Comment Sheet Summary from the Centre Guelph Accommodation
Review Public Meeting #4, March 24, 2010.
37 Comment sheets were handed in.
South
U/North 10
NS-15
NS-12
Variation
NS-14
NS-13/T
1st Preference
2nd Preference 3rd Preference Total
7
7
2
16
5
6
6
3
9
13
20
22
1
13
9
2
2
2
12
17
Comments
South U/North 10
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
As far as the north end is concerned I see no benefit of picking either South U/North
10 or the NS-12 Variation. I am not informed enough to know what is best for the
south end.
It is good that all 7/8 are together and remain in FI @ Waverley. 7/8 component at
Waverley large but more so in NS-12 Variation. The change takes place quickly
(2011). Waverley already has capacity and facility for 7/8.
295 is a good number to start a new FI centre. Moving Tytler to Victory does not
make a lot of sense – there is no physical connection with Victory. Students in the
Tytler area should remain at John McCrae or be gradually moved to Ed. Johnson (I’m
from the Tytler area).
This scenario appears to balance most populations as much as possible with the least
movement of student, or at least no unnecessary movement. However, it does not
make sense to sacrifice the Tytler group to bolster the north (I am not from the Tytler
area).
Ranked the same as NS-15 since south end recommendation is the same, or at least
that is my understanding.
How much life is left in the 8 room portapac? Are any upgrades in the future?
I would prefer for my children to stay in the school that they are currently attending John McCrae - as this school offers a sustainable transportation system from our
neighbourhood "Tytler" to the school for the grades 7/8. The children can walk from
this neighbourhood providing families in the neighbourhood with some financial relief
associated with bus fares for transportation to Waverly, and preserves the integrity of
the Board's commitment to the Community Energy Plan, reduced transitions for the
children, and reduces the social isolation that our children will face when this small
number is moved from John Mc Crae to E.Johnson. A delegation presented these
•
•
•
•
•
•
facts to the Trustees last year and several emails were sent to our ARC members and
trustees over the course of the past 2 years. I have yet to receive a response that would
indicate the rationale for displacement of our neighbourhood children...
I would hope that in any of these scenarios courtesy bussing be strongly considered for
many students (especially older siblings that may not qualify for bussing while a
younger sibling would) in the FAH current school community. Some walking
distances will double in length with FAH being closed to its surrounding community
and students being relocated to Jean Little.
I would like to know if the ARC has considered extra bussing, costs of bussing the
grade 7/8 FI all the way to the north east corner of the city. Also, need to consider
with the splitting of 7/8 FI into north and south, how will resources be divided? I
believe from the meeting last week there is money planned for resources. Only capital
expenditures. There will definitely be a loss of the programming and rotary that
present 7/8 FI students experience now at King George.
This is the scenario we like second best mainly because it does not disrupt the Edward
Johnson population. We feel very strongly that this should not happen.
This scenario is my least preferred. I object to having the 7/8 FI North students
isolated in a JK-8 English school. I also have strong concerns about Victory under this
scenario, as outlined in my comments under Scenario NS-15.
Splitting the French immersion 7/8’s would make the numbers too small to
economically support the resources we feel this age group needs. Given the
expectation that the 7/8 FI program population will increase, any split should ensure
that the post-split populations are each large enough to support the resources.
Positive: good balance of JK-6 & 7/8 students in JK-8 schools in south and Gateway,
good 7/8 program at all schools (based on 7/8 student numbers). Negative: South FI
is all in the “north” of the area – likely still need a dual track JK-6 school in south end.
Does it make sense to move Tytler area FI students? Waverley becomes very high % of
7/8 both FI and English and 7/8 only FI – will FI program suffer? Victory English
program still small & school is overcap by 2017 (FD 4/5) and site doesn’t support
portables well.
NS-15
•
•
•
•
•
•
We live west of the Hanlon, therefore our children may change schools 3 times by the
end of grade 8. This is less than ideal.
Maximizes K-6 FI and RT schools across the city; a good combination.
This has been placed first as it is the only scenario that has accounted for the future
overpopulation at Edward Johnson and the under population at Paisley. It is not my
favorite in terms that my children will have to move schools and leave a FI centre to
go to a dual track school (leave Edward Johnson and go to Waverley). However, I can
see that this makes sense, and is done in an appropriate way.
