HALIFAX, THURSDAY, APRIL 16, 2015

 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON SUPPLY

 

2:55 P.M.

 

CHAIRMAN

Ms. Patricia Arab

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Good afternoon, everyone. This is the Subcommittee of the Whole on Supply. My name is Patricia Arab and I am the MLA for Fairview-Clayton Park. I will be the chairman this afternoon. Today we have before us the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.

 

Resolution E5 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $1,244,607,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

 

            HON. KAREN CASEY: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I'm pleased to be here and to have colleagues from the House here who will be engaging in the debate on estimates for the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.

 

            I would first of all like to introduce two members of the staff who are here with me, my Deputy Minister, Sandra McKenzie on my left and my Chief Operating Officer, Diana Eisenhauer on my right. They will be here to support me and to assist us in providing answers and information that is requested by the members who are asking questions regarding the estimates.

 

            I want to begin by saying that it is our government that in the election of 2013 acknowledged the importance of education in the province and the importance of identifying it as a priority and the importance of following up on the commitments that we made during that campaign. I was pleased to be given the mandate to do that as the minister and it is that commitment that is guiding our department as we move forward.

 

            Education, as you know, has not always been a priority of government in the last few years and it is important that we try to rebuild, and as our action plan says, rebuild, renew and refocus. I will be speaking a bit to the action plan as we move forward, but I think it's important to put it in that context - that it is a priority of government. It is a responsibility that we have and we take that responsibility seriously.

 

            With respect to education and early childhood development, not only are we guided by the commitment that was made by our government, but also by the mandate that we have within the department. I do want to read that mandate because it is what drives the decisions that we make.

                                                  

            The Department of Education and Early Childhood Development has an extensive mandate that focuses on children and youth from birth to high school graduation. The department works to ensure that children in their early years have the support they need for a positive start to school and students benefit from a quality Primary to Grade 12 education so that they are well prepared to graduate to the workforce or post-secondary education.

 

The department works with teachers, school boards, community partners, and many others to achieve its goal to increase overall student achievement and success. That is the mandate with which we are working. That is the mandate, as I said, that will drive the decisions we make at the department and it is our expectation that by following that mandate we will be providing the best service possible for the students; early learning, birth to age of entry to school, and public school until graduation or age 21.

 

            I do want to set the stage a bit for how we have gone about doing that and there certainly is concrete evidence within the 2015-16 budget that we have kept to our mandate and kept our commitment to rebuild the public education system in our schools. The budget, as we have just heard, is a $1.244607 billion budget. I think it's important to note that that is an increase over 2014-15 and we have heard many, many times in the Legislature through Question Period or through debate on bills or through Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne, that we are in a difficult fiscal situation in our province. We are working towards a balanced budget. I think the fact that this department is one of the departments that has shown an increase in the funding to the department, that sends a very clear signal that it is a priority.

 

            It's important to talk a little bit about our commitment during the campaign, our mandate, as I have read it here into the record, and also what we have done since we formed government. There had not been a review of public education in the province for at least 25 years. Far enough back that nobody could really remember. In order to meet the commitment and follow our mandate, we needed to hear from Nova Scotians their thoughts and their opinions about our public school system. We recognized that there were people who thought we were doing good things; there were people who had ideas of how we could make things better. We were hearing those sort of randomly, you know, in the grocery store you would hear it, you would meet a teacher, you would meet a parent and they would share their concerns or they would share their accolades for what we were doing. We needed something concrete that would drive education in our public system for the next, we set five years.

 

            In order to hear in a structured way what Nova Scotians wanted to tell us, in a structured yet a non-threatening way, we put together a minister's panel and you will recall Myra Freeman chaired that panel and she had five members from all across the province who worked with her on that panel. Their task was to create an opportunity for Nova Scotians to tell us what they wanted us to hear. We looked at what had happened in other provinces when similar reviews had been initiated and we learned from those other provinces but one of the things that we asked ourselves was, we're hearing this ad hoc, informally, but how many responses do we think we will get, how many Nova Scotians really care enough to let their voices be heard.

 

            We went to a review that had been held in British Columbia not too many years ago and they had about 5,000 responses so we thought well gee wouldn't it be great if we could get 5,000 in Nova Scotia recognizing that we're pretty small compared to British Columbia, but it was a target for us to look at. Everybody was speculating, nobody knew but we thought let's look at the 5,000 so we set about with the panel to look at how we can  provide opportunities for all Nova Scotians to feel that they have had an opportunity to have their say.

 

            We could have gone out to do public consultations and had town hall meetings and done those kinds of things but we recognize that first of all not everyone is comfortable standing up in a large crowd to share their concerns. We also recognized that whenever you have a public forum you have two or three people who perhaps dominate and it is only those voices that you hear and the other 200 are there, take their ideas and their thoughts and go home. So we ruled that out very quickly.

 

            The other thing we recognized is that some people want to express their thoughts and their opinions but they want to remain anonymous so we had to consider that factor. We know the modern use of technology is something that many, many Nova Scotians would want to take advantage of so we had to make sure that was included but we also recognized that not everybody does have access to that so out of all of this we tried to put together a format that would give every Nova Scotian an opportunity regardless of where they lived, their age, their background, whatever.

 

            We used a variety of ways for people to share their ideas and some of it was through technology, some of it was through email, some of it through written letters, some of it through a big thick submission, but we felt that we were giving everybody the opportunity and that was absolutely critical because at the end of the day you don't want someone to say well I had an idea but I had no way to get my message to you. So we were very careful to make sure that we provided those opportunities.

 

            Nova Scotians that we were appealing to, actually all Nova Scotians, we're going to be sending their thoughts and ideas to the panel and the panel was, as I said, made up of people who represented various geographic areas of the province. We chose intentionally to not have teachers, active teachers, on that panel because there was a belief that that may been seen to be self-serving to have a teacher there assessing what comes in from Nova Scotians.

 

            We looked at the importance of the business in the community and we had one of the members in the panel who had a good solid business background but who also had demonstrated a commitment to education in their own community being a member of the school advisory council long after their children were gone out of the school.

 

            We wanted to make sure that we had somebody who had an education background but was not an active teacher and because a lot of the focus, we believed, was going to be on curriculum we had a retired teacher who had been a curriculum leader when they were working in the school.

 

            We had a parent, and it was absolutely critical that we hear not only her voice but that she was able to read what Nova Scotians were sending in and see it through that lens of a parent. We had someone from the post-secondary institutions who again, we recognize that our mandate is to make sure that when students leave our public school, if they choose to go to post-secondary that we can be comfortable that what post-secondary institutions are looking for in those young people is something that we have prepared them for. So we had a member of the post-secondary institutions there. We had a fairly recent graduate of our public school system who had gone on to his own post-secondary and into employment and very successful in that field of employment that he had chosen.

 

            That was the composition of the minister's panel. We began seeking input. We recognized that we could not have a panel that would be hard for them to manage the work that we were giving them and once you get a panel that is too large, it sometimes makes it difficult and not easy for them to manage the work that we had asked them to do. But we recognized that we needed other voices to be heard and another screen to put things through so we set up another layer, if you want to call it, which was an advisory panel. We were able there to capture some of our partners whether it was through Nova Scotia Teachers Union, all of the unions that have employees in our schools, we looked at the African Nova Scotia community, we looked at the Mi'kmaq community, we looked at the Acadian community, we looked at providing another lens, so of speak, which would capture the perhaps the special needs or the special concerns of other communities.

 

            The opportunity for Nova Scotians to respond was structured and laid out to Nova Scotians. Then we began to watch for the responses and as I said, there were a variety of opportunities. I chose to stay arm's length from the process. The panel knew clearly what their mandate was, I had confidence in them but I did go back frequently to ask the question how many people we had heard from so far. With delight, they told me well, you know, we're over 5,000. We knew then that the opportunities that we had created were what Nova Scotians wanted and they were taking advantage of that. I went back a little while later and I said where are we now? We were over 10,000 and at that point I stopped asking because I knew that we were going to have a broad range of input which would drive our action plan for the next five years. In total, it was over 19,000 respondents in some form, whether it was, as I said, through survey, online survey, or email, written submission, letters, phone calls, whatever.

 

            It's interesting, we were able to track where those responses were coming from. Not necessarily who they were from, if it was an email, we don't know their email address, if it was online, we didn't track who they were but we tracked what categories they would be in and it was interesting because if we were looking for a broad range we didn't want it to be all dominated by one particular group of people. I will say this, we also wanted to make sure that students had an opportunity so we took advantage of the opportunity to go out into some of our schools and to engage them so some of the members of the panel went out and did that. Not only did I want to stay at arm's length but I wanted to make sure that who were responding were responding to the panel, not to somebody from the department, not to a staffer, not to the minister, but somebody on the panel.

 

            When we went out into our schools the students that were engaged there, the panel tell me, were absolutely proud and excited to have been asked. We're very honest with their thoughts and comments, and in fact, we had over 5,000 students who participated and gave us their thoughts and their opinions. It's absolutely critical that we did that because these are the kids, these are the voices of the people who are directly impacted by what we're doing in our public schools. Their voice was absolutely critical.

 

            We had over 6,000 parents, and again these may not be the 6,000 parents of the 3,000 students that we had come into us, but they were parents' voices and I have to tell you because some of them did self-identify, some of them were grandparents, some of them were talking about their experience as a child then as a parent and then as a grandparent so they had a broad range of experiences to speak from.

 

            The other really important thing is that we had over 3,000 teachers and I think it's important to acknowledge that it is the teachers who will deliver and who are delivering the program in the public schools. They have opinions and we need to hear them, they have ideas and we need to respect them. I was very encouraged by over 3,000 teachers taking the time. I have to tell you, some of the things they told us it was brave of them to say it because it was a criticism of some of the things that were happening. But we needed to hear that, it wasn't all complimentary.

 

            I think when you go out and ask for people's opinion, you darn well better be ready to hear the answer. If you don't like it, that doesn't mean you don't act on it. So often people ask a question they don't want to hear the answer to and so nothing changes. You may as well forget the whole process if you don't respect and respond to comments whether they are positive or negative. So over 3,000 teachers took advantage of that opportunity.

 

            After the time frame for response was received, we looked at the analysis and the panel, I can't tell you the thousands of hours that the panel put in because they read every submission, every one of them read every submission. Some of those submissions were 20 pages long. We got 19,000 responses and people talk about what this cost. You could never pay for the time that the panel put into going through the responses and the commitment they made and they were serious about that, they took their task very seriously. They spent thousands of hours going through and then meeting to talk about what they had read and how they could put it in a category and what it might look like. They weren't shy about saying whether it was a negative comment or a positive, our task at the department was to take a negative comment and research it to see if it was an opinion of one person or if it was something out there that we needed to know about. I do want to commend the panel for their diligence and their time to do that.

 

            I also want to, I have it here if I could, I'd like to let you know who the people were that were on the list, I'm assuming it's in this document, if you can give me a minute, those people on the advisory committee. We'll get it for you and I can read it at another time. Guess what? I have it. I knew I had it. I think it's important to see the broad range of groups, not necessarily individuals but groups, that took advantage of the opportunity and reported through, sometimes as I say, a document that was 20 pages long. I think it gives you an idea of how broad range and wide-sweeping this was.

 

The Healthy Eating Alliance, the Atlantic Publishers Marketing Association, Autism Nova Scotia, the Black Educators Association, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the Cape Breton Down Syndrome Society, the Cape Breton Partnership, the Centre for Entrepreneurship Education and Development, the Community Sector Council of Nova Scotia, Confederacy of Mainland Mi'Kmaq, Corporate Research Associates, Council of Regional Librarians, Council on Mi'Kmaq Education, Creative Nova Scotia Leadership Council, Dartmouth Learning Network, Department of Health and Wellness, Disabled Persons Commission, Doctors Nova Scotia, Ecology Action Centre, Finance and Treasury Board, Frontier College, Halifax Chamber of Commerce, Interuniversity Committee for Teacher Education, Kids Code, Maritime Heart Centre, Nourish Nova Scotia, Nova Scotia Persons with Disabilities, Nova Scotia Securities Commission, Nova Scotia Teachers Union, Nova Scotia Youth Civic Literacy Report, Nova Scotia School Counsellors Association, Nova Scotia Government and General Employees Union, Nova Scotia School Boards Association, Office and Planning Priorities within the department, Progress Centre for Early Intervention, Society for Social, Cultural, Recreational Inclusion, Special Education Programs and Services Committees, SpellRead, Faculty of St. Francis Xavier University, and the Wentworth School Sustainability Association.

 

            That to me is a very broad range of people who are absolutely interested in public school and public education and they wanted their voices to be heard because they want to make a difference. When you look at that, I think it tells you that that part of the process was very rewarding. After the panel had taken all of the responses and put them into various categories, they presented that to me. That presentation was made at the end of October 2014, and I made a commitment that we would take their report, the panel's report which had incorporated all the input that they had received and that we would have an action plan to present to Nova Scotians in January. 

 

Some of my staff cringed a little bit at that because Christmas and all that stuff was in the midst of that. However, they persevered and they responded. I do want to congratulate the staff at the department whose work began once that panel's report was received. I want to make that clear because I said earlier we wanted, both myself as the minister and the staff at the department, to be hands off during the survey and the collection of the information but once that came in then their work began.

