February 11th to February 19th, 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.
I'd like to share some concerns with the ARC that I feel have not yet been addressed. I am a
parent of two children currently in the primary grades in Victory's english program, and I
obviously do not want them to lose their school. I am also an active resident in my
neighbourhood, and I feel that the loss of this program will have negative consequences in the
Exhibition Park community for many years. Here is my reasoning:
1.) At the public meeting on January 21st, Ms. Steplock stated that Willow Road is lacking an
appropriate number of elementary students to make the guiding principals of a K-8 model
school work. In reading the report, it is apparent that Willow could use an additional one
hundred students to balance the enrolment, which is coincidentally the number of Victory
english students that would be displaced. However, while this may be a short term solution,
the long term effects would be unsatisfactory. In speaking with a number of parents, it is
apparent that the option of busing children out of their neighbourhood, as stated before, is
unacceptable, and as a result, many people would transfer their kids into the Catholic,
private, or even the french immersion stream. A number of parents have even stated that they
would move. One family that I know of had put an offer in on a house in this neighbourhood,
and consequently withdrew it once they were aware of this accomodation review, as their
children were too old to switch to the french track, and they were moving here for the
neighbourhood school. The last I heard, they were looking for a home on the other side of
London Road (Central school). Why would families choose this neighbourhood if their kids
that are older than JK in the english track, have to get on a bus to go to school? It would be
difficult to attract any new families from other parts of the city (where FI is not offered) to move
here. While these numbers do work beautifully on paper, and Willow road is a great school
that all of these children will end up in anyway for intermediate programming, the actual
results may not coalesce into what the board had planned, and Willow could end up with the
same numbers they have today.
2.)If the english children are removed from Victory, it is logical to assume that most new
families in the area would choose french immersion to keep their kids in their neighbourhood
school. Also, current trends suggest that the west end population is continuing to grow each
year as well. Has this committee explored what would happen if the numbers became too
large with the unlimited increase of kids from such a large geographic area? If a french
immersion program were to be introduced in the west end, such as at Gateway school, would
the remaining students at Victory comprise a sustainable french immersion program? Would
the school then have to close as a result?
3.)If it is not possible to maintain both schools, Victory and Paisley, as dual track, would it not
then be the best use of resources to create a JK-8 French Immersion centre at one school so
that the funds could be used in the most efficient manner. I do not want to see the children at
Paisley displaced by this review either, but if we are looking at long term solutions to this
problem, perhaps we need to look down the road so that another review does not become
necessary for the population at Paisley. What if french immersion takes off at that school
because parents choose FI to eliminate the need for two different schools from JK-8, and the
english kids there get squeezed out due to poor enrolment. Just a thought.
February 11th to February 19th, 2009
4.)When the children at Edward Johnson were displaced a few years ago, I believe the parents
were given a sheet where they could check off their choice of three schools to be relocated to.
The tone in which Central was introduced to this review suggests that the ARC is not thrilled
about looking at options that would involve juggling boundaries to make this work. Is it a
possibility that a boundary could be created to allow the displaced Victory kids to attend either
Central or June Ave school to continue the walkable, neighbourhood school guiding
principle? Perhaps a dividing line of residents on one side of Victory attending Central, and
residents on the other attending June Ave? I understand that Central's population is doing
well, and does not require adjustment, but I fail to see how the addition of fifty students
(probably less if my previous postulations are correct) to either school could cause a
significant problem.
Thank you for your consideration of my thoughts.
Sincerely,
SCHOOLS IN THE CENTRE OF THEIR CATCHMENT AREA
----------------School Boards have a responsibility to the Ministry that funds them to be fiscally responsible
but they also have a responsibility to the students and the communities they represent. I accept
that this is not always an easy balance to attain but if you lose sight of the big picture you
will have failed your constituents.
Healthy communities are made up of healthy responsible people. This requires an active
involved supportive group of people who feel connected to their environment. Schools play an
important role in this. They along with the parents, model for our children the values of the
community. Environmental concerns, knowing and caring for our neighbours, responsibility,
independence, respect and accountability are all very important values for our children to
develop and adopt.
