time lost to closure can be regained. Another statement he made - he examines reams of data in Grades 3 to 10 from 2010 to 2013 and his conclusion is that snow days are less detrimental to student performance than what we just finished talking about - absences.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dunn, your time has elapsed. I would like to throw a question out to the minister, do you know how long you will need for your closing statements? There is 39 minutes left.

 

            MS. CASEY: Nine will be fine.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: So you're requesting the rest of the time? We'll allow it.

 

            MR. DUNN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and when the last 10 minutes are there, we'll bring it to a close.

 

            Again, that's a problem we're going to be faced with forever - storm days. I'm not suggesting I know the answers or where we should go with that. I think, as I mentioned to you before, everything should be out on the table and I'm going to throw this out, just for discussion only: the theory of the four-day week and once that has been said all of a sudden the stop signs come up and parents are saying well what am I going to do on Friday with my youngsters? Where are they going to go? Who is going to take care of them?

 

            I'll just throw out some ideas and we can discuss that. If we had a four-day week where the school year was set up, I can see so many benefits - so you would have to lengthen the four days, Monday to Thursday, to make up the correct amount of time, so the four days would be a little longer.

 

            During the winter season, if a storm occurred in one of those four days, then the operation of the school system would be that it would be made up on Friday so we wouldn't lose that day. That Friday also could be a good day for PD days, if that could be negotiated. It would also be a good day for teachers who have medical appointments or other types of appointments; they would have that day to do that, or students for that matter. It would also be a great day for a lot of school students, boys and girls, who are involved in extracurricular activities, on school teams, and they have to leave Friday morning because there is a tournament on, wherever - so I can see that being a benefit.

 

            I'm just throwing out these ideas here as just more of a discussion or it is something that has already been discussed around your tables. I'm thinking it would even be less student absenteeism and perhaps less staff absenteeism, one day less for long bus drives, a saving there as far as vehicles being on the road and so on.

 

            Probably there would be no need for - we hear of the blizzard bags being used and how great they are, and I have talked to teachers now and some people down that area and it's not as great as it sounds. I'm not so sure if I'd want to see that implemented up in our area here.

 

            Maybe I'll stop there, just to get a reaction from you. Is that something you'd be willing to sit down with your counterparts and at least throw it on the table and say let's have a look at it and see where it goes? Maybe it wouldn't go anywhere.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: I just want to clarify with you, Mr. Dunn, there are 30 minutes available. Did you want to take the entire time, just for the record?

 

            MR. DUNN: Yes.

 

            MS. CASEY: The member is talking about a body of research that exists. My experience is that you can find a body of research to support whichever position you want to take, on most any topic. I'm not dismissing that body of research. I do recognize that, because of the climate we are in, we will always have storm days, snow days, whatever you want to call them. I also recognize that it's probably one of the most difficult decisions that school boards have to make, when they make the call that school will be cancelled. It's never the right call because there are always people who have another opinion. However, I do commend school board staff for making those calls with the safety of students in mind.

 

Because we are in a rural part of the country, we are a rural province, the call is not easy to make board-wide. It's not even easy to make - I can't make it province-wide and it's hard to make it board-wide. It's difficult, you may have roads that are easily cleared of snow and you may have ones that are not. The board operations staff and the transportation supervisor is always challenged with that. They do collect the best information they can get before they make that call but they also know that when they make it that it will be criticized by someone. I think they've grown to accept that but I don't think they can be faulted for not making it in the best interest of safety.

 

            Having said that, we know that we will continue to have those calls and we will continue to have schools cancelled, late starts, no start, whatever. The challenge we have is how much time can we take away from students' learning and how we can best continue that learning and deal with the days that schools are closed. That has been the challenge and that has been the question.

 

            Some people have suggested that one of the ways we can deal with that is to use technology and have teachers communicating with their students through technology. The student is at home, following along and doing the schoolwork or they are doing the assignment and emailing it to the teacher, or whatever. In an ideal world that would be great and teachers would be able to do that. Unfortunately we have students who may not have access to that technology in their home.