 

            We began that, as I said, I received that at the end of October, their work began the next day and were able to come up with this document, which I'm sure all of you have read. It is exactly what we believe, based on what we heard, needs to happen in our public schools over the next five years. It is certainly a document that, as I said, will guide and direct, but it's based on - not my opinion about what we need or not staff's opinion about what we need, but what Nova Scotians have said we need to do. When you can build your plan based on that solid evidence, then you know that you're responding to a real true need that's out there.

 

            The action plan, as we've said, has over 100 actions in it. People have said it's pretty aggressive and I couldn't agree more. It is very aggressive. We don't have time to wait because we have kids in our schools who absolutely need supports that they have not been getting. No one with good conscience could go to sleep at night if they knew that. So we don't have a choice. We have to be aggressive and this plan is aggressive.

 

            When we looked at where we go with these actions - and as I said, that was certainly done by the department and I was part of the decisions that were made that you see in that report. One lens that I viewed everything through was - is this in the best interest of kids. I've used that lens all through my teaching career and I've used it ever since I've gotten into politics, whether it's as minister or critic because I want to sleep at night too, and I want to make sure that if I can make a difference in the lives of all of the kids - but in some cases, some have particular challenges, then we have to make sure that that's the lens that we used.

 

            When we announced the action plan, I spoke about that lens. I also spoke about one page that's in the report, which shows that we have some limitations with how far we can go with a few of the actions. I wanted to identify that because we did that after we identified the 100-plus actions. I asked the question of the committee in my department that was working on this - is there any reason why we can't implement these actions? I mean, we put it through the lens of, is this in the best interest of kids? Everybody agreed it was so where do we start and are there any limitations? Are there any reasons why we can't act on these? Because we needed to know that up front.

 

            One of the limitations that we have and that was identified was the Nova Scotia Teachers Union. I don't say that in a negative way. I say that because when you're looking at how you can improve the learning environment for a student, you are also improving the teaching environment for the teacher. Together, that's got to be a recipe for success. However, there are things that we are limited in because of the collective agreement.

 

            I wanted to identify those because, for example, if someone says - and this has been out in the media, we've heard a lot about it - we have to change where, how and when we do professional development. We can't change that as a Department of Education and Early Childhood Development unless we have either co-operation or through negotiations with the Nova Scotia Teachers Union. So I did not want somebody who had expressed a concern - one of these 19,000, or 3,000 of the 19,000 to come back and say, why didn't you change the professional development days? I want people to know that when we put it through that first lens we believed it would be good for kids if we could change it. When we looked at what the limitations are we quickly identified the collective agreement as a limitation.

 

            There are eight of those actions which we - and I have shared this with the Teachers Union, I'm not talking about anything behind their back, they're well aware of them, and I am hopeful that we will have co-operation because as I said to the president of the Teachers Union and I've said it publicly, and I've said it here, if it's a better learning environment for the student it's got to be a better teaching environment for the teacher and the Teachers Union advocates for teachers, I advocate for kids, and we've had that conversation and I respect their position, I believe they respect mine.

 

The actions that you may not see any action on until we get the co-operation or negotiation are these: changes to the school year including the scheduling of teacher professional development, and I think there was something in the media, maybe a CTV or Chronicle Herald poll that was done and it kind of swirled around the storm days and snow days and school cancelled and whatnot but in the collective agreement there are certain days set aside for professional development and they have to come out of the 195 days that we teach.

 

In order to remove those from the 195 days because people say well let the teachers do a week in summer or let them do whatever, it's not that easy because it is embedded in the collective agreement. Therefore I can't say we're going to take the professional development days that have been agreed upon in the collective agreement and take them outside of the 195, I can't do that but I want people to know that it would be to the students' advantage if we could.

 

The allocation of professional development funding - and again I don't want to get into the detail of this but there is a fund that supports professional development for teachers and there is a committee that looks at allocating that funding and it includes both members from the department and from the Nova Scotia Teachers Union.

 

Improved program delivery in Nova Scotia virtual schools to provide students with more flexible options, and there are terms within the collective agreement which say how many teachers you have to have if you're going to deliver something through the virtual high schools, so there are limitations there.

 

Removing of principals and school board administrators from the Nova Scotia Teachers Union. It became obvious in the responses that we were getting through the panel that there was the potential for conflict when you had a principal who is supervising a teacher in the same union as the teacher they're supervising and if there happens to be a grievance it's the same union that would be, should be, representing both the teacher and the principal. There are not many places where management is still in the union so that came out loud and clear in what we were hearing from Nova Scotians who don't necessarily know what's in the collective agreement but they can't understand how such a strange arrangement could exist and the conflict, and we heard, I will say, from principals who said that was a conflict and from teachers who said it was a conflict. We have a former administrator here in the room who may have experienced, or may understand that it's a challenge if there is a grievance from one or the other.

 

Another one was create a robust system for teacher performance management. Again, the responsibility for teacher supervision and evaluation rests with the principal but there are terms within the collective agreement that identify some of the parameters.

 

            Creation of new requirements for teacher certification - and you'll know that teacher certification is obviously something that is on the minds of a lot of Nova Scotians. We want to make sure that the teacher certification that rests with the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development is geared towards something that is in the best interest of kids and is the professional development, it is the teacher certification directly related to the task the teacher has to deliver programs to that student.

 

            Linking teacher assignments directly to credentials and experience - some people call that seniority. There are terms within the collective agreement, provincially and locally, because boards have local agreements and then there's the provincial collective agreement. But we want to make sure that the right person is in the right job based on their credentials - not necessarily based on seniority. We talk about getting our young teachers engaged and providing opportunities for them to be employed and to grow, and we need to make sure that we have opportunities for that to happen.

 

            The last one is strengthening the process for addressing poor teacher performance - as a teacher you don't like to hear that people think there are teachers out there who are not performing well, but there are and people told us that, and they want us to change it. Again, we need the co-operation and/or the negotiation with the Teachers Union to be able to do that.

 

            Those are some of the actions - would we like to implement them all right away? Absolutely. We will work with the Teachers Union, I believe they want to come to the table, I believe they want to work with us, and I believe they recognize that it was their own membership who gave us some of those comments. I think that's a positive way to begin.

 

            When we took all of the actions that we believed would improve the opportunities for students we kind of divided them up into what we call "pillars" because they kind of postured themselves nicely into four different pillars or categories - we called them pillars, but whatever you want to call them. They do reflect, as I said, what Nova Scotians told us they wanted to hear.

 

Those four pillars were structure, and the structure was not just the structure of school boards but it did include the structure of school boards; it included the structure within senior management at the school board, the school board are your elected members, the management within the school board are your teachers, in whatever position they're in. It was both. There were concerns about both - there were concerns about the elected board and there were concerns about the management team at the board.

 

            The next pillar, it's probably the biggest focus, is curriculum. One of the things that Nova Scotians were saying - parents, students, and teachers - was there are too many outcomes in this curriculum for me to be able to cover them all in a semester or, if it's Primary to Grade 9, in a full year. I can't get them all done. Teachers were anxious and frustrated because they want to do a good job, but they believe they had an impossible task to adequately cover all of those outcomes. So those and other concerns fell into curriculum.

 

            Also in curriculum were things that we need to add to the curriculum - not only call out some of the outcomes that may not be as important as others. You like to think they're all important, but you have to set some priorities when you only have a limited amount of time for the teacher to teach. Adding things to the curriculum which will allow students to be better prepared when they leave, and that includes innovation, technology, and those kinds of items.

 

            Learning environment was another pillar and, again, that speaks to what I've been saying about both teachers and students. Code of conduct was loud and clear from many of the respondents that students need to understand what is acceptable behaviour and they need to understand the consequences if their behaviour is not acceptable. Parents need to know that because it's the parents who have a better ability to influence how their kids behave in school, in the shopping mall, at church, wherever.

 

            The thing that comes out in all of that is - we can say what it is we believe is acceptable behaviour, we can talk about consequences, but we also have to make sure that the teacher feels supported when they put that into effect, and the principal needs to feel supported if it translates into a suspension where they go before a committee of the elected school board. We were hearing that there were concerns with all of that. So there is not an easy solution there, but I think if you first of all establish what it is you expect and you make it very clear.

 

            We will be putting out a new code of conduct. Currently there is a provincial code of conduct, then each board establishes their code of conduct, then each school establishes their code of conduct. So if you want to create mass confusion, you've just done it. So what we've said is there will be one code of conduct and it will apply to every student in this province regardless of where they are. We're not looking at punitive kinds of conditions in the code, but I can tell you - if a student is smoking pot in a Yarmouth high school and another student in Sydney is doing the same thing, you can't be looking at a school code of conduct in Yarmouth and then what does the Tri-County School Board say and then what does somebody else say? Same violation, same behaviour; that's not acceptable, same consequence.

 

            So we're hoping that we can try to improve student conduct in schools because I go back to - and it falls under learning environment - if the teacher's time is spent dealing with inappropriate behaviour, it's taking away from her time to teach and it's taking away time for the students to learn, and we want to maximize on both of those.

 

            The last pillar in this is quality teaching and leadership. Again, we heard from some people who felt that some of the teachers in our system were not perhaps the best teachers that they could be. I believe that teachers want to be the best they can be, and we have to create an environment where they can be the best they can be. So we need to look at what standard we expect of teachers. Teachers will help determine what that standard is and, again, if you're teaching in Yarmouth and you're teaching in Sydney, you should be striving towards the same standard of teaching. So that is the fourth pillar.

 

            So we put the action plan out; we identified that we would begin this. There would be some things in place for September 2015, we recognize that it's a five-year plan and we also recognize that it can't be done overnight.

 

            When we're talking about learning environment we also had some comments about inclusion and the model of inclusion that we are currently using. Again, it may not be a problem with the model that we're using, but it may be a problem with the interpretation and implementation of the model that we are using.

 

            The model of inclusion that we have says that all students deserve an opportunity to be included in the school environment and we put lots of supports and resources in to make sure that that can happen, but never once did it say that inclusion meant 100 per cent of the students 100 per cent of the time. That would be our goal, that's exactly what we would be striving for, but I think that we all understand the realities, the challenges that some students bring to our schools today are huge and the resources to support those students are critical.

 

            What we need to do is look at how we can best accommodate those students in an inclusive model in our schools, but in an environment where they can learn to the best of their ability - and that may not be in a class of 25 students with one teacher, it may be in a small group for a small period of time where there is more one on one. But those are based on individual student needs, the decision about how that program is delivered to those students is, and we have put it in here, in consultation with the parent. They have to be a part of the programing for their children.

 

             I also want to say inclusion should not always mean students with special needs. We have some gifted kids in our schools and when you go to something like Brilliant Labs or you go to the Royal Robots presentation you recognize that we have some very, very bright, gifted kids. We need to make sure that there is programming and supports so those kids can thrive and learn and move forward. So inclusion is both ends of the spectrum.

 

            When we set about, as I said, to start looking at how we can change the way we deliver, what we deliver, and how we deliver, we recognized that the best people to help us make those changes would be teachers and so we've begun to bring teachers in to work with staff at the department on some of the curriculum changes that we're looking at, on the code of conduct, on homework, on some of those areas that Nova Scotians said we should focus on.

 

            I'm very encouraged by the response from the teachers who came in. They feel valued, they recognize that someone appreciates what they have to offer, and they will see their fingerprints on a lot of the changes, and if you want to build a sense of ownership there is not any other way any better than that, I don't believe. So the process will continue and we will be pulling different teachers at different times for different committees to help us make the changes that are necessary.

 

            We have said that some of these will be in place in September, we are committed to that, but at the back at the document you will see the time frame for some of those and they go right up to 2019-20.

 

            I'm just going to make one more comment and then I'll respond to some of your questions but I think it's important to recognize that we, as the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, can't do all of this alone and we do recognize the important role that some other departments, whether it's Justice or Community Services or Health and Wellness, have to play in some of the actions that we want to implement.

 

We'll use mental health clinicians as an example. We recognize that mental health clinicians are health care providers, they are not teachers, but we, out of the department are prepared and have provided funding to the Department of Health and Wellness to hire mental health clinicians. They will be working the schools, but they are not teachers. I think it's important to acknowledge that co-operation and that sharing of responsibility. The other partners we need and value are - I guess there are five main partners but it would be a Nova Scotia School Boards Association, the Nova Scotia Teachers Union, Parents for French, Home and School Associations, and the school advisory councils. Those partners are people we need to rely on because, together, we have a huge task and we have a huge responsibility and no one can do it alone. Thank you.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Madam Minister. We will begin the questioning with the Progressive Conservative caucus and Mr. Dunn. I would just like to remind those members in committee that if they can wait until I recognize them before proceeding with their questioning, just again to keep things simple and for the purpose of Hansard. I know the informality begs to have a bit of a conversation going back and forth but if you could just wait to be recognized, I would appreciate that.

 

Mr. Dunn, we'll start questioning with you and I ask that you introduce yourself and continue.

 

            HON. PAT DUNN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. My name is Pat Dunn. I'm the member for Pictou Centre and the PC Education Critic.

 

I want to welcome the minister here for our starting guest and of course Dianna and Sandra and the rest of the staff and my colleagues around the table and, of course, staff who are in the back of the room there and the wonderful work that they do, especially during this particular time. I also want to thank you for your presentation there, your opening comments and so on. As you were talking I was wondering, I was trying to remember if I gave you a list of questions I had because you were answering quite a few of them.

