February 20th to 26th, 2009
In order to protect the identity of all individuals who have submitted correspondence with
regard to the Central Guelph (FI) Accommodation Review and in keeping with the Municipal
Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, all personal information and/or
identifiers have been severed from all recorded communication (i.e. e-mails and letters) prior
to distribution. The intent or message has not been changed.
As a parent of Priory Park Public School, I have heard that there are many parents that have
not made any comments to the review board. There are many students that do not speak
much English there, so how would a parent that doesn't speak English at all be able to send a
comment to you. I am sure there are alot of people that do not have computers so are
unable to send a comment.
I have received an update that the ARC is considering putting a dual track in my child's
school. What is wrong with leaving the French students in the John McCrae school and
leaving Priory Park an English school only. There are plenty of French Schools in the south
end, how many more do we need? I don't think putting French in Priory Park is a good idea,
give the students that come from other countries a chance to speak English. That is why most
come to Canada, to learn English.
I have heard many negative comments about having a dual track in schools. There are
many children that are in French Immersion, they have alot of problems trying to adjust to the
english language as they grow older, not only for speaking but for writing as well.
I think that the board needs to look at all the schools in the south end, not by what all the
parents have said, but how the students in each school function academically before they
make their decision.
February 24, 2009
Dear ARC committee members/Trustees:
Words cannot express how disappointed I am with the announcement that Scenario B will be
recommended by the ARC Committee to the Trustees. I have many questions/concerns.
Will grade 6 (graduating class) students be “grandfathered”?
Will the grade 6 students be “grandfathered” and be allowed to remain at John McCrae? It
seems quite unreasonable to send these students to Priory Park for one year and then have
them return to John McCrae for grades 7 & 8. In fact, Dennis Cuomo from the Planning
Department informed me that grandfathering the graduating class is quite common in these
situations.
If they are indeed grandfathered, what becomes of their siblings? I can’t describe the stress
and anxiety my family is experiencing thinking about this situation. Is it possible that in
September, 2010 my son will attend John McCrae in grade 6, while my daughter attends
Priory Park in grade 4? Before and after school care concerns overwhelm me just at the
thought of this.
February 20th to 26th, 2009
Before/After School programs
I had the extremely difficult task of locating before school care for my children in the fall of
2006. It took me a couple of months but luckily, I found care at the Before School Y program
at Fred A. Hamilton P. S. Fortunately enough, my children are able to catch a school bus to
John McCrae at that location.
My children also attend the After School Y program at John McCrae P. S. Has there been any
dialogue with the YMCA/YWCA to see if they will offer an after school program at Priory Park
just as they do at John McCrae? Has there been any consideration made for working parents
that may have to find new before/after school care due to this non-voluntary relocation of
students? Before school care is particularly difficult to find in the South end of Guelph. Once
again, I can’t imagine going through that stressful process yet again.
Stress/Anxiety experienced by students
I am not sure the board and specifically the Trustees fully comprehend the stress and anxiety
that John McCrae students have experienced throughout this process. My children cried as
they watched the school they loved being demolished last year. I carefully explained to them
that it would all be worth it. They would attend College Ave. for one year and return to a
brand new and improved John McCrae school in September, 2009. They slowly adjusted to
their new College Ave. environment.
Just as they seemed to be settling in quite nicely, the Central Guelph F.I. Elementary ARC
Review announced 2 scenarios for boundary realignment for September, 2010. My children
immediately started to worry that they would be the students that would be required to leave
John McCrae. I reassured them by telling them that no decisions had been made yet.
Just last week, my son got very upset at the thought of having to switch schools. He said to
me “I’m not going to be able to participate in the grade 6 garage sale, and the year-end
grade 6 air band performance and grade 6 camp.” These events may sound insignificant to
adults, but try and explain that to my ten year old son who has been looking forward to these
opportunities for many years. In addition, most of his close school friends will remain at John
McCrae under Scenario B and he will not.
4 Schools in 4 years?
It is extremely disappointing that Scenario B is requiring 145 students to switch schools three
times in a three year span. This means that this group of students will attend four different
schools during their grades K-6 school years (the previous John McCrae, College Ave., the
new John McCrae, and finally Priory Park). This September, they will be excited to return to
their new John McCrae school and then we expect them to leave it the very next year? This
certainly doesn’t appear to be solution that is in the best interests of these students.
