January 27th to January 30th
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.
Dear Bob
At the January 21st public meeting I asked a question regarding the Guidelines that the Board
is applying to evaluate proposed scenarios under the Central Guelph Accommodation
Review. Specifically, I wanted to know:
1. WHY was the Guideline limiting the number of 7/8 classes in a JK-8 school to 35% or 3-5
classes adopted? It was based on research in a report from Grant Evans, a consultant the
Board hired to bring forth what eventually became the guidelines. A copy of that report can be
obtained from our Planning and Program departments.
2. WHAT was the nature, scope, and context of the "public input" regarding this? I believe that
Dennis answered this at the public meeting. I wasn't part of the consultation process, but I
recall him saying that it was an open invitation format that involved 15 to 20 parents from
around Guelph in a workshop format.
I was referred to the website to look up the 2004 report which addresses this issue. I have not
been able to find this report on the website, or any data relating to my two questions above.
So I would like to repeat my questions, and I would appreciate further directions for finding
the relevant information.
Thank you for your assistance
In addition to Bob's responses to your questions, a link has been provided below for you to
read the information on the 2004 report which provides the context for the guiding principles
and the public consultation process that occurred. This report is on the Board website under
the Central Guelph Review -it is called "Clarification Report on Central Guelph (FI) Elementary
Accommodation Review Report #1."
http://www1.ugdsb.on.ca/departments/planning/CentralGuelph/Memo14.pdf
Greetings,
I am e-mailing you concerning the proposed changes to John McCrae school. I am
wondering if you have considered making Priory Park the new middle school (7 & 8) thus
allowing the McCrae students (JK-6) to remain together. They have been through a great
deal already with the move this year - and again next year - and it would be nice to have
everyone settled in and familiar with a school that is going to be 'theirs' for the duration of
their primary years.
I am told that the school population at Priory Park is quite small - and I am sure Fred A.
Hamilton would welcome new students if it meant that they could keep their school. I am not
keen on having a 'dual track system' as I have heard from other parents who have children in
this system, that there is great segregation amongst the 'English' and 'French' speaking children
- not something that I wish to expose my children to. One of the things that appealed to me
January 27th to January 30th
about John McCrae was that it was a full French Immersion school. If some of the McCrae
students MUST be re-located, I would much prefer to see Priory Park or Fred A. made into a
full French Immersion school - extend the boundaries and don't have a few going to Edward
Johnson - I know that these parents are quite worried about this proposal as there are so few
who would be moving to E.J.. Instead, if students from McCrae MUST move, let's have a
second full immersion school either at Fred A. or Priory.
Thanks for listening,
Dear Accommodation Review Committee and UGDSB Trustees,
I am writing to express my deep concern with the direction of the Central Guelph
accommodation review process. In particular, the notion that Scenario ‘B’ is even being
considered an acceptable option is very discouraging.
As a parent of two young children (one currently enrolled in Kindergarten at John McCrae,
and another set to begin Junior Kindergarten at John McCrae in September), I truly appreciate
the quality of French Immersion education available within a school that fully immerses its
children in the French language.
The proposal to pull 120 children out of the highly regarded John McCrae curriculum and
place them in a JK-6 Dual track stream at Priory Park is unfair to the affected children and
runs counter to seven of the Board’s 13 guiding principles. Such a scenario will undoubtedly
affect the quality of French Immersion education these displaced children receive, and this is
not acceptable. Quality of French Immersion education for all children must be paramount.
Scenario ‘B’ does not take this into account.
Recently, I had a conversation with a parent who teaches at the elementary level in Guelph.
This individual commented that if Scenario ‘B’ were to be approved, they would remove their
children from the French Immersion program altogether. Comments such as these, from our
own educators no less, inspire zero confidence in the Accommodation Review Committee
assertions that an effective dual-track school can be created at Priory Park.
I would also like to add that the concerns expressed by the Fred A. Hamilton parent-body are
also valid. Displacing English students who currently attend this school and dividing them
amongst three other area schools, as proposed under Scenario ‘A’ is hardly palatable for
those families affected.
I urge all decision-makers in the accommodation review process to consider alternate
scenarios, beyond the ‘A’ and ‘B’ scenarios currently proposed. Maintaining John McCrae as
a JK-6 French Immersion centre, and moving the Grade 7/8 program currently existing at
King George to a different venue in 2010 would be a very logical option, with less of an
impact than either of the current proposals. I am certain that additional options exist; options
that value the French education experience of all children equally.
Sincerely,
January 27th to January 30th
Dear Mr. Borden.
I am a parent of 2 Priory Park students and I am hoping that you and the ARC committee
can answer a question for me. I was told by another principal that resource people (eg.
specifically english resource support) is available in english track schools only. My questions
are related to that statement.
1) is that statement true - that there is no english support/resource people in a FI school?
What about in a dual track school?
2) if a resource person can be in a dual track school, is this based on total school population
or based on english track population only?
thank you
Trustee Borden passed your inquiries along to me.
1.
Resource support is more commonly delivered in French in a single track school,
although English support is available. More English support tends to happen at the Junior
level. FI students would have access to support in both English and French in a dual track
school. Student needs are prioritized and generally, students on an IEP (Individualized
Education Plan) would be resourced first.
2.
Special Education teacher time is allocated based on the needs presented by students
at the school overall. Fewer French Immersion students have IEP's than English track students.
Hope this is helpful. Feel free to call me if you require any further clarification.
Heather
Heather Boswell
Superintendent of Program
Upper Grand District School Board
Orangeville (519) 941-6191 Ext 240
Guelph
(519) 822-4420 Ext 729