 

            However, in just a few a comments before I start asking a few questions - I certainly was very pleased as a former educator, administrator, that there was a minister's panel on education. It was certainly long overdue. In fact, I can remember when I was in that particular role wishing that something like this would happen in the province, where we could make some changes and move forward to improve the system, because a lot of things that are mentioned in the minister's report that was revealed last Fall certainly hit home, many of them. Again, in January when the action plan was released, the timeline was 2015 to 2020 with a lot of initiatives and approximately 100 actions, like you mentioned.

 

Certainly to me when I first looked at it I said, wow, this is aggressive. I knew it had to be aggressive and there is a tremendous amount of work to do. There is one question I wanted to ask, the very first question, and you gave a very good answer to but I'll ask it anyway. Again, you mentioned with the sense of ownership, and if there's one thing I heard from talking to a lot of teachers, a lot of administrators, people connected in the school system for many years, and you've heard the very same thing in your various capacities, it is: will they give us a chance to be part of the solution? Will we be given a chance to help create or implement many of the initiatives that are coming down from the top? They still have that feeling, many of them, that here we go again, another school year starting September 2015-16, I have so much to do now that I can't complete it and look what the principal of the school is bringing towards me.

 

            You did give a pretty good answer to it, but I'll let you elaborate on that, and again it's the fact that they really want to be part of the solution and they really want to be involved.

 

            MS. CASEY: I do want to repeat a few of the things I've said about that because it is absolutely critical, and when I announced the action plan I made a comment then and I will repeat it - the success of the implementation of the action plan will depend on the co-operation of the teachers in the classroom.

 

            Without their understanding, support, and co-operation, it's only a document. I recognize that; I've been in the classroom and I know. I've been a principal and I know. I don't want teachers to say that about this action plan. I want them to say, well a teacher from my staff was invited into the department to help to work on the curriculum and we know that things that were of concern to us are reflected here in the changes.

 

            One of the things that's important is not only to bring the teachers in and get their expertise in making the recommended changes, but to engage superintendents and senior staff and program directors and so on at the school level before we get to implementation. Again, teachers may be keen to do it, but if they don't have the support from their principal or their superintendent, for whatever reason, then they have that bit of a battle and a struggle.

 

            We are making sure that once we have something that's in a draft form that we do engage people at the board level. It's not something that anyone can do alone and that's why everyone needs to be involved in that. But it is our goal to make sure that when we hit the go button everybody who is going to be involved in the implementation has participated in or has been made aware of, and supports and is ready to go. You can't start down the road if you have two flat tires, and I don't want this vehicle to start down the road without all of those tires fully inflated and ready to go.

 

            You would know from your experience as an administrator, and I know mine as well, that sometimes people get too far removed from the classroom. Teachers are the ones who make things happen, but it's sure great to have the support of your principal and your superintendent when you're trying to implement that. It's our goal to keep everybody in the loop to make sure they're either part of developing, or aware of, the changes and if they have a concern, I don't want to hear it the middle of September. I want them to let us know before we start the implementation - have you considered, what about this, and maybe there are some things we need to change. We don't have all the answers, but we have the responsibility to get them.

 

            So, we will give people the opportunity but, as I said, the success of the implementation will rest in the classroom with the teachers; they're the ones who will make it work.

 

            MR. DUNN: Thank you for that answer. I know you know it's critical, it's important also, and it's something that I'm looking forward to - that input from the people who are in the front lines. I'm very pleased with the number of respondents - you mentioned there are approximately 19,000. I know I encouraged every person I ran into - if you have concerns, here's your opportunity to express your concerns about the education system regardless of what their role in society was and what their occupation was. I think the only person I didn't talk to was my pet dog, Charlie - and I was even going to talk to him.

 

            Anyway, I was very pleased to see the great number of expressions and opinions that were passed in, and also realizing the difficult decisions once that was in, the difficult decisions - where do you start? What are your priorities going to be? What will we start with, in 2015 - the time line to 2020 - with all the initiatives and the time line for each one and so on?

 

            Something that you mentioned in your opening comments, and maybe I'll fire it into question, and it's dealing with professional development. As time goes on, I may refer back to a topic more than once - and it's not from early stage Alzheimer's but it's just that I want to go back to it again. The question is dealing with funding for professional development - will that funding for professional development increase for this coming school year, 2015-16?

 

            MS. CASEY: Before I respond to that, could I just go back to your comment about where you start, because that's exactly what we had to look at. This document is - when you're looking at public schools, Primary to Grade 12 - we have some statistics on math and literacy assessments of our students that are very discouraging.

 

            Not only do we have statistics that are discouraging, we have a trend that we absolutely don't like, and that trend is that those scores are going down instead of up. So we need to try to stop that trend and turn it around.

 

            One of the things that we decided we had to do - and we say, and I'm sure there is a body of research to support it, if students can't read by the time they leave Grade 3, then they will struggle, and you would have seen them, through the rest of their schooling. And how fair is it to ask a student who can't read to do a book report in Grade 6 or to read a   math question and understand how to solve it.

 

            So we put kids at a distinct disadvantage if we don't give them the skills that they need. So that lead us to setting a priority for where we start, and that would be Primary, Grades 1, 2 and 3. We can't bite off more than we can handle, but we recognize that if we can catch those kids before they leave Grade 3, the chances of them having success are greater, and that all leads to student success and engagement and feeling good about themselves and all those kinds of positive things. So our focus is on Primary to Grade 3, and our focus is on literacy and math.

 

            Right now, when you look at the curriculum for our elementary grades, you will see recommended times - a recommended time for language arts, a recommended time for math, a recommended time for science, a recommended time for social studies, phys. ed., music, and art. So when we're looking at that, I'm thinking - if we want to have math and literacy as a priority, then we need to have students engaged in math and literacy activities for a longer period of time in those early years.

 

            Part of this change which will come about in September is that the science and social studies time allocation will be incorporated into math and literacy. For example, if you're teaching a concept in social studies you can do it as part of your language arts lesson; if you're doing something in science that is measuring you can incorporate that into your math.

 

            So the new time allocations will be greater for math and literacy; they will include social studies and science in that block of time. We've said that we will protect music and phys. ed. times; in fact, we're talking about daily physical activity, we recognize the importance of both music and physical activity. But we believe and our consultants at the department and our teachers believe that we can incorporate the science and social studies into math and literacy.

 

            So going back to your first question, to say where do we start, and so that's why we believe we have to start there and that's how we're starting there.

 

            The second question that you had was about professional development, and oftentimes in the past teachers have been asked to implement something without any professional development - and if you ever wanted teachers to be aggravated and annoyed with the Department of Education and Childhood Development, what better way to do it. So their professional development, in those situations they get it the best way they can and that leads to inconsistencies in the delivery. So any action that we have in this plan that results in a change in what is delivered or how it's delivered will be accompanied by professional development that will be driven by the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.

 

            When we're asking teachers to add something new to their curriculum, we will be responsible and committed to doing the professional development with them before that happens. Even something like changes in the code of conduct, we want to make sure that teachers who are having to implement that understand it before they have to implement it, so there will be some "train the trainer" kinds of professional development where, maybe, one teacher in the school gets the training and then they train others in the school.

 

            So that's the professional development that supports actions in the action plan, but there is a professional development fund that I spoke of earlier when I was talking about the co-operation with the Teachers Union, and we are not changing how much money we put into that fund, but we do want to work with the Teachers Union on how that professional development supports the curriculum that teachers are teaching.

 

            We're not going to reduce the amount in the pot, but we do want to ensure that the money that's there is used to support teachers in their own professional development so they can better deliver the actions and the curriculum that we're asking them to deliver.

 

            MR. DUNN: A little later on with some questions I want to get into the structure of the day, more or less as a conversation as opposed to firing questions out and so on.

 

            Again, when I look at these initiatives, I like the initiatives. It's really a monumental task to bring all the pieces together, and I know I don't have to tell you that because you know monumental task in having all the parts to come together with teachers buying into and being part of it, teachers working across the curriculum. I hope to be able to see them reap the benefit of this particular action plan.

 

            I'm going to switch here for a few seconds and I'm going to go into a couple of questions dealing with staffing levels and teachers' pensions, just to give a little heads up. Just with staffing levels, and I believe I'm correct in saying this, the departmental estimate for this year shows a decrease of 17 funded positions compared to last year's estimate, so a decrease of 17.

 

            I guess one of my questions is, how many of these positons were unfilled positions as opposed to actual staff being cut?

 

            MS. CASEY: If I could, within the department we've done a couple of things that have affected the number of staff that we have there, and they've been some in and some out and I'll just share with you what those were. As you know the division of Early Childhood came over from Community Services to the department and that began in 2013. It was pretty well completed in 2014, but all staff did not come over at one time. For example, I think we've just had seven inspectors for the licensing division within Early Childhood that stayed with Community Services until just recently, and so now they've come over and that makes an increase in our numbers.

 

            On the other hand we've had Shared Services which, as you know, we're just having people as of April 1^st move to other departments. So some of the folks in our facilities planning division have moved out of the department and gone to Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal. Those kinds of ins and outs have happened, and I just wanted to share that with you.

 

            The other thing that we've done within the department is when the action plan was introduced we recognized that it was a change in focus at the department and so we wanted to establish a centre of excellence, a division within the department that was what we called the centre of excellence. That meant moving some people around within the department to have them in a better positon to lead the action plan implementation, but at the end of the day there are two fewer positions at the department and no additional money into staffing at the department.

 

            MR. DUNN: Just one follow-up question to that. Just two fewer positions then, with two fewer positions there's probably - my next question was going to be: What areas of the department were affected by this, if any?

 

            MS. CASEY: There were 17 positions - is that we're talking about, 17 positions?

 

            MR. DUNN: Yes.

 

            MS. CASEY: We lost IT positions - I shouldn't say we lost them, the IT financial services and the facilities planning moved. So those were gone. We inherited seven of the early years licensing positions and that, I believe, accounts for the difference that you're looking at.

 

MR. DUNN: Just leaving that and going to a further question - this year I have noticed a 12 per cent increase in spending in strategic policy and research, where I think it increased by maybe approximately $7.5 million. The previous year, from estimate to estimate, this only increased by around $3.7 million. So the question I have is, does this substantial increase indicate an increase in the number of teachers retiring?

 

MS. CASEY: Are you talking about teacher pension?

 

MR. DUNN: Yes. Teacher pension, like matching contribution, and my understanding was there was a 12 per cent increase in spending.

 

MS. CASEY: I'm being told that the 12 per cent is an increase in premiums and, as you know, when teachers' salaries and wages are increased then the premiums that are paid have a corresponding increase, so that's where that 12 per cent would come from.

 

MR. DUNN: Again, moving on to another question, and this question is dealing with the approximate cost of licence upgrades and salary increases. Licence upgrades and salary increases from the Drake University courses - I know how we both feel about the Drake University courses and so on, I would agree with your previous comments about that. Do you have any idea, in total, how many teachers are taking these courses?

 

MS. CASEY: I do have an idea; in fact I probably have the exact number. We know that there were a number of teachers who had looked at putting together an integrated program, a 30 credit hours, which would be used towards a teacher upgrade, a teacher certification upgrade. Some of those intergraded programs included courses, as we know, from Drake University, the video courses that were offered through Drake University, not by Drake University, but through Drake University.

 

There were over 400 that had been preapproved to take an integrated program. As of March 2015, there were 84 of that 400 plus, I think it was closer to 500 teachers that had received a teacher certification upgrade as a result of being given credit for the Drake University courses, which they would have included in their integrated program, their 30 credit hours. That was as of March 2015 and I would - just a moment, and I can check this, but I believe that would be from over the last, probably, six or seven years, from 2008 - probably nine years, the total would have been 84.

 

MR. DUNN: I think I'll just follow that with one more answer just too perhaps get an opinion from you. Again, the question would be: What steps are being taken now to improve the courses that teachers are taking so they're meeting the needs of kids and improving the curriculum in our schools?

 

            MS. CASEY: It was, again, clear when we looked at the responses to the minister's panel that the disconnect was obvious sometimes between what teachers were taking as professional development and what their teaching assignment was, and it was not well received by many of the respondents. As educators, we recognize that your professional development certainly enhances your background and strengthens your ability as a teacher to be more effective. I think that's understood.

 

What we wanted to do, recognizing that there were some courses that perhaps teachers were participating in courses that were not directly related to their teaching assignment - no one has said that you can't take whatever professional development course you want, but we do have to look at whether we recognize those courses for teacher certification. And I want to make that clear - there are teachers that take professional courses all the time because they believe it will make them a better teacher, but they don't do it because they want to get a raise in licence. They do it because they believe it will strengthen their professional ability and their professional background.

 

            So there are two issues. One, teachers take professional development all the time and never ask to use it for teacher certification. Where we have a responsibility at the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development is to ensure that what teachers are getting credit for towards a teacher increase in licence is directly related to the teaching assignment that they have, and if there is something in their history of qualifications that they need to strengthen, that's what we would encourage them to take their professional development. We have put that in the action plan.

 

We believe that if we're talking about quality teaching and the learning environment, they are both directly related to how effective the teacher is, how knowledgeable the teacher is in the course that they have been asked to teach, and having a direct correlation between the professional development and the teaching assignment is absolutely important and critical.

 

            MR. DUNN: Yes, that correlation again, and a little later on I will be going back to that with regard to that correlation which, again, I agree with you, it is so very important.