 

            We talk about students needing to feel valued and appreciated and included and if 20 of the 25 students in their class are able to communicate with their teacher on a storm day through technology and five of them aren't, how do they feel? They are being excluded instead of included.

 

            Technology is wonderful and if in the ideal world we had everyone at home hooked up to an iPod or a laptop or whatever, that would be great, that would be a solution, but it is not in this situation. There is a body of research to say that's the way to go.

 

            The second thing is with respect to what limitations that are currently with what we can do within the 195 school days. We know that within those 195 days there are eight days that are part of the collective agreement that are designated for professional development. Public opinion appears to be those would be days that we could consider to make up for lost instructional time. In fact, there were a couple of surveys done during the height of the snow days: one was done by the Herald and one was done by CTV. They asked their readers or their listeners their thoughts on how we could capture the lost instructional time and I believe 58 per cent of those who responded in The Chronicle Herald said use professional development days, and CTV, I think, was 42 per cent PD days. That's the opinion of the public and the public are responding in that way.

 

If you go back to the Action Plan, when we were talking about some of the limitations that exist with putting forward our plan, is the co-operation or negotiation from the Teachers Union to do some of the things that we believe are in the best interests of kids.

 

            It's easy for the public to say, take the PD days and cancel PD and have the students in school for instruction during that time, and it all makes very good sense. However, I will share with those here that last year there was a storm, I think it was the 10^th storm day that the Cape Breton board has had; they had schools closed for 10 days. I believe it was on a Monday or a Tuesday of a week and they had already scheduled a professional development day for the Friday of that week. They wanted to cancel the PD day and have the kids in school on that day, so instead of the kids having a three-day week, they would at least have a four-day when they were getting instruction.

 

            The Nova Scotia Teachers Union gave notice to the board that if they cancelled that PD day, they would grieve it. Now I said here earlier that my responsibility is to advocate for kids. I understand that the Teachers Union is to advocate for teachers, but I would suggest to you that there would be many teachers in this province who would recognize that having their students in class was a better use of their time and the students' time than having a professional development day.

 

            It's not as easy as the general public believes it is. You have to look at that co-operation or negotiation. If you assume that you can't touch them because the union is going to grieve it, and if you assume that we're going to continue to have days shut down because of storm, then you have to look at alternatives.

 

            This year, recognizing that we had no control over either one of those, we went out to the principals, to the school board, and to the classroom teachers and said, is there any way you can look at what you have scheduled and perhaps change a winter carnival day or an assembly instead of having a full day have it a half-day? You look at what you have scheduled and see if you can capture any of that lost instructional time.

 

            Teachers and principals were very accommodating and they did work within their schedule to try to do that. I heard from parents who were unhappy because the winter carnival day was cancelled so you cannot make everyone happy.

 

            I would think that parents would recognize the important decision that particular school made to try to recover some of that instructional time. One of the thoughts is - and everything is up for consideration here because it is a problem that we don't have a solution to - is to schedule the professional development days sometime other than the peak winter season, so if there is a storm day and the kids are out for a day, they are not also going to be out another day that week because it's an in-service day. Maybe the timing of the in-service days is something that boards can look at and consider: the notion of an extended day, an extended calendar, or a change in the calendar, again in co-operation or negotiation with the Teachers Union, so there are some severe limitations.

 

            There would be advantages to a four-day, there would be disadvantages. There are parents who rely on schools to provide care for their children while they work. We've all been working parents; we know that. When school is cancelled, what is your backup plan? As parents, we've all gone through that.

 

            If we're looking at changing the school day, we have to recognize the impact that would have on families who at this point believe and understand that their children are going to be in school five days a week. The four-day week, the extended day, and the extended year are all possibilities, worth conversations about that, recognizing there are challenges and limitations with any.