Start dual track at Waverly right away (2011). Split up existing EJ group. Keeps my
kids together at same school longer. How many students from each class will there be
in new FI at Waverley? What if only 1-2 grade 3 ends up in ¾ split FI class? Are there
enough FI teachers to make Waverley dual track in 2011? Good 7/8 component
(better than NS-12 or U/10).
I think it is unrealistic to start a new dual track program with only 1 class per grade
and expect the program to even come close to the student’s previous program.
There are a lot of children moving in this scenario. Will the proposed amendments in
2017 be relevant – or will they be obsolete before implemented? I am concerned the
•
•
•
•
•
•
two-stage plans that sacrifice the present of the unknown future may be a little too
ambitious. The new dual track program would be too small.
This scenario balances school populations well, it created a strong FI infrastructure
through all grades which will benefit all FI students.
I would prefer for my children to stay in the school that they are currently attending John McCrae - as this school offers a sustainable transportation system from our
neighbourhood "Tytler" to the school for the grades 7/8... The children can walk from
this neighbourhood providing families in the neighbourhood with some financial relief
associated with bus fares for transportation to Waverly, and preserves the integrity of
the Board's commitment to the Community Energy Plan, reduced transitions for the
children, and reduces the social isolation that our children will face when this small
number is moved from John Mc Crae to E.Johnson. A delegation presented these
facts to the Trustees last year and several emails were sent to our ARC members and
trustees over the course of the past 2 years. I have yet to receive a response that would
indicate the rationale for displacement of our neighbourhood children.
I am choosing to submit only my top 2 preferences as I believe these are the best
options overall.
I would like to know if the ARC has considered extra bussing, costs of bussing the
grade 7/8 FI all the way to the north east corner of the city. Also, need to consider
with the splitting of 7/8 FI into north and south, how will resources be divided? I
believe from the meeting last week there is money planned for resources. Only capital
expenditures. There will definitely be a loss of the programming and rotary that
present 7/8 FI students experience now at King George.
We do not support any scenario that splits the Edward Johnson community. Splitting
the EJ community is 2011 seems extremely sudden and would cause a great deal of
emotional stress.
This is my preferred scenario. I feel strongly that the FI 7/8 North not be isolated in
an all English school as proposed under scenario South U/North 10. I have noted
from the scenario data passed out at the March 24th meeting, that this scenario
includes 145 7/8 FI students from King George plus 175 FI JK-6 students from
Edward Johnson for a total of 320 FI students attending Waverley. This, I believe, is
sufficient for a strong FI program. By the way, in the projected enrolment data at the
bottom of the page, the number of FI students attending Waverley is listed as being
285 in 2011, which doesn't quite match with the 320 students that I calculated above.
Please verify numbers. I support this scenario as it relates to the 7/8 FI students.
However, I have a lot of concerns about having all of the West End FI Victory students
transferred to Paisley, as proposed for all scenarios currently on the short list. This
removes 135 students, or over 50%, of the FI students currently attending Victory. This
will leave a large hole in the program and will deeply affect the ties that have formed
between the FI students from the West End and those from the surrounding
neighbourhood. Furthermore, many of the parents of the West End students are very
involved in volunteering at the school. They make up a large share of council
members and contribute greatly to the events and programs run by Council. Without
them we would not have sufficient volunteers to keep our programs running. Our
school would be greatly impacted. FI students stand to lose a great deal under this
scenario. I have one additional concern: the sustainability of the English Program at
Victory and the fate of the school should the RT program fold due to insufficient
enrolment. Would the Board close the school? Or, would the Board make the school
an FI centre and bring in FI students from elsewhere to bring the school population to
its capacity? I would like to hear an answer to this question. There has been a
proposal made by some Victory parents which I support. It is as follows:
Half of the west end kids, about 65, from the area north of Paisley
> Road could continue to go to Victory. (There may be other places to
> draw the line this is just one that occurs to us.) This would retain
> an important part of the Victory community but reduce the numbers to
> alleviate the over-capacity problem.
>
> The other half of the west end children, about 65, from south of
> Paisley Road could go to Paisley School to increase the numbers there.
> (The reduced numbers being transferred to Paisley Road School could
> also help alleviate the eventual over-capacity there by 2017 in some
> scenarios.)
I call on the ARC Committee to reconsider the current proposal to transfer all West End
students to Paisley. I would prefer the compromise described in the above proposal.
• Better % 7/8 in Waverley; but only because JK-6 enrolment is high! Waverley overcap
for > 5 years; very few schools enrolment matched to cap – underutilized & several
overcapacity. Victory eng program small.