 

I'm going to jump over to another question now dealing with the Auditor General and the school boards. The department has indicated that the Auditor General will be asked to examine the governance model of the province's eight school boards - looking at the committee structure, how effective the senior staff is, and the efficiency of services. Beyond the report on the Tri-County board, has the Auditor General started any other audits yet or will he and, if he's going to, when that will be and any idea how long it may take?

 

            MS. CASEY: Again, when I was giving some of my preliminary comments, I talked about concerns that were raised regarding structure and that being structure of both the elected boards and board committees and senior staff and senior management. Some of the comments were directly related to elected school boards and we knew that the Auditor General had done an audit in Tri-County and some of the findings of that audit, which have been made public and the board is working to address them, spoke to the importance of decisions that are made around the elected board table, in particular with regard to policy and programs to support students.

 

            The Auditor General felt that there was a disconnect there and so with the Tri-County board they put some recommendations in. The Tri-County board accepted those and have developed an action plan to work towards that, but as that was happening and other concerns were being raised, not specific to Tri-County, but to school boards in general, it appeared that there needed to be more information about what actually those concerns might be, what would have driven members in the communities to raise those as concerns.

 

            It appeared to me that the best office to do that independent audit would be the Office of the Auditor General. He recognized that was important and it was within his mandate to do that, and so made the commitment to conduct those audits. We included that in the action plan.

 

            Again, to go back to your comment about we can't do everything all at once, the Auditor General has indicated that he will focus on three boards initially, and I believe the initial contacts have been made with those boards now; that would be Chignecto-Central, Strait Regional and Halifax. He is currently on his path to auditing in those three boards and I can't give you a timeline for when he will have finished that, but he has indicated that he will focus on those three and then he will move on to Cape Breton Board.

 

            MR. DUNN: Thank you for that answer. In fact, you answered another three or four questions dealing with that, so it's a good job.

 

I'm going to move on to another question dealing with administrative costs. It's something that you've talked about a number of times - Early Years Program administration costs and the Centre for Learning Excellence.

 

            As we know, there is quite an increase, I believe maybe $700,000 in the Early Years Program administration costs. I think in the Centre for Learning Excellence there is a decrease. The decrease may be in the area of maybe $200,000 or around 40 per cent or whatever. These new programs - just a comment on the different scenarios with regard to administration costs for both of them.

 

            MS. CASEY: One of the initiatives that was started by the previous government and which we believe should be continued, and we are continuing, is the establishment of Early Years Centres. We have recognized that it's important that students get an opportunity to be in a better state of readiness when they come to public schools. So in 2014-15 there were four Early Years Centres that were established - one at Rockingstone Heights in Spryfield, Yarmouth Central in the Tri-County board, East Antigonish Education Centre in Monastery, and Jubilee Elementary in Sydney Mines.

 

            The importance of the Early Years Centres - number one, they operate year-round. It's a service and support for families. The Early Years Centres include a program for four year olds, and they include a regulated daycare and family support for those programs that are offered there. We have had great response from the parents whose children are taking advantage of the Early Years Centres, and that has told us that we have monitored it, we believe it's effective, and we believe we should expand. So the $700,000 you see there is for the establishment of four additional Early Years Centres.

 

            The locations for the four new ones, which have been announced - one in West Highlands in the new school in Amherst, École Beau-Port, New Germany, and Cornwallis Elementary. So that accounts for some of that increase you are talking about.

 

            The other is - I talked about the licensing division that came over from Community Services just recently, the last part of that whole transition. The $734,000 that's in the report is due to that transfer of the licensing division over to the department.

 

            MR. DUNN: The next question is going to be dealing with the weather impact on schools and the fact - you indicated earlier about the $15 million. Just prior to asking a couple of questions about that process, I'm going to just touch base with you to get a reply, dealing with the Shannon Park School that was purchased by the province. I understand that was for a considerable amount of money and if they have to renovate that, again another considerable amount of money. Again they threw around a figure of $1.3 million - it could be less, it could be more, whatever.

 

            The reason I'm asking is, I'm thinking if all the schools that need repairs - which I'm going to ask you two or three questions about - I'm surprised that they would have the need to purchase. Maybe there is a need, but I was just going to get a reply from you.

 

            MS. CASEY: I'm not sure how much members around the table know about Shannon Park, but Shannon Park is a school that was on the old military site in Dartmouth. It has about 570 students there, 90 per cent of the classes at Shannon Park are French immersion. It has been part of the school system within the Halifax board for a number of years. They have been leasing it from Canada Lands and Canada Lands now wants to sell the property - the property the school is on is one of the pieces of property that Canada Lands wanted to sell.

 

            So the Halifax board looked at that and determined that it was an important piece of their family of schools, so to speak, because it was really a French immersion, with the exception of the 10 per cent. Students from other communities in the area come to that school, so it is a little different than most community schools. Value in having all the French immersion classes together spins off not only for the students but also for the teachers who are working together across grades and planning and professional development and so on.

 

            The province cannot purchase the land from Canada Lands so we did not purchase it. The school board could purchase it so the chairman of the Halifax board wrote a letter asking if they could use some of what they call "accumulated surplus," which every board has some surplus, but they cannot use that without permission of the minister. They wanted to have permission to use $313,000 of that to purchase the lands and so that permission was granted.

 

            The business of renovation and what they may do with that, and that school is no different than any other school within the Halifax Regional School Board or any other board in that there's a process that boards can use for new schools, for additions and alterations, or for major renovations that are less than $1 million. The two are completely separate in that the approval that was given to the board was the approval for them to use surplus funds to purchase the school. There was nothing in that approval to approve any renovations or anything like that.

 

            What the school board can do though, if that is a priority for them, they have two ways to access money - they can put in a request for a renovation project or they can put in a request for some renovations less than $1 million out of the $15 million that we've put aside for maintenance capital. I think it's important that we make the distinction here and any request for anything from the board for Shannon Park will be something that the board decides if they decide that's a priority for them. I can't tell you where that would be on their needs and wants list but that would be a decision of the board.

 

            As to the $15 million, last year we increased that from about $9 million I think to $15 million, recognizing that many boards have many projects that aren't big enough to qualify for additions and alterations, but they are big enough that boards were finding it difficult to address them through their operations budget. We increased that to $15 million and boards then had an opportunity to submit to the department their priorities. We gave them an amount of money based on the enrolment, which was one of the things that we used to determine how much each board would be eligible to make application for and then they submitted those requests to the department.

 

            Between 50 and 60 individual schools did benefit from that fund. Some of the applications for repairs to a school might have been $200,000 or might have been $800,000, but they varied depending on what the need was but the boards submitted that to us based on their priorities.

 

            It's interesting, we didn't know it when we approved it, but we know now the importance of it. Many of those requests that came in last year were to address problems with a leaking roof. So I expect there will be more this year because we did put $15 million again into our capital budget for 2015-16 and we have asked boards to submit their priorities. I've not reviewed those yet, but I know that staff do have those and I expect there will be a lot that will be addressing a leaky roof.

 

            I think it's important to note that that initiative and that commitment was well received and you know you have a tough decision sometimes to make, but I can tell you it was not a tough decision for me to make. I could take $15 million and put it into one community and build one school, but it's hard to do that when you know you have between 50 and 60 schools that can benefit from a little bit of money to address a problem that, if it's not addressed, will continue to grow. And a little leak in a roof as we know if it's not addressed can translate to a bigger leak, to mould, to interior damage and the need for a more complete renovation is not far off if you don't address that. We believe it was preventative, we believe that it's been successful. We recognize that school boards liked it and that took some of the pressure off of their operating budget - and so we have made that commitment again.

 

            MR. DUNN: Again, that money is very valuable to the school boards and the individual schools because in my experience being in schools over the years, and since that talking to people in the maintenance departments of the various schools and so on, in at least a couple of boards the budgets were pretty stretched with regard to what they could actually do and they were perhaps maintaining the maintenance to a point where they were neglecting other things in the schools just because of the resources and because of the unavailability of money over the last four years or so.

 

You can see the difference in the schools, at least in some of them when you would walk in. I can remember talking to some of the maintenance guys I knew from my previous career and they were saying well, first of all we don't have the human resources and we don't have the money available to do what we want to do, and we're doing the best we can. I knew they were.

 

Staying with that $15 million, the funds are out there, the school boards have access to them and, as far as the timelines, will the school boards and schools have enough time, like say during the summer, to get a lot of these projects done, or most of them, before the children come back to school in the Fall?

 

            MS. CASEY: I think we saw in a school in your area an example of the work not getting completed last summer. I was in that school and recognized that time was running out. Our plan is to have started the process, fast track it as best we can, so that school boards do find out which projects are approved. I would want that to happen before the end of the month and then that means that they can put their tenders out, they can get their contractors in, and either be ready to work on weekends which they were doing over in your area when I was there, or at least be ready when students leave in June.

 

It is a short window if it's an outdoor project and weather sometimes is a deterrent there, but it is our goal to have boards made aware of how much money they have, which projects have been approved, and then it is important that they make haste and don't waste any time to get the tenders out, because I believe last year there may have been some tenders that were late getting called, contractors late getting the nod to go, and in some cases they ran out of time. It is our goal to do that, I'm saying the end of this month, I know that those submissions are in and boards know what money they have to work with, it's just which projects are approved.

 

            MR. DUNN: In following up that, you may not be able to answer this one, if you can't that's fine, we'll move on, but it's because of the last two months and the problems that we've had with our schools and so on - do you have any idea the increase in maintenance costs, what it could possibly be or is that something that your department hasn't had a chance to look at yet because those estimates are not passed in yet?

 

            MS. CASEY: I can't tell you what the increased cost would have been by each board, but I will say that some of the issues that boards had with a leaky roof or an overloaded snow on the roof or whatever is reflected in the requests they've put in, but it doesn't tell me what their additional costs were to address the problem. I believe there was a lesson learned, and sometimes we learn our lessons the hard way. Some boards took it upon themselves to do removal of snow from their roof in anticipation of a leak. The ones who did not are the ones that are going to have the leaks.

 

We all know that, we do it in our own homes - when you see the snow building up on your roof you think maybe I should clean that off. Some boards and some schools were more proactive and attentive to that than others, so I think they've all learned a lesson because if you leave it there, the chances are you're going to pay a price.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dunn, you have about 5 minutes left.

           

MR. DUNN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Just another question came to my mind and I'm just trying to think of New Glasgow Academy, the new P-8 school, looking at the structure and the roof. I always wondered why the schools were built with flat roofs because it just seems that it's a recipe for disaster down the road. Again, this is just a question as far as the engineers that are doing the plans for any new schools that may occur in the province down the road. They must be considering a different type of roof where we're not running into the same types of problems that we have for the past 30 or 40 years. There are so many problems.

 

            I know I've experienced - I'm sure you have too - in some of the schools we've worked in, a lot of roofs were leaking because they were flat. You knew it was going to happen, it was just a question of when.

 

            MS. CASEY: Talk about lessons learned. I think we've both walked around with buckets in the hall on a rainy day or a snow-covered roof.

 

            If I could just explain a little bit - once a new school is announced and once the steering team is put together the construction of the school is really the responsibility of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal, TIR. The concern you've raised is certainly one that I've no problem raising with our staff who are in contact with TIR but it's ultimately that design team and the contractor who determine what that design will look like. I would expect they're probably better able to build a building with a flat roof that is probably more able to withstand the weight of snow than some of the ones you and I were in.

 

            It's certainly a concern, and I have no problem passing that on.

 

            MR. DUNN: Two or three minutes left? Okay. With two or three minutes left, do you need a break before you move on to the second hour? Okay. Just one last question before we change.

 

            It's dealing with a risk analysis for schools that are prone to flood areas, if we do have any in the province. Is there a policy in place to mitigate the risk of schools that might be in flood-prone areas?

 

            MS. CASEY: I would expect that the awareness has been heightened for that kind of analysis. That would be driven by the individual school board if they believe that there was a need for that then they would take the initiative on that. We know the location of some of our schools puts them in a high-risk area but it would be the responsibility of the school board.

 

            MR. DUNN: Perhaps I'll just end off with a comment. I'm interested in having a good discussion with you later on dealing with snow days and so on. I don't have the time to now, but I'm looking forward to having a good discussion, not necessarily a question and answer type of thing, but just like sitting at Tim Horton's and having a coffee and trying, you never know. (Interruption) You never know. Anyway, I'm going to finish there and continue later.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: We'll take a very quick break.

 

            [4:50 p.m. The subcommittee recessed.]

 

[4:53 p.m. The subcommittee reconvened.]

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Ms. Zann, whenever you're ready.

 

            MS. LENORE ZANN: It's nice to be able to be here and nice to be able to be here and have a chat up closer and more personal with our Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development. I'm sure it's a position that many in Nova Scotia would actually love to be in so that they can ask questions about what's going with our education system and what the plans are for the future. As I believe, Ms. Casey and I both know, this department is something that concerns many Nova Scotians and is really an integral part of our province and of the way our young people grow up and whether they succeed and where their futures take them.

 

            I'd just like to start off by saying thank you so much for your opening remarks. I did listen intently and I did take many notes. As you know, of course, I do come from a family of educators and I'm wondering, my father might have even - did he teach you at one point in time at the Teachers College, I can't remember? I know we have always enjoyed a healthy relationship and that my family and I have always admired the work you do and that you did in the system.