 

            I do believe that if we have quality teaching in our schools and if we have a concentration on teaching and if, in particular, we can look at - which we are in our Action Plan - standards of teaching, the quality is sometimes more important than the quantity. We have classrooms where we have quality teaching five hours of the day. I think we have to accept the fact that we need to bring everybody up to that level of quality.

 

            MR. DUNN: Mr. Chairman, could you tell me how much time is left, minus the 10 minutes for the minister's final reply? (Interruption) About 12 minutes, okay. I'm going to allow my colleague to just ask a couple of questions and then I'll come back and continue.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: We're going to wrap it up at about 3:40 p.m. and allow the minister to finish off so, Mr. Houston, if you'd like to ask a few questions.

 

            The honourable member for Pictou East.

 

            MR. TIM HOUSTON: I thank the minister for the time this afternoon. I just have a question about the consolidation of Pictou East and Frank H. MacDonald. That's a project that was the number-one capital priority of the Chignecto-Central Regional School Board. It's not one that made it onto the department's capital list for this year. I'm just wondering if the minister can share some of her thoughts on that project and where that might rank in terms of projects to come forward.

 

            It's an area of pretty significant concern for people in the community. It's a good project to consolidate those two schools, and I'm just wondering if the minister has anything she can share with the people of Pictou East on that particular issue.

 

            MS. CASEY: Welcome to the table. The process, as the member would know, for renovations or new school construction is driven by priorities of the school board. It's also determined by the financial envelope we have for new school projects.

 

            There was an example in Pictou County, as we talked about, with WA and I commend the board for looking at consolidations because they have a lot of real estate and not as many students. Pictou East is a big rambling old piece of infrastructure that in its heyday was full and now it isn't, so I commend the board for looking at those kinds of consolidations.

 

            The process, as the member knows, is for the board to identify their priorities and then we respond to that. We cannot respond to every request. We have been able to maintain the same level of capital for the last - well since we came in - the last two years but when we came in there were a lot of projects on the books or there were others that were approved by the previous government. My positon is I think we need to move those projects ahead so we can create some capacity to bring new ones in.

 

            I would encourage the school board, if that is still their priority, to keep submitting it because space will become available. In the meantime I know that boards are looking at what do we do for maintenance in those buildings, if we recognize that in two or three years' time there may be a new announcement. I would just encourage the member to work with his school board member to continue to identify the priorities and put them forward for us.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: That's definitely a project that I support. It's an important project; it's important to the people in that community and obviously those are the schools that my children went through as well so I'm very familiar with them. I am hopeful that it's a project that does happen and as I say it was the board's number-one priority. I get the sense from the minister that she supports that project as well, so I appreciate that.

 

            I just had a question, I don't know if the minister - just a quick comment on the need for co-teaching, collaboration, and more help for teachers in the classroom teaching differentiated lesson plans and IPPs. Will the increase in the budget for this year allow for more resource teachers and guidance staff? I don't know if the member can comment specifically on the Chignecto-Central board but does the minister feel that, with the increase in the Education budget, there will be the ability to hire more resource staff and guidance staff in the Chignecto-Central board?

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: I just want to make you aware we have about seven minutes left until your allotted time for your final speech.

 

            MS. CASEY: To the member's question, we have provincial ratios for guidance counsellor to student and resource teacher to student, and the funding that we provide we had an earlier conversation about it being targeted money to the boards. Boards don't like that because it takes away some of their flexibility. If we believe that it's important to have a ratio of one to 500, and we provide the funding to the board to meet that ratio, then we want to target that so that is where those resources do go.

 

            I don't have it at my fingertips, but I can give you where Chignecto-Central is with respect to those ratios for guidance counsellors and for resource teachers. We also have ratio for speech language. If it's all right with the member, we can get those so we'll know how close Chignecto-Central is to reaching those ratios.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou Centre.

 

            HON. PAT DUNN: Mr. Chairman, there is a request for the NDP to ask one final question in the dying minutes.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: We have five minutes left. The honourable member for Truro- Bible Hill-Millbrook-Salmon River.