NS-12 Variation
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Don’t count on a new school being built; maximize use of existing infrastructure. Only
draw back is Waverley is not central to service area i.e. Long bus ride for kids from
south end.
Keep communities together.
Overcapacity at Waverley (7/8 large component) Waverly doesn’t become dual track
and change occurs quickly.
New FI centre at FA Hamilton too small. Is it worth moving 180 kids for 185 kids?
The start-up # of students for FAH FI appears too small. The 7/8 FI should be split
immediately. There are many programs & schools being sacrificed to keep the 7/8’s
together & it isn’t necessary.
We would like our children to attend school with their neighbourhood friends. In the
above two scenarios – where we are on the boarder of reassignment resulting in
friends who live across the street going to a different school. This scenario seems to
better protect these peer relationships and also maintains our children in the same
school thru gr. 8.
Since I am forced to choose an option where my children will be displaces from our
neighbourhood school, I look at the scenario which keeps the population at FA
Hamilton small. Thus our neighbourhood school building site will be less cluttered with
horrible portables.
I would prefer for my children to stay in the school that they are currently attending John McCrae - as this school offers a sustainable transportation system from our
neighbourhood "Tytler" to the school for the grades 7/8. The children can walk from
this neighbourhood providing families in the neighbourhood with some financial relief
associated with bus fares for transportation to Waverly, and preserves the integrity of
the Board's commitment to the Community Energy Plan, reduced transitions for the
children, and reduces the social isolation that our children will face when this small
number is moved from John Mc Crae to E.Johnson. A delegation presented these
•
•
•
•
•
facts to the Trustees last year and several emails were sent to our ARC members and
trustees over the course of the past 2 years. I have yet to receive a response that would
indicate the rationale for displacement of our neighbourhood children.
I like that all 7/8 FI students in one school. All resources from King George brought to
Waverley. With the increasing number of students in the 7/8 FI there would likely be
better rotary and programming then the previous scenarios.
This is by far our preferred option. In this scenario the Edward Johnson population
stays intact (which is our greatest concern), and the 7/8 population stays together for
five years giving the teachers and staff a good buffer for planning, division of
resources etc. This scenario takes the onus off John McCrae which doesn't seem to be
ready for such a large influx of 7/8 students. This scenario also seems to displace the
fewest number of students.
I like the idea of having all of the 7/8 FI students stay together. I have strong concern
about Victory under this scenario, as outlined in my comments under Scenario NS-15.
Given the number of French immersion7/8’s it is crucial that they are all kept together
to ensure they receive the resources i.e.: specialized teachers, books, labs, shop
equipment, instruments etc… to support their special needs. Waverley is the best
physically equipped to handle this as the numbers grow.
Victory English program small. Could Tytler FI students move to Ed Johnson to relive
eventual overcapacity at John McCrae? Waverley is at north end of area – many more
7/8 FI students would need to be bused. Waverley 7/8 pop is too high. FI enrolment
at FA Hamilton is low; can a good FI program be offered?
NS-14
•
•
•
•
•
•
Would be ok, only change schools once at grade 7. Also, John McCrae is a lot
closer for those students traveling from west of the Hanlon than Waverley.
Central location for easy access for FI 7/8 students; new FI centre at FA Hamilton can
support displaced K-6 FI spaces from McCrae. A short term fix prior to new school
being built.
Waverley gets dual track K-8. Timing delayed (when before 2017?) Unclear as to
when 7/8 FI goes to Waverly (part 2). Where are the 7/8 FI in 2011 who are currently
at EJ?? Do current 7/8 FI move from EJ to John McCrae for 2011, then on to
Waverley before 2017? Waverley overcapacity for part 2. Move to 7/8 school and
dual track to Waverly too slow.
Number of 7/8’s at John McCrae are too high.
Filling JMC to 50% 7/8’s is a significant concern, particularly when there are other
places to house the north program. Further, filling a school to such an excessive
capacity to help ensure there is no too small an FI dual stream at Waverley is like
borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. Nothing gained.
I would prefer for my children to stay in the school that they are currently attending John McCrae - as this school offers a sustainable transportation system from our
neighbourhood "Tytler" to the school for the grades 7/8. The children can walk from
this neighbourhood providing families in the neighbourhood with some financial relief
associated with bus fares for transportation to Waverly, and preserves the integrity of
the Board's commitment to the Community Energy Plan, reduced transitions for the
children, and reduces the social isolation that our children will face when this small
number is moved from John Mc Crae to E.Johnson. A delegation presented these
facts to the Trustees last year and several emails were sent to our ARC members and
trustees over the course of the past 2 years. I have yet to receive a response that would
•
•
•
•
•
indicate the rationale for displacement of our neighbourhood children.