 

            I do have a lot of questions regarding the four pillars you talked about, a lot of the things you are planning. I'd like to start with one question that has been on my mind, that was our breakfast program for students. I know that in my first four years as a MLA you would oftentimes hear of all the different schools having to get money for breakfast programs from the local, basically, charity organizations, and parents and teachers forming together to form breakfast programs for the kids. Personally I have never felt that was something that is a fair thing in our society, I think it's something the government should be looking after because obviously if we care about the health and the well-being of our youngest citizens then feeding them and making sure they start off with a full belly will make a big different to whether they can learn and how much they can take in; in fact, it will deal with a lot of behavioural issues.

 

            While we were in government, the NDP announced a $700,000 to the provincial breakfast program, a first provincial breakfast program. It was going to be an agency that could also take money from corporations that could invest in it. I'm wondering - where does that stand and, if, indeed, is that actually in existence?

 

            MS. CASEY: Thank you to the member for the question and for the compliment, I guess. One of the things we recognize is the importance of - and I mentioned it here earlier - partners. Some of our best partners are school advisory councils, our community groups, our parent-teacher groups, or whatever. In many cases they are ones who are driving a breakfast program.

 

            We recognize that there are kids who come to school, and I often think - I was the   principal of an elementary school and classes didn't start until 9:30 a.m. That's because the first bus run though the community was for school that started at 8:00 a.m. and then the next bus run was for a school that started at 9:00 a.m. The last bus run was for the school that brought the kids to the elementary school. Those families were up and ready for the first child to get on the bus at 8:00 a.m. I would expect that if they had any breakfast, they had it before 8:00 a.m. Then these little fellows came in at 9:30 a.m. and they had been up a long time and they were hungry.

 

            It is difficult for kids to learn if they don't have food in their belly. I think that acknowledgement of that was something parent-teacher groups took on. It has flourished and it has grown. It has grown through the dedication and funding from volunteers and from communities.

 

            I think of Tatamagouche. I know that Foodland, the grocery store in Tatamagouche, has been very generous in providing free of charge, food to the schools and the parents use it for a hot breakfast. It's interesting, kids who had a breakfast still want to have a breakfast when they come to school. I've been there and it's not because they didn't have a breakfast it's because it's a social event. That's a very positive spinoff to what started to meet a need but it has become a social need that has been met.

 

The department - I'm just looking at grants here, and there is about a $75,000 grant that is available through a program called Nourish Nova Scotia which goes to schools to help support that, but it's interesting that that certainly is not enough. I think we recognize that we need to strengthen that program. Whatever the initiative was that you're speaking of, I'm not aware that that has ever become a practice.

 

            MS. ZANN: Yes, I believe there was that grant in place which it helped to pay for some of the breakfast program but many of them were left wanting and needing extra funds which is where the different home and school and parent organizations would get together and try to scramble around to give charity, really, to be able to feed kids. I know the Lions Club for instance in Truro was very good at giving out money, I think they gave out $500 per school in and around the area but, again, personally, I just don't think it should be a charity, I don't think it should be something that is left up in the air for all of these different people to try to scramble together to come with something that is as essential and important as having food for kids in the morning.

 

I am disappointed that that $700,000 that was earmarked for a provincial breakfast program under the NDP Government, has not had an uptake, has not been used, and do you know if there is anything else in the pipeline - do you have any other plans to maybe create something like that? Or is that not being discussed at this point in time?

 

            MS. CASEY: I'm going to do some follow-up to see if in fact the $700,000 ever became a reality or not. I will say that our Premier began what we're calling a student support program, it is an allocation to each school based on the - it is a $5,000 per school grant that the school gets, $5,000 plus a dollar per student. Last year was the first year and the criteria around that were really pretty flexible. We were saying to principals, if there are things that are happening in your school where parents are having to go out and raise money to support that program, here's whatever that translates into for your school to do whatever.

 

We have asked for feedback because we want to know what they are doing with that. Some of the schools have chosen to use that to support a breakfast program. We are giving some funds that we allow the school to make some school-based decisions, they know best what's going on in their school and we recognize that so we had that in our budget last year, we have it again this year and we will continue that, but we'll continue to monitor to see how that is used. I will do a follow-up on the $700,000 to see if in fact that ever became a budget line.

 

            MS. ZANN: I would appreciate that. As I said, I believe the idea was to provide the $700,000 and create an agency that could also then take money, donations, from other corporatized businesses who would actually get some kind of tax receipt or tax credit back, but it would be an incentive for business to help pay for the breakfast program so it would be a government and private corporation, and private individuals, way of helping to feed our children.

 

            When you look around the world and you see many countries that they're much poorer than Canada and much poorer even than Nova Scotia, and they have two hot meals a day that are free, I have to say that I feel we are lagging behind when it comes to the progressive nature of these thoughts and these ideals - especially, as I said, many of these countries are much poorer than we are.

 

            As part of the program review, the minister's department has indicated that it will find savings of about $600,000 by eliminating the Nova Scotia Book Bureau system. According to the department's website, the Book Bureau is responsible for the distribution of learning resources and related products to support teaching and learning, and to ensure availability in a cost-effective manner to Nova Scotia schools.

 

Could you please explain to me what the rationale was behind eliminating this particular program?

 

            MS. CASEY: I wonder if the member could tell us what line she's looking at because the savings within the Book Bureau were $90,000, so I don't know what line you're looking at.

 

            MS. ZANN: We're going to find out which page it's on and come back to that one.

 

The other issue that I wanted to talk to you about was the hub school model, which we touched on in the House the other day. The closure of small schools has obviously been an issue that has been ongoing, and parents and small school advocates are concerned, obviously, about losing three schools in the Chignecto-Central School Board region - Maitland, Wentworth, and River John.

 

            The government's guidelines for hub schools state that the proposals must not cost the board more than the board's future plans. The Chignecto-Central School Board has taken these government guidelines to mean that the hub school proposals must cover things like repairs to the school, teachers' salaries, basically it looks like the whole cost of running a school that the board proposes to close.

 

            I know there was a meeting last night with the Chignecto-Central School Board that was basically being billed as a final meeting for the citizens who are fighting for their small schools to remain open. Do you have any responses from that meeting, and can you enlighten me a little bit about what is going to happen there?

 

            MS. CASEY: If I could speak to the whole issue of hub - and I did speak to that yesterday in late debate. I think it's important to note that the whole conversation around hub began, I believe, through some research and there was somebody who was writing articles about the hub model. At the time, the government of the day - and the member would have been part of that - started talking about this would be something that schools, communities could do, to look at a hub model. It was something that nobody had done any kind of research on from the department at that time.

 

            So the conversation about establishing a hub model led communities to think there was some hope for their school community, and so they started asking what does a hub model look like? Nobody had an answer. In fact I was critic at the time and I called the department at the time and asked what the definition was of a hub model, and the minister of the day could not answer that.

 

            I went to the school board and asked what the definition of a hub model was and they couldn't answer the question, yet we had communities out there who were thinking that the minister was talking about a way to respond to their dilemma about a school closure but nobody had given them anything, not even a definition of what it was. It caused a lot of concern, a lot of anxiety, a lot of hard feelings, I would say, within the communities because they were asked to do something without any guidelines, without any definition.

 

This was in the mix in the Fall of 2013 and when we became government the questions were asked of us, and at the department they had no answers because there had never been anything done to determine what a hub model is. So the first thing that we did, even when we were developing our school review policy, which was to guide the school review process, there was reference in that to a hub model opportunity, but without the accompanying document that would say what are the guidelines, what's the criteria, who does what, who's responsible for what, it was really quite a mess.

 

Prior to even getting the legislation through we put together guidelines and criteria for a hub model, and I want to make reference to that because I think it's important that everybody understands now what those guidelines and criteria were. The first thing that needed to happen was a definition of hub and, as I said, there were many people who were imagining what a hub was but nobody really knew what would qualify for a hub if a school board was going to work with a community to develop one, or if a school board was going to pass a motion that had anything to do with a hub.

 

I do want to read this, because I think it's important for the context of hub schools in the Province of Nova Scotia. "A Hub School is the reasonable and sustainable use of public school space that does not impede the delivery of the public school program, is financially and operationally viable, and is supported through a strong business case from the community."

 

Now we remember that Bob Fowler was doing some work on the new legislation in the school review process, and so a lot of the components in that definition came through conversations when he was out meeting with communities and talking about this very thing. It's important to note that the intent of a school and the primary purpose of a school should not be lost in this, and so it stated clearly that the primary purpose of a public school is to provide the public school program to the students.

 

It sounds like we're stating the obvious because I know that's what communities want for their schools and I know that's what school boards want for their schools and that is the mandate that we have at the department, but it's important that it be stated because once we start looking at what other services and supports there may be in that school, that the primary purpose cannot be forgotten or compromised or disturbed in any way.

 

            So when a community is looking at a hub model and when a board is looking at doing what the member said, reviewing the proposals that come from those communities, everyone has to have the same background information and so that was the purpose of the guidelines and criteria. I think it's important to say that within this context of the primary purpose of a school being to deliver the public school program, any proposal brought forward by an organization, a business, or an individual, must demonstrate the following - and again, we are trying to put parameters around this so people know what the game plan is or what the rules of the game are - an environment that is in the best interest of students; an environment that does not negatively impact student learning and engagement; a strong relationship between school boards and, as applicable, community partners, business partners, municipalities, and the public; improved service delivery for families and communities; reasonable and appropriate use of public infrastructure through increased flexibility, accessibility, and utilization.

 

            So if there happens to be a business in a community that wants to become engaged in developing a hub model with the school board and the school, they know clearly what it is that they can or cannot bring to that proposal. I think it's also important to note that in that criteria they talk about who eligible partners would be. When we're talking about children in a school, it's important that we have some control over who might be coming and going in that particular school so "eligible partners" has to be clearly defined, and it is. Federal, provincial, or municipal government departments, wrap-around education services such as early years or adult learning, community organizations, organizations supporting culture and the arts, local businesses providing services to families, students, and children, sport and recreation providers, and other groups as determined by the school board. The school board ultimately has a responsibility for that school and those children who are there.

 

            We've identified any organization or business and what parameters they have to work within. It talks about the eligible partners and it talks about eligibility criteria. Health and safety of students and staff will not be at risk. Again, we're putting our students first. The proposal will not compromise the school's ability to deliver the school program. The proposal is appropriate for the school setting and respects the mission and vision of the school board, the proposal aligns with the policies and long-range planning of the school board, and the proposal does not interfere with the school board's strategy for student achievement. Again, if everybody knows the rules of the game, then they know what they can or cannot include in their proposal and, again, it is preserving and protecting students, their safety, and their programs.

 

            The next thing is the part that I think the member might be talking about - it is financial viability and sustainability criteria. If we believe, and I know I had correspondence from one of the members suggesting that this was set up to fail, which is absolutely ridiculous to think that anybody would set criteria, looking at the best interests of students and their safety and suggest that it was designed to fail. I have more to do with my time than design something to fail.

 

            The financial viability and sustainability says the proposal must clearly demonstrate - and these game rules are known up front - the source of funding for the proposal, evidence that the funding for the proposal has been secured, or will be secured, prior to any finalizing of an agreement and evidence of the financial viability and sustainability of the proposal, including sufficient cash flow to support the operation of the alternate use. School boards have to be able to ensure that whatever proposal comes forward comes with the money to support it, that it's not an additional financial burden - and I said additional financial burden - for the board.

 

            There's criteria for the use of the building and, again, this has to go to the safety and protection of students and teachers and any other staff who are working there.

 

            Facility requirements as outlined will be considered based on the following, so if you are putting together a proposal, you have to make sure that these things are considered: how student and school staff safety will be maintained, including confirmation of criminal reference and child abuse registry checks for any employee or volunteer associated with the alternate use; the condition of the facility; the configuration of the space and the separation of space between educational and non-educational use; any zoning or site use restrictions; anticipated vehicle and pedestrian traffic; and accessibility.

 

            So those are pretty clear, if you're thinking about putting a proposal together. It's pretty clear what you have to consider - the criteria with respect to the building. Then it goes on and I'm not going to read it, but I'm going to suggest to you that the roles and responsibilities are clearly outlined, what is the role and responsibility of the school board and what is the role and the responsibility of the proposed applicants. Then you get into a joint use agreement of the building and all those kinds of things.

 

            I want to share that because I know there are three communities that are - in fact they presented their proposals last night. I know they have been working for a number of months to put something together because as the Act says, as the school review policy says, there's a certain time frame for them to come forward with their proposal. The board will judge it against the criteria and the board will make their decisions.

 

            I did have a chance to meet with a representative from each of those three school communities - River John, Maitland, and Wentworth. They shared a little bit about what their proposal looked like and they were very different, as we would expect, because they are very different communities. So last night they would have had an opportunity to present their proposal to the board. The board will judge that against the criteria that has been set and the board will make a decision as to whether that proposal is something that meets the criteria and they will determine whether, in fact, it does or doesn't. Each one of them will be judged based on its own merits because they are different communities, they are different proposals, but the first thing the board will be doing is judging it against the guidelines and criteria that I've just shared here and which have been made available so that communities would have some feeling of what it was they were supposed to be developing.

 

I understand that the board has until June 10^th to make their decision, based on what the guidelines say they should do. I'm looking forward to their reaction to that; I can't anticipate it. I'm not part of that process, but I do know that the communities worked hard with their proposal and I do know they are very different, and I do know that they'll be judged against the criteria.