South-end F.I. students are being displaced as a result of a previous accommodation review
Lastly, I find the entire process extremely unorganized and short-sighted. Surely, the board
was aware that King George was planning to displace grades 7 & 8 F.I. students before the
construction of the new John McCrae school. If one of their primary goals is to create K-8
February 20th to 26th, 2009
schools, why didn’t they build the new John McCrae to accommodate this? Even with this
said, I strongly feel that current John McCrae students should be grandfathered and that the
new boundaries should only affect new students entering the French Immersion program in
September, 2010. This may require some portables at John McCrae for a few years during
this transition but I truly believe this is the right thing to do. I feel quite helpless and saddened
that my children may have to leave John McCrae as a result of a decision made by a
previous, separate accommodation review.
I realize a difficult decision needs to be made but I hope the final decision will take the above
concerns into consideration.
Dear School Trustees,
1.2.3.4.
Who are we for?
Victory, Victory, Rah! Rah! Rah!
I learned to chant those words with gusto in 1940 when I was eight and we
moved to Guelph. In the sixty-nine years since, nine members of my family
have gone to Victory School. Two of my great nephews and one great niece
are enrolled there now. I do not idealize the place. Among my many vivid
memoires of my years there, some are decidedly painful. But many more are
good and I learned so much that matters to me still. For instance, I was
taught to touch-type there when I was in Grade Five, a useful skill for a
future writer.
This is the fourth time I have rewritten this letter, struggling to be
both succinct and impassioned. What am I concerned about? I am hoping that
you will not decide to turn Victory into yet another Guelph school given
over to French Immersion while many of the neighbourhood children who now
can walk to school must be bussed to Willow instead.
All nine of my family attending Victory were able to walk to school. My
siblings and I walked home for lunch as well. We were all in English
Immersion. I came up with this term last night after deciding that tacking
the word "Immersion" on to a language seems to lend it added significance
and weight. How would you like to be designated as a child in the regular
track?
I have no wish to do away with French Immersion but I see no reason for
failing to consider what English Immersion offers. We learned how to write
compositions in English. We studied and often memorized poems that woke our
love for thoughts and stories superbly expressed. We learned to spell in
English and how to parse a sentence. We sang songs, including "Waltzing
Matilda" and "Flow gently, sweet Afton." And we were encouraged to read
classic short stories and novels written in the language spoken by most of
our parents. I grew up not only to love that language but to spend my life
writing children's books in it. Are you aware that kids in French Immersion
are not allowed to check my books out of their school library because they
February 20th to 26th, 2009
are not written in French?
Many children must travel to school on a bus because that is the only way to
get them there. What does it matter if children are bussed to school
unnecessarily? Surely that is obvious. They do not have the chance to
experience their environment or make friends with others in their community.
They don't stop to gaze at a rainbow or scrunch through Fall leaves. Trees
seen on a computer monitor do not become their friends. If they are inside a
bus, they can't catch snowflakes on their tongues. If they are being
bullied, they cannot readily escape if they are trapped inside a bus.
I realize that the world has changed since I first went to Victory
in 1940. In lots of ways, it has changed for the better. I cannot imagine
schools today sending the boys in Grade Five off to have swimming lessons
while the girls sat in the classroom and sewed. Mind you, there was only one
swimming pool in town then. There was no school library then. There was no
gym either.
As for French, none of us learned any of it until we went to high school. I
studied it for five years and today retain almost nothing. We clearly
started too late. Yet I spoke Chinese fluently until I was seven. Everyone
around us, except for a few missionaries, spoke it. And I now know only a
handful of words. I can say "Bad child!" and sing "Jesus loves me." I would
hope that the children in Guelph who are in French Immersion graduate with
a sound knowledge of the language and hold onto it into adult life. I would
be extremely interested in learning how well they do statistically. My
guess is that their program costs us tax payers significantly more than the
English instruction does. Yet a language that is not used constantly in the
child's environment is almost always lost.