I like the now central location of 7/8 FI program and that all 7/8 FI students put into
one school until new south end FI school opens. This will allow for better rotary and
programming.
I like the idea of having all of the 7/8 FI students stay together within an all FI school.
My concern with this scenario is that John McCrae may not have sufficient facilities for
such a large FI 7/8 program. I have strong concerns about Victory under this
scenario, as outlined in my comments under NS-15
I propose a variation. Grandfather the existing Tytler area JK-6 FI families at JMC.
New students/families in the Tytler area would go to EJ. While I don’t believe the JMC
is the best facility for 255 7/8 FI’s, I prefer this option because it provides a strong FI
program for both the 345 JK-6 students displaces to FAH and the 7/8 FI’s. Placing
the 255 7/8’s in the six portables would require only four classrooms inside of the
school. This should minimize the disruption to the primary and junior grades, an
important concern for existing JMC families with primary students.
John McCrae school is not equipped to accommodate the special needs of grade 7
and 8. The K-6 community school would be overwhelmed by the 7/8 numbers.
I would not support any scenario that had only support of KG ARC reps.
NS-13/T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Would be great for us, no changing of school until grade 9.
A French immersion centre is a desirable solution. This also involves the least number
of moves for students west of the Hanlon.
I support a French immersion centre, as it pools together more resources for teaching
and learning. Students then become fully immersed in the French language.
Priory Park number decline in NS-13 compared to T??? Doesn’t make sense with 2
sets of student numbers for Priory in different scenarios. Can’t be fairly evaluated.
I would like to see an English investment made to Victory PS. As non-French speaking
Canadian I don’t want to force my children into immersion where I am not able to
help them with their homework.
Move from EJ to Paisley but considered outside bus route cutoff. Paisley overcapacity
2011 and 2017. Paisley set up for 7/8 program? Large 7/8 component. Too many
students moving.
Too many students are affected in this area who do not need to be affected. The new
FI Centre at FA Hamilton is too small.
There are too many students affected who don’t need to be. Wrong to move the
English program.
NS-13 is the only scenario where no gifted classes are moved. Least disruptive for
gifted students and teachers. Oops, if these are combined there is movement.
Boundaries for RT students from Paisley bring displaced to Victory do not make sense.
Creates an FI centre, that should help achieve objective of having a French learning
environment.
Moving English students out of school is no good!
I would prefer for my children to stay in the school that they are currently attending John McCrae - as this school offers a sustainable transportation system from our
neighbourhood "Tytler" to the school for the grades 7/8. The children can walk from
this neighbourhood providing families in the neighbourhood with some financial relief
associated with bus fares for transportation to Waverly, and preserves the integrity of
the Board's commitment to the Community Energy Plan, reduced transitions for the
•
•
•
•
children, and reduces the social isolation that our children will face when this small
number is moved from John Mc Crae to E.Johnson. A delegation presented these
facts to the Trustees last year and several emails were sent to our ARC members and
trustees over the course of the past 2 years. I have yet to receive a response that would
indicate the rationale for displacement of our neighbourhood children.
Prefer central location of 7/8 FI programming and that students not divided
prematurely into north and south groups. Keep all resources together for better
programming and rotary system.
Again, while Paisley Road is not ideal for our family in terms of transportation, we
would choose this scenario over one that splits the Edward Johnson students up.
I like the idea of having the 7/8 FI students stay together. However, I feel it would be
unfair to transfer such a large number of RT students from Paisley to other schools. I
have strong concerns about Victory under this scenario, as outlined in my comments
under NS-15.
Paisley Road school should not lose its English stream students – this would be
catastrophic for the strong neighbourhood/community school.
Other Comments
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Concerned with the fact that FI students living west of the Hanlon will have to travel all
the way to east side of Guelph to go to Waverley. What length of bus ride would this
be?
I am disappointed that the use of Victory as a French immersion centre is not an
option here. It is in a central location, this would displace the least amount of
students from Victory and it would not alter or diminish the already strong French
program at Victory. The board has created French immersion centers in the past
which have thrived quite well in other parts of the city. It makes sense to me, as this is
a direction that has worked in the past and accommodates the large and growing
population interested in French immersion.