 

            MS. ZANN: Thank you for that detailed answer. I know that these three communities are waiting on tenterhooks for a response. I also know that the River John school, for instance, is a sweet little school that my dad has oftentimes talked about because he has gone there as a writer in the school to tell stories and read stories - his children's books - to the kids. In the River John they have the writers - the Read by the Sea, every summer. It's a very popular event. I know that Sheree Fitch, a children's author, lives in the community and has been one of the spearheads for about 17 people in that community who have been really fighting to keep that school open and alive.

 

I loved the idea that they came up with to have a little art gallery and coffee shop where you can see local arts. There are so many different artists there in River John, as you would be well aware, and also to have books and things like this available.

 

            I know that they met with the school board a little while ago, and I believe you were also present when they presented their presentation and their ideas, but then they were suddenly told that they'd have to come up with another $500,000 on top of that. Apparently the response from the community group was, how do you expect a small community to come up with $500,000? What is your response to that?

 

            MS. CASEY: The meeting of which you speak was the one that I mentioned where there was a representative from each of the three school communities. I agreed to meet with them to listen. Sheree was there from River John. That meeting also included the superintendent and the board chairman. I wanted to give a representative from the community an opportunity to sit down in a small group with two key players - the superintendent and the board chairman - to let them present kind of a concept.

 

            It was certainly not a detailed proposal, but it was a bit of what they thought might work in their community, and I know they had done a lot of work. It was really a meeting where people listened. I have no knowledge of what the board may have come back to say to them as a result of that. I don't know that, but I do know that was an opportunity and I do know that they had the full presentation, I believe, last night.

 

            If I could just go back to one of the questions that I said we'd get some information on, because I do have it, and that has to do with the breakfast program. The $750,000 that you were talking about was through the Department of Health and Wellness, and that's why I couldn't find it in my budget line. So it is through the Department of Health and Wellness. It was in a press release from the Department of Health and Wellness. We will follow up to see if, in fact, that is still their budget line.

 

            I do know that the intent, I'm sure, there, and the intent of our $2 million is to perhaps leverage some other support and money from within the community because it is a valuable program. I just wanted to go back to that now and share that. We'll confirm where that is with the Department of Health and Wellness budget.

 

            MS. ZANN: I really appreciate that. I hope that that is still there and in place because I think it's really urgently needed here in Nova Scotia with so much poverty and so many people who make under $30,000 a year - it must be very hard to feed their children and get them ready for school with a fully belly.

 

            I have a little bit more information - actually I'll go to that in a second, but I just wanted to stick with the hub schools for a second. We know that the meeting happened last night and the final presentations were done, but one thing that I had been told by some folks who live in Tatamagouche, and I mentioned this the other day as well - the minister may or may not be aware of this - there was some meeting in Tatamagouche about the new school there and apparently it was brought up in questioning that the school was designed in order to fit all the students from River John because they expected them all to come to that school and that the River John school would be closed. Can you confirm whether that's true or not?

 

            MS. CASEY: The new school that's being built in Tatamagouche is to replace two schools, the elementary school and the high school. When the school steering team, which would have members from the school board, from the school, from the parents, from the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, and from Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal. When they sit down to look at the capacity and what spaces they need within the school they look at the enrolment and they look at a history of enrolment.

 

            In the past when I did do some work for the board on school construction after I retired, my experience was that there is always the challenge of building it too big and having nobody there or having it too small and having it overcrowded. So determining who will be there and how many, the committee takes that pretty seriously. I don't know what conversations they've had there, but it would be my belief that if enrolment numbers from another school were being considered, it would have to be after a decision of that school had been reached because the school that was approved was a replacement for Tatamagouche Elementary and North Colchester High School.

 

            It would be a request that would go to the board, what your projected numbers are, and it would be based on history and those numbers would be submitted to the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal because they're the ones who do build the schools. The Department of Education and Early Childhood Development announces them and has the budget to build them, but TIR immediately takes over and they work on the design and the tendering and the architecture and so on.

 

            They would be the ones who would be getting the information from the school board, and I can't confirm what information they would have gotten from the school board, but I would suggest it's premature to include enrolment numbers. If that was going to happen you would look at Wentworth, Wallace, all the schools that might be close to Tatamagouche, and I mean those schools aren't closed so it would be based on the enrolment that is within the catchment area for the elementary school and the high school.

 

            MS. ZANN: If River John closes, where are they planning to bus those kids?

 

            MS. CASEY: I can't answer that question. I don't know if the board has any conversation, but normally if a school closes they would be working with the community to determine where those students would be relocated. I'm not aware that the Chignecto-Central board has moved into that conversation with the community, but that would be what would happen.

 

            I remember when the schools in Pictou County - and the member for Pictou Centre would remember this - there were five high schools I believe that were consolidated into two: Trenton, Stellarton, New Glasgow, Westville and Pictou East. But when those decisions to close those schools were held, it would be the board that would be working with the community to say where do the kids from Trenton go, where do the kids from Westville go, where do the kids from Stellarton go? That would be something a board would do in consultation with the community.

 

            If I could go back to that particular situation, those conversations I would expect would be held in communities once the new school was announced and, if it impacts on an existing school, the conversation is with that community - where do these students go?

 

            MS. ZANN: In talking with some of the folks from each of those areas, Wentworth as well, and Maitland, I know that the parents and the community members are concerned because they were told that within each of the small communities some kids would be bused to one community and other kids would be bused to a different community. So in fact those kids wouldn't actually get to hang out together at the same school, which even more breaks up a community. Those kids don't even know each other and don't even have the same friends, and it makes it very hard for a community to remain a community. That's what I've been hearing from people, so this is why I am concerned about these issues and why I'd like to get to the bottom of what's going on and what will happen with them.

 

            We do have some more information now about the program review, the Book Bureau. It has been reduced; there's a reduction under the whole program review items. According to the department's website, the Book Bureau is responsible for the distribution of learning resources and related products to support teaching and learning, and to ensure availability in a cost-effective manner to Nova Scotia schools. I just want to know what the rationale is behind eliminating this particular program, and how much exactly are the savings?

 

            MS. CASEY: My understanding is the Book Bureau is still there. We are using more online than we are print and so that translated into a savings of $90,000. Those services and supports are being provided from within the department, so we were able to realign some things within the department to save $90,000 - but the big change there is a move from print to online. Going into the Book Bureau is quite an experience because there are a lot of books there that have been there a long time. We all value books, but I think the demand for online is increasing and so we're trying to respond to that demand.

 

            MS. ZANN: Thank you for that answer; I appreciate that. The other thing I noticed and it seems to be a little bit of a trend in the overall government budget and it's a concern to me - I'm noticing that the budget of the Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs was decreased significantly again this year. I also see a small decrease in the funding for African Canadian services within your department, on Pages 8 and 9. Services for Mi'kmaq students have also been reduced. I'm just wondering, why has the minister decided that these are areas to find savings?

 

            MS. CASEY: An initiative within all departments across government, I understand, is a continuation - it's what we call "vacancy savings." It has not translated into any fewer people but there has been a saving within the African Canadian Services of 43 and within the Mi'kmaq of 17. That is something that my understanding is was started forever, so it's a continuation of that. It's not a decline in services that are provided and it's not a reduction in persons or people who are involved in either one of those departments.

 

            MS. ZANN: I'm still not quite sure what it was for - what was it used for?

 

            MS. CASEY: My understanding is that it is a practice that has continued from the previous government to this one and it is due to what they are telling me is staff turnover, which does not translate into anyone losing their job or any fewer services being provided, but it is something that all departments have had to do and are continuing to do. The savings of 43.9 and 17 have been a result of the staff turnover in those two departments or two divisions within the department.

 

            MS. ZANN: I would just like to make note of the fact that personally I feel we need to invest more in our African Nova Scotian learners and our First Nations learners. I know it helps them a lot to have people who are working with them in the system. I know that demographically our First Nations Mi'kmaq people have one of the most rapidly growing youth populations in the province.

 

            When my father was teaching at the Teachers College he introduced the very first Mi'kmaq teachers' training program since when we first moved to Nova Scotia, to Canada, from Australia, they didn't have one. He noticed when he was practise-teaching in the schools that there were no Mi'kmaq teachers and he felt that this was something that needed to be addressed, and so he started a Mi'kmaq training program at the Teachers College, along with the recently deceased Mr. Noel Knockwood, an elder and spiritual leader. They trained Mi'kmaq students to be teachers and graduated a number of them - thirteen of them, in fact, which he felt was so important to our system to have people who understand various different cultures and not just our Anglo-European culture.

 

            I would hope that these savings are not going to be on the backs of the people and the children who need it most - does the minister have anything to respond to that?

 

            MS. CASEY: To respond to the member, I think it would be important to note that our commitment to African Nova Scotian learners and to those in the Mi'kmaq community has been strengthened. We have valued very much the work that's done at the department in both of those divisions but, more importantly, the work that is done out in the communities and the ability for our department to work with some of the partners that deliver programs to our African Nova Scotian students and adult learners as well is strong.

 

            We have kept our commitment; we have kept our budget line to that. It's difficult to explain the vacancy factor and the staff turnover there, but there is no reduction at all in the services that we're providing. The savings that we're talking about - the 43 and the 17 - are found within other divisions within the department. They do not affect those departments in either their staffing or their delivery of program. It is a practice that has been in place across government departments. It is my understanding it was in place under the previous government and it's something that is being continued, but it has not affected, at all, the program delivery that we have.

 

            In fact, I would say that our attention to working with both of the communities has been strengthened. We have met with, and continue to meet with, members of both communities to ensure that their needs are met. We have recognized that and have had conversation with the African Nova Scotian community in particular about some of their standardized test scores. We share their concern that those scores have taken, that trend that we don't like, and we know that we have to be able to look at the dollars that we put into those communities and the schools that serve our African Nova Scotian children, to make sure that they're being used in the best possible way.

 

            We are working with the community in north end Dartmouth. That whole program that we're working with there - bringing people from various community supports and various governments and businesses together - is driven completely by our concern and the concern in the community for the poor performance of the students there.

 

            I believe it'll be a model for us in the province to look at, and for other provinces, because we recognize that some of the children who come into the schools are bringing a lot of concerns from their home and their family and their community, and that is interfering with their ability to be successful in our classrooms. We had the conversation about breakfast programs and recognizing the importance of all kids having a good belly full of food before they are in any state of readiness to learn.

 

            So I would certainly be very proud to say that we have identified that community as a priority and we have Community Services, Health and Wellness, Education and Early Childhood Development, and Justice all working together. Those meetings have been held - one of the first meetings I had as minister was with the Minister of Community Services in her community in one of the schools.

 

            It's a challenge for all of us, it's a challenge that the community recognizes, and it's one of those situations where there may not be a simple solution and there may not be a quick solution but the fact that everybody recognizes that we have to work together towards that solution is progress, and so we will continue to do that.

 

            MS. ZANN: I agree with you, that's one of the things that I completely am devoted to trying to create a better understanding of that in our society, but I also think that $60,900, which is being eliminated, could be used towards helping with this very idea.

 

            I'd like to just move on and ask you quickly: How many subsidized child care spaces will be created in this budget?

 

            MS. CASEY: If I could go back and I just want to correct there has not been a change in service or staff, and the services that are provided in both of those departments will continue.

 

            I spoke earlier about Early Years Centres and the fact that we have announced four new Early Years Centres. For those centres, that's an investment of $700,000; it does include regulated daycare, so that is an investment. It includes programs for four year olds and it includes the support for families who are accessing those centres and who benefit from having those services available in a school setting.

 

            We have looked at the four that were in place, which some of those had an official opening this past year. We had the one in Spryfield, which was opened, I think, in 2013; then then we had Yarmouth Central, I was happy to be down there and be part of that; and East Antigonish, Monastery, and Jubilee in Sydney Mines.             The ones for this year will provide those additional daycare seats and they are Cornwallis Elementary, West Highlands up in Amherst, École Beau-Port, and New Germany.

 

            Our goal is to try to establish centres that provide that regulated daycare, but in addition it's more than just a daycare. There is a program for four year olds and it is the benefit - I guess the strength of these is that they don't close in the summertime even though they may be in a school. We encourage and try to have them located in a school, but they are 12-month operations. We have in our budget $1.3 million for those centres and that will be our commitment.

 

            MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The time allotted for the questions of the NDP caucus has elapsed, so I'll turn this over to the Progressive Conservative caucus, and Mr. Dunn.

 

            HON. PAT DUNN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I guess we're all ready to roll. I'm going to finish off what my colleague was talking there - do you know how many child care spaces will be created in this budget?

 

            MS. CASEY: We currently have 4,427 subsidized seats in the province. There are no additional subsidized seats, but we are investing our money into the Early Years Centres, which do include regulated daycare.

 

            MR. DUNN: I'll start off with the question with all the different initiatives that we will be getting in September of 2015. I know the minister would like to have every single one of them up and running. My question is, will government be able to implement all of these here? The reason why I'm asking that is, I'm just thinking about the tremendous amount of work and collaboration with the people involved to try to have everything set in place for September. It's going to be such a short time with all the stakeholders involved. Is it realistic to think that we might reach that in September with the things that the action plan is stating that we hope to be implemented?

 

            MS. CASEY: When we talked earlier, we talked about it being an aggressive action plan and it is. We talked about what ones we could have ready for September and how realistic that would be. We knew that we had to set some priorities and so our priority was to focus on Primary to Grade 3. We also recognized that we had to set priorities and we had to have something that was manageable. We focused on Primary to Grade 3 and we focused on math and literacy. We are well on our way to looking, with our teacher teams, at the number of outcomes that teachers will be expected to work on and students will be expected to have success with, and that number will ready for implementation.