The importance of the school as the geographic centre of it's catchment area reflects these
values. Children who can walk to school, walk to their friend's houses and live within their
neighbourhood grow up less dependant on their parents driving them everywhere. They are
less likely to spend their free time entertaining themselves sitting in front of screens if they have
friends within walking distances. They can develop some independence and responsibility
within a safe environment. They are also less likely to become obese and have weight related
health problems. Children who hang out in their own neighbourhood are known to their
neighbours and their actions are not anonymous. They can be called to task for misbehaviour
and taught to be accountable for their mishaps. Parent can be more involved at a
school situated close to where they walk, shop and live. The placement of schools can be
central to the building of a healthy involved community around it.
The reorganization involved in closing programs in certain schools is certainly an emotional
issue for many involved. Suffice it to say that no child wants to be moved from his/her familiar
school and friends. Let us remember that every school in Guelph services some needy children
and every school in Guelph prides itself on providing a good education to children. However
our schools and the Board that provides for them have a responsibility to the community
within which the school reside.
February 11th to February 19th, 2009
Basing decisions to close programs solely on current numbers and trends can be very
shortsighted. Many unpredicted events like financial downturns can have significant effects on
community projections and may require repeated accommodation and boundary reviews for
the same areas. The idea of busing children from one community to another to again address
the numbers can lead to further issues of imbalance and is not a sustainable model. Victory
Public School's current overpopulation and imbalance is resultant from this type of planning.
We need you to base your decisions on sound long term principles that not only reflect the
fiscal and programing needs of a school but also the needs of the community.
The steering committee has been asked to present viable options that reflect the Board's
guiding principles. The AR committee members have been given the difficult job of trying to
represent the parents' best interest to the Board. You as the trustees that represent your
constituents wishes, have been elected to manage our tax dollars but to also protect our
communities. Please do not lose sight of this.
I am writing this to you, the Trustees, the members of the Steering Committee and the AR
Committee members now prior to the outcome of the ARC committee's deliberations because
I fear that if we don't step back and strongly consider the principles important to a healthy
community we will be doing a disservice to our city at large.
Thank you for your consideration,
V.P.S. parent
Dear Arc Committee,
My daughter is currently a student (senior kindergarten) in the french immersion program at
Victory public school. I have a son that will be entering the french immersion program in the
fall.
Recently, my daughter's teacher and I have determined that my daughter is not thriving in the
french program and therefore it would probably be of a benefit to her to switch to the regular
track program in the fall. My initital reaction is to keep her in the french program so that she
may remain at Victory. This is the school that she is familiar with; it is part of her community.
This is the school that we walk past on week nights and weekends, her friends that she plays
with on the weekends are at this school, she goes to Victory kid's club before and after school
and she talks about how she is going to help her younger brother when he attends the FI
program at Victory. This will be lost if she has to switch to Willow Road public school.
Of course there is also the inconvenience for our family of finding before and after school
care for our daughter if the regular track classes are moved to Willow Road. Not to mention
that our children will be at two different schools and attending two different before and after
school programs.
But I cannot keep my daughter in the french immersion program for convenience sake if she's
not thriving, just as I am unable to deny my son the opportunity to enter the FI program
because his sister will be in the english program.
February 11th to February 19th, 2009
When the committee is studying the proposed numbers of attendance in each program for the
future, are you taking into account the attrition numbers?
I understand that this is a very hard and emotional process that the committee has to perform
but on the other hand, this is a very emotional process for the families being affected as well.
Thank you,
Good Afternoon Accommodation Review Committee and UGDSB members,
I want to point out that I find it “curious” that since November there has been posted only one
set of minutes that accurately reflects the name of this review.
Could someone answer why the FI (French Immersion) has been deleted from the title in the
minutes for November, December, January and February? The only date that I noted with FI
included was on January 14th. Is it not the French Immersion students that were slotted to go
to King George who now have no school?