I would prefer that my children are immersed in French as much as possible. An
acceptable accommodation is a French immersion centre or a dual track school with
a large proportion of French immersion students, teachers and resources.
Finally, the French immersion program got what it wanted. All five scenarios include
Fred A. Hamilton students moving to Jean Little so the FI program can take over our
wonderful school. I always thought that French immersion is optional. I would never
have thought that an optional program would gain so much power to be able to kick
English students out of their school. What is it with all those parents that send their
kids to the French immersion program? Why do they think that this program stands
for a better education? Did nobody tell those parents that it is very important for a
child to learn its mother tongue properly in speaking, reading and writing before
moving on to learn another language? So if none of the parents speak French at
home with those kids this program might even be ‘counter productive’ for them.
Maybe that explains why quite a lot of kids drop out of the FI program by grade six! I
would highly recommend the school board to think about the way they run the FI
program at this school board. Maybe you should think about providing an earlier
introduction of French to the kids in the regular English program!
These scenarios all look reasonable and acceptable.
Thank you for all your hard work over the past months. Please, let’s just make a
decision and get this done.
Regardless of the scenario, it would be helpful to understand how the
•
•
•
•
•
•
bussing/transportation system would work especially if there are multiple children at
different schools affected. Are there any teacher issues we need to be made aware of
in terms of hiring or moving FI instruction to new centres? Need more details of
individual class makeup (how many kids/grade in K-6 FI) in NS-15 scenario and how
would that affect learning if there are only 1-2 students of a grade in a split grade
class – additional teacher assistance is adjusted teaching strategies.
Every effort should be taken to ensure that existing teachers for the gifted classes retain
their assignments if classes are moved to new schools.
I am extremely frustrated that and ‘optional programme’ has the clout to force
displacement of a whole school population of regular track children! When will the
school board consider what regions all around us has successfully implemented? I.e.
putting a cap on enrollment to implement an effective programme without steamrolling those of us who choose not to do this ‘optional programme’. Start French
instruction for regular tract students in grade one instead of waiting to grade 4!!
I just do not understand why the French immersion program, which is optional at this
school board, has so much power! That it can displace English students out of their
schools.
I would prefer for my children to stay in the school that they are currently attending John McCrae - as this school offers a sustainable transportation system from our
neighbourhood "Tytler" to the school for the grades 7/8. The children can walk from
this neighbourhood providing families in the neighbourhood with some financial relief
associated with bus fares for transportation to Waverly, and preserves the integrity of
the Board's commitment to the Community Energy Plan, reduced transitions for the
children, and reduces the social isolation that our children will face when this small
number is moved from John Mc Crae to E.Johnson. A delegation presented these
facts to the Trustees last year and several emails were sent to our ARC members and
trustees over the course of the past 2 years. I have yet to receive a response that would
indicate the rationale for displacement of our neighbourhood children.
We feel that the three choices about make the most sense for our area, and involve
the least amount of upheaval. These three scenarios are all very similar for the Victory
PS cachement. We strongly oppose the idea of sending children from our area to
either Paisley PS or Willow Road PS.
Please forward this thank-you to the ARC members who generously gave of their time
and had to make some very difficult decisions. Compromises were necessary on
many fronts. Your efforts were very much valued and appreciated. I have some final
thoughts and comments regarding this difficult and lengthy review process. Future
Accommodation Reviews will undoubtedly be required in the not so distant future as
there are no parameters put on the FI program (which is a portable and optional
program) to responsibly and effectively manage its growth. That being said, it has a
tendency to displace many regular track and FI students. A CAP on enrolment (to
responsibly plan for future needs whereby less children need to be shuffled around to
various schools whether they be FI or regular track) would help to lessen the need for
the ARC process every few years. Many school boards utilize a CAP with good results.
I understand that the FI program is growing in popularity, but many programs will with
no limits placed on them. I am an experienced educator and would have loved for
my children to receive French programming before Gr. 4, but found that making this
important decision when my children were still 3 or 4 years old too difficult to make
(many parents choose the regular track program for precisely this reason). Many
children struggle in the primary grades (with regard to basic skills in math and literacy)
and FI may not be in their best interests. Furthermore, children with exceptional
learning needs may find FI too challenging and even detrimental to their overall
education (especially with English literacy skills not being formally introduced until
about Gr. 3).Finally, as a result of the many students that will need to make school
moves regarding this Accommodation Review, I would like to strongly recommend that
the planning department open up discussions about a French Immersion CAP. Many
parents of regular track students would like to have their say in the matter. Thank-you
for your time and consideration.