 

I think we have to be careful not to try to do too much. I'd rather do a few things well, but some of them are interconnected and I believe that by addressing one of those, it may incorporate more than one action. If we're talking about the outcomes for students, then that also includes the professional development for the teachers who will have to do that. We're looking at a schedule for when we can have that professional development. And the monitoring of all that will begin in September. That will continue throughout the implementation, and it is our goal to have been able to respond to those.

 

            MR. DUNN: As far as the fund for implementing these initiatives, I think when you were unveiling the action plan you answered a question from the floor - I thought you said you were going to find the funds from within the budget. I know the budget has increased, which is a real positive thing, but I guess I'm wondering, did the increase occur because of the new initiatives or the additional surplus that the department has, which again I say is a very positive one - was that a result of these new initiatives?

 

            MS. CASEY: We have said and you've heard me repeat it several times - it is our intent, we will do it - we will reinvest the $65 million that was cut from public education by the previous government. We will reinvest that into programs for students in our schools, and we would do that over the course of our mandate. We began that last year and we reinvested $17.5 million of the $65 million in last year's budget. This year the $20.4 million is coming out of that $65 million. That brings a total of $37.9 million that we are reinvesting out of that $65 million that was cut by the previous government.

 

            What we've earmarked is a total in our budget of $20 million to help implement the action plan. Some of that went out to schools with their funding and some of it has been held at the department because, as we begin the implementation, we need to make sure that we have the funds we need to implement that. For example, I talked about having teachers come in to work as a team to make some of the changes in our curriculum.

 

There are some costs related to that if you bring teachers from Yarmouth and Sydney and so on, so we are holding some of that money which is directly related to the action plan at the department to pay for things like that. I think it is $6.5 million that we've held at the department to pay for some of the implementation and the action plan.

 

            MR. DUNN: So the funds associated with the September 2015 action plan, would it be safe for me to say that's sort of like - I guess some people call it dedicated funding or targeted funding. If it is, then I guess my question would be: Will this constrain the ability of school boards to deliver other programs that they may want to?

 

            I know I've talked to school board members and they would say we don't like the idea of targeted funding. I personally like the idea, maybe not fully but I certainly like the idea because there have been the areas where the interaction action plan is trying to implement initiatives that I know were overlooked over the years - and I usually cringe thinking of it, why the dollars didn't flow down.

 

            So I guess going back to my question again - will that constrain them from delivering other programs because of some targeting funding?

 

            MS. CASEY: We have recognized over the years that we have declining enrolment, and prior to us forming government, the previous four years, the NDP Government used a decline in enrolment to justify cutting money out of education. It was a very ill-conceived idea because we use a simple example - if you have a bus going down the road with 60 kids on it and five families move away, well guess what? The bus still goes down the road - same distance, same amount of gas, pays the same driver - so you cannot base your budget solely on enrolment.

 

            The other part of that equation is as you introduce new programs, which are designed to meet the needs of some students whose needs have not been met - and I would use skilled trades as an example, Options and Opportunities as an example. Those programs, by their very nature, are limited to the number of students you can have in a classroom, in a shop. You would know, if you have kids in a carpentry shop, you can't have the same number. There is a ratio for safety reasons - Occupational Health and Safety - that limits it. So the cost to deliver those programs goes up.

 

            So if you want to deliver new programs that are more costly, if you want to put supports in for students with special needs, all of those costs remain constant or go up regardless of your enrolment. What we did last year was look at a hybrid of enrolment and programming when we were determining how much money would be allocated to each board.

 

            To go back to the member's question about funding, there are some of those programs that are implemented because we believe that every student in the province should have an opportunity regardless of where they live. We know there are some exceptions based on the rural nature of our province but, for example, I'll use Options and Opportunities. There is a belief, and there is evidence to support, that Options and Opportunities is a good program. It has provided students who might have otherwise been disengaged or perhaps even left school, to stay because they see the relevance, that they can be successful. It also provides some of our best students to experience something that is perhaps not as academic as they normally would follow.

 

            So if we believe that is a good program, then we have to make sure that it is delivered. One of the ways that you can assure it's delivered is to target the money to the board for that particular program. You're right - boards don't like it because it takes away their flexibility, but our responsibility as a department is to ensure that the money that we give to a board to support a program goes towards that program. I make no apologies for taking their flexibility away because, as I said at the beginning, I'm motivated by what's in the best interests of kids. I'm not saying that boards are not, but there is quite a temptation sometimes to move money around, and if the direction that the department is taking is to provide a program so that all students have access to it, we have a responsibility to fund it but also to ensure the funding does go to that program.

 

            So our model in the last couple of years has been, as I say, a combination of funding based on enrolment and funding to support programs. And the funding to support programs, in many cases, is targeted.

 

            MR. DUNN: Earlier in my first hour, we talked about renovations to schools and the $15 million that the department provided for that. I guess to ensure that things will get done in a timely manner - and I know things sort of slide over to TIR - will your department also be overseeing to make sure that things are done in a timely manner and are perhaps not delayed? Is there any connection there, or is it once it's moved over it's their responsibility and you hope that they get the job done?

 

            One other thing too is sometimes the lack of tradespeople or the unavailability of tradespeople in the community to do some of these jobs is often the problem - with electricians and plumbers and so on.

 

            MS. CASEY: The $15 million that we're talking about is managed by the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. The requests from the boards come to the department, because with shared services we have just transferred some of our staff over to TIR, we are making every effort to ensure that continuity and that accountability is still there. So that will be working - that may be a bit more challenging to work between two departments, but TIR have always done the construction part of any new schools. Any new school, they do the design - I just say that we pay the money and then they do the work.

 

            We will have that link to ensure that those things that boards have submitted and have been approved, that they get the word out to the boards, here's your money - and that will come from us - here are the projects that have been approved, you get your tenders out.

 

            MR. DUNN: Just another question that I had in my mind for quite some time - I don't think you or your staff will have the data here for it, so if not we can get it. I think it happened at the beginning of the school year where the cost of milk went up in the schools. When you look at 5 cents it doesn't sound significant, but I think in the overall yearly budget it could maybe cost the school board $20,000. I think that's probably, if my memory is right, maybe '95 since the last time we had an increase in the milk program.

 

            I guess my question would be, do we know if there was any decrease in the use by the students in our schools across the province? Again, I don't expect you to have that answer at your fingertips.

 

            MS. CASEY: I don't have that information. We have not had anything forwarded to us from boards to suggest that there was any decline in the number of students who were drinking milk, or from them to say that there is an additional cost that they have been finding hard to absorb. But we can certainly see if there is any data at the board level and, if there is, we'd be glad to share that with you.

 

            MR. DUNN: As long as milk is all they're drinking, we'll be fine. (Laughter)

 

The next question is dealing with teacher recruitment strategies. I'm not sure if this is the question I should be asking you or the Department of Labour and Advanced Education, but it's dealing with the recruitment of teachers; for example, African Nova Scotians and Mi'kmaq and males for elementary teaching positions in the province. If you could comment on that, please.

 

            MS. CASEY: I believe the member may have read the action plan because we do have an action in there that speaks to teacher recruitment in general, but then it also, based on what Nova Scotians were telling us, a need to do recruitment for teachers from the Mi'kmaq community, from the African Nova Scotian community, and from the Acadian community. We've also made note of the Gaelic community.

 

We also recognize that, generally speaking, the ratio of male to female in elementary schools is certainly in favour of females. There's also that whole recruitment - I guess you could say "recruitment" - for bringing in new, young graduates.

 

            What we're doing is working with universities to make sure that, first of all, you have to look at your supply and demand, and if we are going to recruit we need to know what the supply is. Universities are the best people to let us know. for example, within their B. Ed. programs do they have students of African descent, do they have Acadian students, do they have Mi'kmaq students, do they have students in their B. Ed. programs who will be graduating, who will be looking for work and who we can recruit into positions, particularly in schools where we have a significant population?

 

            One of the things we have made a commitment to do and it's in the action plan - we've made the commitment to all the four communities, actually, to incorporate part of the history and culture and heritage into the curriculum. We heard loud and clear from the advisory council that I have on both Mi'kmaq and African Nova Scotians, that they want to see their culture and their heritage better reflected in our curriculum. We've made a commitment to do that and we'll be working with the communities to determine what should be there, and how it should be presented, and where in the curriculum.

 

            I think our action plan acknowledges in several places how we value and need to improve our curriculum related to those communities and also the recruitment aspect. We are working with the universities - does their supply meet our demand, basically.

 

            MR. DUNN: I'm just looking over the last few years, do you think we've been training too many teachers in this province, with regard to the supply and demand?

 

            MS. CASEY: There are some young people who want to be teachers who don't want to stay in Nova Scotia, but I think we have a responsibility to provide them an opportunity to be teacher-trained in Nova Scotia, but we also have a responsibility to let them know what that demand is.

 

            I remember - I will date myself, I guess - back in the early 1980s I was teaching at the Teachers College and we had a glut of teachers in the province at that time. It was so discouraging to be talking and working with your students and them saying to you, I know I don't have a hope of getting a job in Nova Scotia because nobody was hiring. I think the hiring of new grads at that point was about 3 per cent; it was extremely low. I said to them, why are you here if you don't think there's any prospect of getting a job?

 

They wanted to go on to some level of post-secondary education, they wanted to teach, and the sad part was there were no jobs here. I think we have a responsibility to let our young people know what the demand is. If they are committed to becoming a teacher, it's not for us to say if they can or can't, but we have to be honest with them and tell them what the job prospects are.

 

            I think what might be motivating your question a bit is do we have enough retirements coming up in order to create positions for our young graduates, and with declining enrolment sometimes there is really no change in the staff numbers at a school board, because you have a decline in enrolment which translates into, say, 30 fewer teachers but you have 30 teachers who are retiring so you just do well to hold what you have. I wouldn't say that we're training too many teachers, but I think we have a responsibility and I think that teacher-training institutions have a responsibility to share that information, what is the market demanding, and share that with them.

 

A number of years ago, we did go from several universities all providing teacher education programs down to, I believe, it was four at that time because everyone in the university business wanted to offer a B.Ed. program and we were pumping teachers out. So what we did was work with the universities to have them sort of specialize in some areas and some specialized in B.Ed. programs and some, of course, in medicine and so on, or business.

 

The short answer to your question is, I don't think we have too many teachers but I think where we have vacancies is probably a bigger challenge. We have, and you would know, some very rural schools and some people just don't want to live in rural Nova Scotia. We have that with doctors, we have that with a lot of - if you want to be in rural Nova Scotia, you can get a job as a doctor or a teacher, but if you want to live in downtown Halifax, it's a bigger challenge. We can't change people's choice of where they live or what they do, but I think we have to be honest with them and let them know what's available.

 

So those are, I guess, some of the circumstances around teacher training and teacher certification, but to go back to your original question about recruitment, we work with the universities, so they let us know and we let them know.

 

MR. DUNN: Again, with the number of teachers who are graduating each year, I think there's a better job at the high school level now with the professional development that has been available to guidance offices and so on as far as earmarking and helping students as far as what type of career they're looking at and giving them the available information. Sometimes I wonder, and I'm sure that the department is probably involved in this with regard to letting the universities know the shortages if they are in science and math in our high schools across the province - if you want to comment on that.

 

MS. CASEY: I remember a few years ago when people would ask me, do you think I should be a teacher? That is their decision, not mine, but they would ask, do you think I can get a job? And at that time we were short on math teachers and French teachers and I would say to them, if you specialize in math or French you're probably going to get a job. If you take a B.Ed., if you take a B.A., and you major in social studies and English, you probably won't get a job because, again, we had a glut of teachers who were specialized in social studies and English.

 

            I think career counselling at the schools can be better. I think there has to be a better understanding of what the market is demanding. I don't think there's anything wrong, in fact I think there's a whole lot right with letting students know that and letting universities know that, too. Again, the decision about what a student studies and where they go and what degree program they take is their choice.

 

            I think to go back to what we were talking about, I believe the issue with math and French has pretty well resolved itself. I wouldn't say that we have such a difficult time now getting math and French teachers as we did six or seven years ago.

 

            We have in the action plan talked about introducing career counselling, so to speak, or career exploration in Grades 4 to 8. That doesn't mean that some child is going to decide in Grade 5 what they want to do when their graduate, but you take the whole Take Your Child to Work Day, that's a great experience but I don't think it helps many kids determine what they want to do with their future. It helps them understand what their parent does, but that doesn't mean they want to do it.

 

            I think we need to change our focus so that we give kids more exposure and more information and more opportunity. I had an invitation last week to go to a career day that is being held in an elementary school. I thought that was wonderful because obviously they are going to be bringing in people who have different careers, and I suspect kids will be asking us questions and we'll be telling them about what we're doing. I don't think that's too early to start having kids think about their future.

 

            When we went to the Brilliant Labs announcement and we had some of the brightest and keenest little minds around there, I wouldn't be surprised if you asked some of those kids from Lockview in particular, I bet you they know exactly what they want to do. They've been exposed to technology and they've been exposed to science and they've been exposed to some of these hands-on kinds of things which I think excite them and help them think about what the possibilities are for them when they graduate.

 

            Some of us are old enough to know that there weren't many opportunities when we graduated. Now the world is open to them all and I think we have a responsibility to expose kids to those opportunities.

 

            MR. DUNN: Those little tykes would be great at home helping their parents fix their iPads and phones, too.