We live in a bilingual country which stresses the richness of
multiculturalism. Shouldn't this be reflected in our educational
institutions? When I hear of schools being turned over to French Immersion
it sounds like segregation to me. How do we bridge the "two solitudes" if
we sort the kids out by the language in which they are being taught?
Already, at Victory, there are six French Immersion kindergartens to one
"Regular Track". What is this saying to the children?
Think carefully as you make these decisions. Don't shift the children around
like puppets. These are hard times economically but our children should not
have to pay the price for our mistakes.
Can you tell that, once upon a time, my mother was Chairman of the Board of
Education?
February 20th to 26th, 2009
To ARC members:
This letter concerns the Central Guelph Elementary (FI) Accommodation Review, and
specifically the scenarios for North Guelph (Scenarios 1 and 2). I have some issues which I
would like to raise that concern Victory Public School and the Exhibition Park community in
which it is located.
I find myself struggling with the fact that there has been so much concern and involvement on
the part of the Victory School community in this public review process and yet the decisions
being made for our children and community seem to be overwhelmingly based on short term
projection enrollment figures.
Upon notification of the proposed scenarios for North Guelph in this review, the Victory
community immediately rallied together to organize a parent group to hear what everyone was
thinking in terms of their desires for this community and its school. The community held
meetings for people that could attend, delivered surveys to receive input, and put together an
email account where people could exchange comments. It was important to ensure everyone
had a way to provide input at any time and it is not a surprise that so many have found
themselves immersed in this issue. There was an overwhelming consensus that the community
wishes to keep Victory Public School dual-track, both from regular track and french immersion
families, and as important as it is to everyone, the group proceeded to make their opinions
heard through all avenues possible in order to ensure the ARC members understood what this
school means to our community.
Victory Public School has been a cornerstone of the Exhibition Park community for close to a
century, and has greatly contributed to a neighbourhood cohesion rarely found elsewhere and
often sought after. Families move to this community for many reasons, including the presence
of a great walkable school to which they can send their children for their elementary years.
They are not a transient population and have a strong interest in maintaining this community
and all it stands for - it is a healthy and friendly place to raise children. The community’s
involvement in the school, including those numerous parent volunteers, is outstanding, and
one which has certainly contributed to the achievements of our students, both in and out of
the classroom. If Victory Public School were to be open to only one stream of students, I fear
it will segregate this community and break down much that we have strived to maintain and
build stronger for close to a century.
We realize that not all guiding principles of this accommodation review are likely to be
upheld under any scenario, including our preferred scenario 1. With that understanding, it is
imperative that you realize that having a community school is more important to the families in
this neighbourhood than it is that a particular guiding principle be met. In particular, the
students at Victory Public School continue to have good student outcomes, despite the number
of split-level classes. That is not to say that we don’t believe in those principles, but given the
choice, we prefer to have this school remain dual-track. It is a natural phenomenon to have
fluctuating enrollments, and for decades you have allowed Victory to manage these
fluctuations, with some students added from other areas within the city, and remain open to all
students in this walkable community.
February 20th to 26th, 2009
Given the Victory community input during this review process, all that we can do now is hope
that the ARC will not base their decision between the north end scenarios solely on numbers.
We are a united community that has worked hard to maintain and build stronger what we
have, including the school that brings together our children from down the street and around
the corner, no matter what stream of education they are enrolled. Please don’t create barriers
where there have not been any for close to a century. I truly fear that segregating our children
will segregate our community.
Dear Mr. Borden and other members of the board;
We are very concerned parents of a senior kindergarten student in John McCrae (JMC).
Leaving alone the more personal fact that our child will have to undergo several school
changes, while knowing that multiple school changes can (as scientifically evidenced)
negatively affect a child, we are actually quite dismayed by the fact that the least supported
option by John McCrae (JMC) parents, the so called "Scenario B", is now being regarded as
the only option.
It is our understanding that Priory Park has a very small number of students and is currently a
dual track system with a “normal” English as well as an ESL program. This arrangement has
some challenges in itself, but to add a French immersion program, while it may undoubtedly
solve the logistical problem you face, will leave a small group of students poorly served.