 

            MS. LENORE ZANN: Thank you very much, I know it has been a long couple of days for the minister. Just getting back to a couple of the themes I was asking about earlier today, I do want to ask the minister again, and to reiterate the importance of having teachers' voices at the table. Coming from a family of educators, I honestly believe - how can education reform be truly valid if teachers' opinions and teachers' research is not included?

 

The Nova Scotia Teachers Union and the Canadian Teacher's Federation have been researching educational issues and collecting data on various educational topics for years, using really a variety of means so why would the department not want to collaborate with the professionals who are working with students on a daily basis and who have seen the effects of various government policies on our students in classrooms over the years?

 

            If this educational reform is not really just a smoke-and-mirror attempt to look good to the public and is truly an attempt to make education more viable for students and teachers, I think the government needs to include the teachers' voices and teachers need to be included on education committees. I think their voices, experience, and professionalism are valid and it's not valid to rely on retired teachers or outsiders to give their viewpoints.

 

Even student opinion will have a different vantage point to the teacher viewpoint so teachers' views on forming a new code of conduct policy, reforming AEE, SOP, streamlining the curriculum outcomes, and updating all the forms like the IPPs, the adaptations, and behaviour plans - all of this work really needs to include teacher voices and the experience of the NSTU.

 

Wouldn't the Department of Education want to build teacher morale and act as a bridge between teachers in the public and not demoralize them by talking about fixing the system that they have been trying to glue together for years?

 

I think it's time that we need to see education as an asset to the future economy of our province and it's compassion, the creativity, and the caring of teachers that will help our youth grow into citizens who will make our province grow and prosper. I just wanted to say that and ask the minster one more time if the teachers, who are active teachers now, can be and will be consulted and put on the various committees to make these very important decisions as we move forward.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Just to let you know we have about a minute left.

 

MS. CASEY: I find it actually quite insulting to have been here for eight hours, and have commented many times about the number of committees and the input that we have sought from teachers, that we have over 3,000 teachers who responded to our survey; we have them on many committees, every committee that we have struck. We have teachers involved. I have repeated that many times and I find the comments from the member either quite insulting or else she did not understand what I was saying.

 

I've said many times, I value the work that teachers do. I am a teacher. I know how important their work is. I know how important their voice is. When you're sitting around a table, they are the ones who will be implementing the changes that we make in the Action Plan. They are the ones who will be responsible for the success of the implementation. I've said many times in these last eight hours that the committees that we are striking have teachers who are at the department.

 

They are excited about being asked. They have not been asked in the past, in the last four years. They have suffered from a $65 million cut to education, and if you want to talk about demoralizing, what could be more demoralizing than know that the government that you had at the time was saying: sorry, you're not getting any more money. That was not a recognition of appreciation. It was not recognizing what the teachers were doing. It was basically saying: continue doing what you're doing but we're not giving you any more money. Thank you.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: And with that, we'll leave the last 10 minutes for a closing statement.

 

            MS. CASEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the others who have chaired during these last eight hours. I appreciate you keeping those of us in the room on task and that you recognize that education is definitely a priority for this government, and every indication in the budget would point to that.

 

            We have a responsibility in this province to ensure that all our students from Primary to Grade 12 have the best possible education before they leave public schools. We recognize that there are concerns, that's exactly why we asked Nova Scotians to tell us what they valued in our public school system and what they believed should be changed.

 

            We had a response that was overwhelming. No one would have anticipated that but I think it sent a strong message that Nova Scotians do care about public schools and they do want to be part of complimenting teachers for what they do and they do want to be part of any changes they believe can make the system better. Out of those 19,000 responses, we had a pretty clear direction, based on what Nova Scotians were telling us. That is what drove the Action Plan that will be followed for the next five years, over 100 actions in that plan spread out so that they are manageable, so that they can be implemented, and so that the input we need and we are getting can be reflected in what we are doing to improve student learning.

 

            We have a responsibility to ensure that the students who graduate have the knowledge base and the skill set required so that whatever path they go down, they can be successful. We know that some of our students struggle and we know they need supports. Our budget for 2015-16 is a clear reflection of our accepting and understanding of that.