Would it not seem a more common sense approach to look at programming first? Shouldn’t
programming be first priority when weighing all considerations? What do you want the
outcome to be for the students at the end of Grade 8? How can this be provided? What
programs will offer this? What teachers will be needed? What resources and space will be
needed to meet this outcome? What will it cost? Then look at what facility will best allow for
this outcome. Surely not portables, split classes and limited resources. My feeling is that the
emotional side of this decision, the softer things likes walk-ability and community
cohesiveness, friends in the area, pride in our schools, the price of homes in the area if a
school is dual versus single track etc. should come secondary to the education that will be
provided to our students- this HAS to be first priority!
This is not about just finding a space to put them; there has to be thought into the
programming that will be offered our students. I do hope that all students whether in an
immersion program or not, will have equal access to education- if education in French can
not be equal to that in English then the program should not be offered at all. To quote
another’s response, there needs to be a level playing field, not a 2 tiered system. French
immersion parents are not asking for better resources, better teachers, better facilities then
what the English students will receive, but we do want the same for our children.
I find it very distressing that this process has been handled in such a way that it has pitted
parents against parent and English against French when all anyone wants is HOPEFULLY the
best EDUCATION for ALL children.
Look forward to seeing the final outcome; regardless of whether I agree with it. I respect the
efforts of all of those on the ARC and their combined and individual struggles to put together
a recommendation, one that I hope the Board takes seriously.
Sincerely,
Hi Mr. Borden,
I am writing with reference to the ongoing Accommodation Review. I currently have children
enrolled at Priory Park school. It is my understanding that Priory Park is under consideration
February 11th to February 19th, 2009
for a dual track French Immersion/English program. I know that there has been some concern
about this consideration and I would like to lend my support to those concerns:
there is a real possibility that the Priory Park community reflects a higher demand for
English as a Second Language programs than for a French Immersion program
apparently there is an increased demand for French Immersion in the south end of
Guelph and I believe that this would argue for a south end location (and less busing)
according to our Priory Park ARC representatives, John McCrae and Priory Park
already nicely meet the needs of both English and French Immersion students within
their catchment area
with reference to any enrollment concerns at Priory Park, I think the suggestion to
include the two nearby student housing communities within the Priory Park catchment
area has a lot of merit
Thanks for taking on the role of chairing the Accommodation Review and for taking the time
to consider the above concerns. Please feel free to contact me if you have any comments or
questions.
Last week I attended a John McCrae School Council meeting; thank you to everyone for an
opportunity to "hear and be heard" in regards to John McCare-related accomodation
scenarios. I would like to make a couple of points regarding this important matter:
John McCrae school is a French Immersion centre where students are surrounded by
French language and have a great opportunity to acquire it;
Parents of John McCrae children appreciate this learning environment, and so do the
children;
While the parents understand that there is a need to better use the existing space in
the schools (included in the Accomodation Review) in the south end of Guelph, it
should not happen at the cost of quality of education;
LEAST SUPPORTED by John McCrae (JMC) parents, so called "Scenario B" would see
about 145 students currently enrolled at JMC moved to a French Program at Priory
Park Public School; THIS SCENARIO IS NOW THE ONLY ONE ON THE TABLE;
All available information - scientific research, publications and experience from others
- clearly indicates that a French Program at Priory Park would be too small and as
such would not provide a good opportunity for students' immersion in French;
If a French Program needs to be created somewhere in the south end of Guelph
please don't do this at the expense of the children who happen to reside "at the wrong
side of the fence";
While Scenario B, as currently described, may be acceptable to majority, it places a
minority of students at serious disadvantage and sacrifices them for the "greater good";
Can there be any good greater than equal educational opportunities for all children at
UGDSB?
Please consider amendments/revisions to Scnario B that would share the burden of
growing a French Program in the South Guelph among all FI students in this part of
the city;
As such, please consider the following: FI Grades 7 & 8 at Priory Park
Building portables at John McCrae until an appropriate solution for another FI in
South Guelph can be found;
"Grandfather" existing John McCrae students;
February 11th to February 19th, 2009
Bring Another school into the review that would allow for a larger FI program in South
Guelph;
Any of these scenarios is better than current Scenario B that simply does not give a chance to
children living in the affected areas.
I appreciate your time and attention to this important matter. I would kindly ask that you
share this e-mail with other members of the Accomodation Review Committee and/or anyone
else involved in the south end accomodation decision-making. Sincerely,
(John McCrae parent)