 

            Another reason I was mentioning the fact that the guidance officer seems to be a little more prepared today as opposed to back a number of years ago - I know I'll run into business people in the community who are saying that the province should be going to a knowledge-based province as opposed to a resource-based province. You'll run into some people and they are saying we should stay with our resource base and maybe add the knowledge base to it.

 

            But again, our career guidance councillors at our schools certainly with the ever-changing environment out there in the world - because I can remember and I'm sure all of us can, people telling me that your child will probably end up, when they start their careers to the time they end, they will be in five or six different jobs. I didn't believe it then, or I didn't want to believe it because I was in one job and stayed there, but I know I have a daughter who is probably with her sixth company already, which I wouldn't have dreamed of that back when I started. Within the teaching profession there is not a lot of moving, at least I don't think there is. When someone secures a teaching job they, I think, normally are going to stick with it, which is reasonable and wise. That's where I was sort of coming from there.

 

I'm going to move on to another item. It's called "deferred maintenance." I guess I'm just going to try to get a comment from you in a minute. In addition to the operational service funding, can you give me any information or anything to do with deferred maintenance in - I guess what I'm talking about, like we have the emergency funding, we have funding for things that happened this year, operational funding and so on. Does the department have deferred maintenance where schools get so much, let's say, per square foot per year? Again, asking this question, I'm not familiar with it myself so?.

 

MS. CASEY: I wonder if the member would mind if I just go back and make a further comment about guidance counsellors before we talk about deferred maintenance; it ties into the whole conversation we were having about targeted money. We establish a ratio of 1 to 500 for guidance counsellors to students because, again, we want to make sure that students have access to guidance services in their schools and we, I guess you could say, we target that money. That's what boards have to spend that money for because we believe that a ratio of 1 to 500 is workable. There is that ratio and we monitor that to make sure that boards are meeting that ratio.

 

 And the other comment I would make about guidance counsellors is that there is career guidance and there is personal guidance and I believe that guidance counsellors are doing both, and I'm not sure if they've been trained to do both and I think that's where professional development needs to come in because I believe the personal guidance is probably - I'm not saying it is probably, I know, it's more demanding now than it would have been 20 years ago. I think that whole business of how we provide supports for our students through a counsellor is important, and we should not forget there is a difference between career counselling and personal guidance.

 

            To go to your question about deferred maintenance - it takes us back to that whole conversation of the $15 million and boards have some money within their operations budget to deal with some deferred maintenance, but the reason that we took the $15 million is because they were telling us it wasn't enough. They recognize - and we recognize too - that the longer you defer it the bigger the problem becomes, so we have taken that $15 million to try to address that. I can continue to speak about that, but that would be our way to work with the boards to respond to what they are asking us for. They're saying that we have this deferred maintenance; we don't have enough money in our operations budget - help.

 

So this is one of the ways that we're trying to help. I believe last year was the first year with the $15 million but I believe as we continue that on for three, four, five years or whatever, you will see the list of deferred maintenance in each board going down significantly because if you can pick off between 50 and 60 in one year - I'd like to be able to say we're going to get maybe 50 again this year - that's making a big dent in what they have as their long list of deferred maintenance.

 

            MR. DUNN: I'm going to go back to your action plan and it talks about increasing the number of credits at the high school level for graduation, which I enjoyed reading because I think I'd like to see that myself. When I was an administrator I wished there were more credits required for graduation. One question I have, and it may be premature to ask, is this: Will these credits be electives or compulsory, or do we know yet?

 

            MS. CASEY: We have identified in the action plan that we will have a mandatory course in citizenship. That will certainly fill up one of those spots that might have been otherwise an elective. We've also announced that we will be extending the academic Math 11 from one semester to two. That takes up a little more space there.

 

            What we would like to do is try to give students some options but recognize that there are some skills and some knowledge base that they need, and we don't want to create a situation where they can graduate without it. The number of mandatory courses in order to provide those skills and knowledge base is pretty important. I'm not saying we would take away some opportunities for kids to have electives, but I think they need to recognize, based on what Nova Scotians have told us, when kids leave Grade 12 they are saying they are not ready, and post-secondary institutions are telling us that kids are not ready - and the two areas are telling us where they have weaknesses are science, math, and literacy.

 

            If we have that message, then I think it's our responsibility to ensure we provide more opportunity to strengthen those skills before they graduate, and if you're going to do that you're going to have to take an elective away to put in a mandatory course. We heard loud and clear that the whole business of citizenship, governance, financial management, volunteerism, all of those components were important, so we're putting that together into what we call citizenship, which will be mandatory.

 

            It's driven by what we heard from parents and from the business community and from post-secondary institutions. You will notice at the back of the action plan that we are phasing those things in over the course of the next five years. We recognize, even with the math extending from one semester to two, those changes don't come easily, or quickly, when a school is having to build their calendar, make their course selections available, and have their kids enrolled in their choices for courses.

 

            Schools need some time to prepare for that. I know there was a question that you started to ask me in Question Period about courses and, in particular, about the math and the class cap for the math. If I could, I would respond - or I could wait until tomorrow. No, but I think it ties into this. You can ask me again tomorrow; I'll give the same answer. It ties into the whole business of giving schools time to prepare, and that is why I'm going to that right now.

 

We know that if we cap the class size in academic Math 10, the school principal has to know in advance so they can look at their timetable, their schedule, courses that they can put in their course selection syllabus for students. All of those things take time, so that's why we're giving lead time and we're going in to work with school boards and, in particular, high schools to make sure that they have the time to make that adjustment in their schedules.

 

            MR. DUNN: Citizenship courses being offered is, again, long, long overdue. I'm very happy that's in there, in the fact that they have to take it. I just hope the course itself is going to be a really good one because I think it's a necessity - and academic math going in there too is great.

 

            You said there is room for electives, which is a good thing too because I think right off the cuff maybe that may make, I'm not sure, in the area of 15 mandatory courses maybe in the curriculum at the high school level in order to graduate - 18 to graduate, but out of the 18, how many compulsory courses?

 

But I guess going back, it is a good thing to have a few electives there.

 

            MS. CASEY: We can certainly get that information for you. I want to say that when we are looking at what is mandatory and what isn't, it will be partly driven by what we've heard in the action plan and what employers and post-secondaries are telling us, but it will also include teachers at the high school level because it is important that we have their input into what is mandatory or what is compulsory, how many choices do they have, how many blocks do they have. I think that we may be looking at what's offered and when it's offered and what's needed in order to graduate. That has not yet been determined, but we will certainly heed what we have heard, and also include teachers in helping us better determine that.

 

            MR. DUNN: Going back to the number of credits - is there a possibility that you may be looking at some of the ones that have been mandatory for several years could change or stay the same?

 

            MS. CASEY: We will be increasing the number of mandatory. We will be looking at the areas where there was significant concern, being English, and math, and science, and adding the citizenship to that. So there will be some courses that have been elective that may be replaced by a mandatory.

 

            MR. DUNN: This following question again may not be suitable for this, but I'm going to throw it out anyway, and I know you'll be able to comment on it. I guess looking at that faculty of education admission standards - are we sort of looking now to set a higher standard than the present standard that we have, and maybe more of a hands-on practical approach to the education program as far as the school wanting that to happen?

 

            MS. CASEY: The action plan does certainly speak to teaching standards and we recognize that that cannot, and should not, be done in isolation. If we are setting a standard that we expect teachers to meet, then we would want the teacher training program they went through to have perhaps realigned their program so that they are teaching to the standards that we expect our teachers to meet.

 

            You don't want a teacher to go through a B.Ed. program and come out in the school and be faced with a set of standards they are expected to meet if their program at the university has not focused on those standards. So we will be working very closely with the teacher training institutions to make sure that they can incorporate, into their program, curriculum that reflects the standards we will be setting for our teachers.

 

            Those standards again, if you follow through the action plan, will be used to evaluate teacher performance so they are all tied together. That is something that will not happen overnight because they are too interconnected. We've already let universities know that we want to be working with them. I think the universities would recognize that they are very competitive and if you are going to be looking for a teaching job and you can take something in your B. Ed. program that better prepares you to get a job, chances are the university is going to respond and include that in the curriculum.

 

            I think we'll see co-operation amongst the B. Ed. universities to respond to what we're identifying as standards we want teachers to meet.

 

            MR. DUNN: Again with this collaboration and working with the universities, which I think is critical, do you have any plans at any date to talk to them about maybe the length of the B. Ed. program? Again, talking about myself, when I went to university it was a one-year program, now it's two. Is two okay? Should it be longer, or shorter? Should it be a year and a half?

 

            I'm looking at if there will be any discussion on the length of it. I know the other thing I remember back then that it never seemed practical enough. I always thought that teachers coming into the school could have been much better prepared in a lot of different areas.

 

            MS. CASEY: We have had the first meeting, conversations and meeting, with the universities' B. Ed. programs. I think the whole business of how practical B. Ed. programs are has been around for a long time. I had an opportunity to work with Acadia to place and supervise their student teachers; they were such bright, young, aspiring teachers. We'd come out into a classroom and they had no idea what they were getting into, really. They really did not - there was no connect between the theory and the practice. I think that's exactly what you are saying.

 

            I felt badly for these teachers because some of them, all they knew was what was in the textbook. The other thing that alarmed me at that time - and I hope it has changed - is that they had no background in working with students with special needs. They didn't know how to identify - they would know that there was something that was causing a child to behave the way they were, but they had no idea what might have been causing that and they had no idea how to respond to it.

 

            So there has been that disconnect, and we're hoping that we'll be able to work with the universities to share with them what our standards are. We can't tell them what to do, but we certainly can let them know that the teachers who are there graduating will be expected to meet those standards and will be evaluated on those standards.

 

            MR. DUNN: So, with about three and a half minutes left, what could possibly happen with regard to, what does the department take as far as removing administrators from the union - is that something they will be pushing the department to have that happen or are they going to leave it up to what happens on the table?

 

            MS. CASEY: There certainly has been conversation about that but, as I said, in the action plan some of those things can only be resolved through negotiation. What gets put on the table for negotiations, I am not privy to that. We recognize that is something Nova Scotians believe would make a better environment for teachers and administrators.

 

            MR. DUNN: Perhaps the last comment - I think it's my understanding that by 2020 there will be the same number of students in Nova Scotia schools as there were in 1910, before WWI. On that, we will end tonight's proceedings.

 

            MS. CASEY: I'd like to thank the member for the conversation and the questions, and a couple of things we said we would get information for, we will certainly do that.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: We don't have a representative from the NDP at the moment to continue with their hour. Ms. Lohnes-Croft, if you would like to ask a question in the allotted time.

           

MS. SUZANNE LOHNES-CROFT: When you speak to increasing the math in high school, is there any consideration for financial math?

 

            MS. CASEY: I did mention financial management when I talked about the whole cluster of topics that could be included in the citizenship course. It can't be lost, in with a lot of other - the citizenship course has not been written. We don't know for sure what it will look like but we do recognize that somewhere in our curriculum that is mandatory; we must look at financial management.

 

Unfortunately we have kids - mine and yours and others - who when they were in high school didn't really do very good at managing their finances. But we've never taught them that, and parents aren't teaching them that, and so we have a responsibility, I think, to include that in our curriculum and we will be making it part of a mandatory course, there's no question. Whether it's a stand-alone financial mathematics course or whether it is financial management within another course, it will be mandatory.

 

            MS. LOHNES-CROFT: I find that more and more constituents lack financial literacy. A lot of situations are because of a lack of financial literacy. What was the most surprising finding of the educational review for you?

 

            MS. CASEY: We're talking about the things that prompted us to put together the action plan and that is suggesting that everything that we heard was negative, and it was not.

 

            One of the things that came through loud and clear was the strength of our teachers and the dedication of our teachers, and the amount of time our teachers were putting in to delivering the curriculum and the challenges that our teachers have with children that have some special need and need a support. Those were the kinds of things that made you feel good about being a teacher and being part of that profession. So I think the strength of teachers is certainly something that came through as a positive.

 

            We recognize that we have to be careful that we don't just focus on what people suggested to us were negative, because there are so many good things that are happening - the opportunities that kids need in order to be better prepared to go out into the workforce. It was heartwarming to also hear from students who had good things to say about their teachers. Sometimes you think that might be a little, an adversarial situation, but students spoke very highly of the teachers, of the time that teachers took to give them additional help and support.

 

            So to get back to your question, if there was one highlight, it would have been the strength of teachers, the dedication of teachers, the time they put into their profession, and how they care about kids.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Ms. Treen.

 

            MS. JOYCE TREEN: I just want to ask about the 21^st Century Citizenship course. I'm very excited about that. We talked about that once and I think it's great. Have they set any rules and parameters in place about what it's going to be about? When is it going to first come into being - is it going to be this year or next year?

 

            MS. CASEY: We recognized from what folks were saying - and it's not the first time I've heard it - the importance of kids understanding some of those things that make you a good citizen. We have teachers right now who spend a fair bit of time talking about government, about citizenship, about volunteerism, and there are sprinkles of it throughout the curriculum, but it's not there as a concentrated requirement.

 

            You know as an MLA, sometimes we get invited into classrooms to talk because the teacher is teaching government and politics and leadership, but the teacher next door may not be doing that. So it has kind of been inconsistent, and what we believe the citizenship course . . .

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The time allotted for consideration of the Subcommittee on Supply has lapsed for today.

 

            [The subcommittee adjourned at 6:58 p.m.]