Looking at research that is available about the effect of multiple tracks, this will be quite a
disadvantage for ALL the students concerned, the new ones that have to move from JMC as
well as the students currently attending Priory Park. Choosing a school is a significant decision
for a family, and all the factors that led us to choose JMC are now out the window. We would
have appreciated, if by the time we enrolled our child at JMC, that we would have been made
aware that our child might have to switch schools repeatedly. I assure you we would have
chosen a different school. Sadly, if Scenario B is to be the final decision, we will most likely
choose an English track program for our child simply for the sake of stability.
Another sad aspect of the moving around is that we will loose our place in the “after school
program” – a spot that was very hard to come by and much sought after.
Even though Scenario B in its current form may be acceptable to a larger number of parents,
it places a small but still significant number of students at a serious disadvantage, which, to
our knowledge, is against the UGDSB regulations.
Understandably, the French immersion program needs to expand in the South end, but
consider variations of Scenario B like FI Grades 7 & 8 at Priory Park, or building portables at
John McCrae until the existing JMC students have completed the elementary program and
start a FI program in a school larger then Priory Park. The current Scenario B is a significant
disadvantage for the children affected by it and we would appreciate the attention of the
members of the Accommodation Review Committee to this matter.
I am one of the parents extremely concerned about the displacement of children from John
McCrae. I have seen all the various Scenario's proposed and must voice that I am strongly
opposed to Scenario B that puts the students in Priory Park.
>
February 20th to 26th, 2009
I certainly hope that you will defer any recommendation on Scenario B until all facts and
concerns from the Priory Park parents about the special needs of their community and
the delivery of a quality ESL program have been heard. As I understand that the process calls
for all parents and communities to be heard and that this has not yet happened.
>
I am hopeful that the best scenario for the FI children will be the one that prevails!
Hi,
I am a John Macrae parent of an Sk child, and I wanted to bring to your attention the
research I have found on dual-track education. I also want to provide a few suggestions.
I am 100% against scenerio 'B'. It goes against what immersion is supposed to be. Unless you
can only transfer older immersion students to Priory who are already purposely implementing
english into their program(earlier year immersion students are given 100% immersion)
anything less cannot be called french immersion-it isn't adequate to what the other schools are
offering for their earlier students. There isn't enough control over the amount of french or
english they are receiving.
Thank you for taking the time to consider what I am about to say. I realize this is becoming
something of a heated issue, but I hope the facts and logic still manages to surface.
RESEARCH:
According to a study by Micheal Parkin, entitled, 'But Do They Speak French? A Comparison
of French Immersion Programs in Immersion Only and English/Immersion Settings', "Teacher's
reports indicated that students from immersion center schools spoke more French outside of
the classroom compared to students from the partial (dual track) immersion programs. It is
concluded that... in the teachers' minds there is little question that the immersion center is the
more advantagous environment".
According to Lapkin et al(1981), introducing French immersion students to a dual track
english school has been shown to not only provide a lower level of french education, but also
lowers the french student's english skills.
According to the Centre for Research and Consultation, Winnipeg (Manitoba), 1983,
although French immersion groups obtained lower results in French language proficiency than
students whose native language is French, the early total immersion program in an immersion
setting produces the best results. Intermediate and late total immersion programs also yielded
positive results. It is suggested that the program type and setting influence French language
development, with students in an immersion setting and in a total immersion program
obtaining higher scores than those in an English setting or in a partial immersion program".
According to Frances E. Aboud et al. (1981), " Overall findings(when comparing french and
english dual-track schools) were that students had more companions from their own than the
other ethno-linguistic group". Bullying was most prevailent between students from the different
language groups, which were not general in nature but attack specifically aimed toward the
other person's language being studied. These types of attacks were also reported by the
students to be the most emotionally harmful in comparison to other types of bullying.
February 20th to 26th, 2009
NEEDS OF ALL STUDENTS THAT WILL BE NEGLECTED:
*Amongst all of this change, I hope the handicapped population will receive one single move
that will minimize change in their lives.
ESL students need: (regular English track population students need these as well)
-An english atmosphere.
-English teachers/students/hallway posters/signs
-English speaking at recess/in hallways/in school gatherings in the gym/auditorium
-English library rich in resources
-English geared staffing team who organizes school projects and lessons towar English
learning
ESL students dont need:
-Another language playing over the announcements.