• We have reviewed all the scenarios and cannot support any in their current form.
Victory is a great school, due in part to the West End families that are part of the
school community. We think Victory School will lose in all the scenarios put forward
because all propose the loss of all the west end kids from Victory. These scenarios will
reduce the strength of the French Immersion program at Victory and decrease the
overall vitality of school life as well. (This is not a criticism of our ARC members who
have a difficult and unenviable task. It is hard to balance so many issues. They have
done a good job in difficult circumstances.)We propose an option below to keep at
least some of the west end children at Victory.
THE OPTION
---------------About 135 West End children currently attend Victory according to the Board's information.
Half of the west end kids, about 65, from the area north of Paisley Road could continue to go
to Victory. (There may be other places to draw the line this is just one that occurs to us.) This
would retain an important part of the Victory community but reduce the overall student
numbers to alleviate the over-capacity problem.
The other half of the west end children, presumably about 65, from south of Paisley Road
could go to Paisley School to increase the numbers there. (The reduced numbers being
transferred to Paisley Road School could also help alleviate the eventual over-capacity there
by 2017 in some scenarios.)
This option also reduces the number of children who will have their schooling disrupted by this
process. Fewer west end children would be disrupted and the proposed transfer of John
McRae students (Tytler area) to Victory would not be needed (in one scenario), avoiding
further disruptions.
This option could be added with relative ease to a number of the scenarios already under
consideration.
WHY WEST END FAMILIES ARE IMPORTANT TO VICTORY
---------------------------------------------------West End families make major contributions to the school activities. Downtown and West End
kids have formed great friendships. The current demographics of Victory families is what
makes the school so vibrant and such an active group of parents. The mix of downtown and
west end kids make for excellent diversity and dynamism.
We don’t want to lose all our West End families from Victory. And we know many west end
families do not want to leave Victory. A great many downtown / north end Victory families are
concerned about the loss of vitality that will occur with the loss of West End families.
Thanks
• As Edward Johnson parents, we are strongly opposed to any scenario that splits the
population of that school. The sense of community at EJ is very evident, and our
children feel very much a part of that community. It seems very unfair to split up
friendships and to disrupt the lives of the EJ children. We chose to send our children
to FI and EJ specifically because it was a small school with much community appeal.
We have no desire to see our children parachuted into a much larger school
especially when there are other viable solutions in which no school populations are
being split.
• Please reconsider the proposal to transfer all of the West End FI students attending
Victory to Paisley. Impacts to the FI program and the school would be considerable.
See comments under NS-15 for further elaboration.
• My primary concerns are the delivery of quality programming and minimizing
disruptions to existing students/families. For JK-6, that means attending a school with
250-300 students. For the 7/8’s grades ideally a minimum of 200 students is
needed, hence I prefer the 7/8 options that keep all the 7/8 FI’s together, at least in
the early years (2011-2015). (Quality programming also means having qualified and
experienced teachers delivering the program. I have some concerns that moving the
gifted/FI students might mean a loss of qualified teachers with the interest and
experience to teach these students. I trust the UGDSB will be able to make some
arrangement to ensure that the existing “gifted” & “FI” teachers follow their respective
students as they move.) Scenarios that do not displace Regular Track/English students
from their walkable schools or the do not remove a small portion of the students from
a portable (ex FI, gifted) program are also two important requirements for me. NS-14
(with a variation to grandfather the present Tytler area JK-6’s) is the only scenario that:
¾ Ensures > 250 JK-6 FI students move from JMC to FAH and;
¾ Keeps the 7/8 FI’s together and;
¾ Does not displace any Regular Track/English students (NOTE: although 150 eng
students volunteered to go from FAH to Jean Little and 25 eng students are displaced
from Jean Little to Priory, this happens with all five scenarios, so it is not relevant to
selection of the five scenarios)
¾ Does not remove a small portion of students from either the gifted or FI program
(although the gifted students are being moved, each grade moves as a group so no
one is left out or separated from his class).
•
For these reasons I can only support NS-14 (with a variation to grandfather the Tytler
area JK-6s).
Very amazing work – reducing more than 40 scenarios down to 3 (or 5)! It still makes
sense to me to move part of the FI program in south Guelph to the ‘south’. If you think
a new school is likely fine, otherwise Westminster Woods should be a dual track JK-6!