 

            There is more money going into our schools than there was last year and there was more money last year than there was the year before. I think that is exactly the message we need to send, that we care about math and literacy. Our Premier, when he was Leader, made a commitment that education would be a priority with a focus on math and literacy. The money we have put back into the system is a clear demonstration of that commitment: $65 million is what we said we would reinvest. That is the exact amount that was cut from the public education system in the previous three budgets and we made a commitment that over the course of our mandate, we would reinvest that money and we have done that - $17 million last year, $20 million this year. I think it comes up to about $37 million out of the $65 million has been reinvested.

 

            We are not going to dump the money in with no clear direction. We are putting money in to support programs that have been identified as important for students, necessary for them to get the skills they need, to get the supports they need. It is driven by the minister's panel. It is supported by the Action Plan and we are moving forward.

 

            We recognize that the strength of our public education system is in our teachers. They know it and they know that we know it. They know that because we are investing in them and we are asking them to be part of the changes we are making. When they see the new P to 3 curriculum, they will know that they have been part of that. They will see their fingerprints on that and they will be proud of that.

 

            Mr. Chairman, that is one of the ways that you can build a sense of ownership - bring people in. These are the ones who are the front line. They are in the classrooms. They are the people who are directly connected to every student in our province every day. They are the ones who make the difference. We need to listen to them. We are listening to them. They are proud to be called into the department to work. They believe for the first time in a long time that they are valued and that they are appreciated and that they are respected. When you have those three components in place, you can be sure that along with their dedication they will be the ones who deliver. They will be the ones who bring about the change that we want, and they will be the ones who can take credit - not the department, not the staff - they are the ones who will be able to take credit for the success of our students when they graduate.

 

            We recognize that we have a huge responsibility and for 13 years of these young people's lives we have some responsibility to make sure that they are directed in the right way.

 

            I don't know how much more time I have but you can tell me that.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: You have four minutes.

 

            MS. CASEY: One of the things that has been added to the Department of Education is early learning. It is important to know that the work that's happening in the early learning division, whether it's early intervention, whether it's Early Years Centres, or whether it's supports for child care, the students who are coming into our Primary class will be in a better state of readiness. If there is some disability or some developmental delay, it will have been identified; the intervention will have taken place; the supports will be there for both the student and their family, and when that student hits the ground in Primary a lot of those issues that were never addressed before, and were a deterrent to that student's success, will have been identified, intervened, and resolved.

 

            Having the responsibility for birth to age of entry to school has certainly helped in our public schools because what Primary teachers were facing, with unknown diagnoses and not knowing what to do to respond to that individual child's learning style, those have been resolved and so progress can begin immediately, as soon as that child comes into the Primary class.

 

            We're looking at Primary to 3 as our focus, recognizing that if students cannot read by the end of Grade 3, they will be disadvantaged and they will struggle through the rest of their schooling. That's why our focus is on teachers, curriculum, and students, Primary to Grade 3. It is the teachers who are looking at the outcomes. It is the teachers who are identifying what those priorities are. I have every confidence that the teachers will have a set of outcomes ready for September. Teachers will be in-serviced on them; they will be able to hit the ground running, and one of the concerns that teachers had about too much being dumped on them will certainly be relieved and alleviated because they will now have something that is manageable; they will have the resources to support it, and they will be able to move forward.

 

            I'm pleased with the questions that were asked. I certainly enjoyed engaging in conversation and I do hope there were a couple of things that we said we would provide for the members and we'll make sure that that information is made available to them.

 

            In conclusion, I would like to thank first of all my staff who were here with me to provide that support and to give me the detail that I need. I'd like to thank my colleagues who are here and some had the opportunity to ask a question.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E5 stand?

 

Resolution E5 stands.

 

Thank you very much, we appreciate your time and everybody enjoy the weekend.

 

            [The subcommittee adjourned at 3:49 p.m.]