-French version of those points listed above.
French students need:
-An french atmosphere.
-french teachers/students/hallway posters/signs
-french speaking at recess/in hallways/in school gatherings in the gym/auditorium
-french library rich in resources
-french taught gym classes and french lead outings/feild trips
-french geared staffing team who organizes school projects and lessons toward English
learning
French students don't need:
-Another language playing over the announcements.
-English version of those points listed above.
SUGGESTIONS:
-Concern has been shown by ARC that putting the South Guelph 7/8s FI students at Priory
Park instead of the JK – 6s would put FI 7/8s would be over 50% of the population. Principles
thought that this would not make a good school environment for the JK-6s. I am concerned
about the school's recognition and sympathy toward the consequeces of blending students
who have such great age diferences, yet are not expressing any concern toward belnding even
greater and more detrimental differences: language. Compared to the issue of interrupting
immersion programs for ESL or French speaking students, any issues invovled in moving
grades 7/8 to Priory Prk will be resolved by giving them a seperate recess time. By grade 7/8
it is not as important to play french on announcements or to have the shcool be 100% french
speaking becaue they are at a point then where English language is being streamed into their
educations more and more. It meshes better than introducing young children who are
supposed tobe 100% immersed.
-Displace english speaking students to other english speaking schools, and french students to
other french speaking schools. Any will do. At this point it isn't fair to be picky if our children
are gaurenteed a french immersion non -dual track school.
-Remove english speaking students from Priory Park school and create a new french
immersion school. Grades 6 7 8 (or even add grade 5) would be suitable, OR another junior
school(jk-5jk 6). There will be extra space but it will be NEEDED. WHen all of the other junior
February 20th to 26th, 2009
french immersion schools need to merge their students into middle school, the space will be
available.
SOURCES
1.French Immersion Programmes in Manitoba: An Evaluation of Grades 6 and 9. Final
Report.
Source
Report: ED253109. 124pp. Nov 1983
2. International Journal of Behavioral Development
2007, 31 (5), 445–453
http://www.sagepublications.com
© 2007 The International Society for the
Study of Behavioural Development
DOI: 10.1177/0165025407081469
Friendship and identity in a language-integrated school
3. Frances E. Aboud and Janani Sankar-1981
#
# Title: The Immersion Centre and the Dual-Track School: A Study of the Relationship
between School Environment and Achievement in a French Immersion Program
# Author(s): Sharon Lapkin, Christine M. Andrew, Birgit Harley, Merrill Swain, Jill Kamin
# Source: Canadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l'éducation, Vol. 6, No. 3
(1981), pp. 68-90
# Publisher(s): Canadian Society for the Study of Education
# Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1494656
4. Lapkin, Sharon;1981 The Immersion Centre and the Dual-Track School: A Study of the
Relationship between School Environment and Achievement in a French Immersion Program.
Canadian Journal of Education, v6 n3 p68-90 1981
As the parent of a student currently enrolled in John McCrae, I am considerably concerned by
the scenarios proposed for solving the problems with FI boundaries. Scenario B, as I
understand it, presents a whole host of problems for a lot of students. These problems
(already presented in previous public meetings) are substantiated by considerable
research, which demonstrates that Scenario B should not be considered as a viable option.
Decisions need to be guided largely on RESEARCH; I have a new concern in this
area regarding mixing ESL, FI, and regular schooling in Priory Park. In my view, this would
dilute the efficacy of all three programs, making the educational gains for students in both
extreme areas (ESL and FI) much less (this does not include the developmental class also
currently at that location).
Unless there is compelling educational research possessed by the committee that indicates
running a program designed to immerse students in French as a new language does not
negatively impact students in a program designed to immerse them in English as a new
language and vice versa, common sense indicates this makes NO sense. All programs will
suffer; more importantly, the children who are in those programs to learn vital information
February 20th to 26th, 2009
specific to their educational language of choice will suffer. Doesn't that fly directly in the face
of the intention of our educational system? Shouldn't the committee put educational value at
the top of its priorities?
Accomodate the children as we must; shift boundaries as we must; and I accept that these
things must be done in a changing city with shifting demographics. But if those changes come
at the COST OF EDUCATIONAL MERIT, they should not be made.
Dear Trustees,Chair of the Board and Parent Representatives for ARC:
I am writing in concern over the ARC Review Update for Parents notice I received this
afternoon in my SK child’s ‘sac en plastic’. I thought that more time was being given to visit
a variety of options and provide opportunity for parent/family input from all affected children,
over the decision to relocate a portion of the south-end children to a different school.
It is thus surprising to find that the decision has been made, when we were lead to believe
our voices were actually being heard. As a result, my family feels quite jaded and
disenfranchised over this process. In response to the parent concerns and the ARC
comments found on the back cover of this sheet, I have the following further comments to
add.
1) Scenario A and B were originally proposed, recognizing that scenario A (FI
centre at FA Hamilton) was the best option upholding the principles of John
McCrae and French Immersion. Unfortunately, this scenario was too pinned to a
school place, rather than the concept of a new immersion centre on the
south-end. As FA Hamilton families made engaging and persuasive arguments
against scenario A, this option was removed from the table. Unfortunately, this
left only the ‘band-aid’ scenario B. I view scenario B as a band-aid for
many reasons, but foremost is that that south-end is growing and currently only
one piece of the south-College students are being moved out of the JMC family.
As the south-end grows (and based on my understanding the estimates of growth
for FI have been underestimates to date), more FI students will end up at JMC
and you will be in this situation again in 3-5 years. Thus it is a band-aid
solution to a significant problem of FI education in Guelph.
My second concern is that the research is being cited inaccurately. Yes-- the
literature does state that a dual track school when attention is paid to FI
principles is equivalent to an FI centre (as a colleague of mine at the
University has confirmed). However, what is being proposed in scenario B is not
dual track, but potentially 3 or 4 track. Secondly the research does not support
two specialized programs (FI and ESL) in the same site, but rather one or the
other with a regular school program. You are essentially setting up two or more
‘special needs’ programs of disenfranchised families that you don’t know
how to deal with.
2) Thank you for clarifying that it is 145 and not 120 students that are being
affected. This provides further credence to my comment 1) that FI is growing and
a south-end centre is the more appropriate and well-thought out option here,
rather than the band-aid.
February 20th to 26th, 2009
3) If kept within the FI family, my child will not only have started a
different school 4 times in 4 years, but she is also going to be exposed to
split classes. The literature also indicates that spilt classes, dependent on
the teacher, can be a benefit to students. However, you can’t guarantee that
these superlative teachers will be at Priory Park for the six years of my
child’s primary school education, or that she will not be in a spilt
grade for each year.
4) It seems that the band-aid of scenario B is a result of poor decisions from
the beginning, which include only reviewing 7 schools in this current ARC.
5) Loss of community and family- this is the crux of the problem isn’t it?
How much of your FI “family” are you willing to sacrifice for what you
believe to be the greater good of JMC? Is one child’s early experience and
formative education enough for the Trustees and board to say we must uphold our
principles-- or is it 50, 145, 250? In my view, ‘no one should be left
behind’.
As a university professor who knows the challenges of teaching and attempting
to accommodate all, I know that you are working hard to find the best solution.
However, for me it always comes back to the principles—what am I trying to
teach here? I am disappointed to find that the FI principles have been so
readily abandoned, as have these students. Because of all of these concerns
and the decisions made to date, I will be removing my daughter from FI and
sending her to a private or separate school this fall.
Greetings Bob,
I was encouraged to send my opinion about the school review process.
Teacher agree with it as well, that Priory Park should have never been converted into a K-8
format. Simply put it: The school is not big enough to run a program for the 7-8's.
Please represent our opinion, to convert it back to K-6 model, as soon as the coming
September 2009 school year.
Hello,
I heard that scenario B is now the preferred option for the south end FI review. My concern
remains how you will ensure adequate programming, lab space, an enriched learning
environment, a wide variety of social/sports groups and so on in the the new John McCrae
location with only half of the total 7/8 FI cohort of Guelph.
Most parents of 7/8 kids prefer to have all of the city's 7/8 FI kids in one location to open up
their horizon in a truly enriching way.