November 26th to December 12th
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 Borden,
I attended the meeting on Wednesday and the one speaker raised views I have never even
thought about before. I know a lot of parents this year who's children have had such a
positive experience with the programs offered at King George. So positive that I am excited
for each student in the future to be able to receive. Whether it be in French or English.
Willow has developed too a wonderful program for the grade 7 and 8's. This program will
continue to run but there has been no plan on continuing these programs for the french
program.
This is not about losing a 7&8 French Immersion school but it is about the 7&8 losing a
program!!!
Fact: King George is closing.
Fact: There will not be a 7&8 school program offered to the French Immersion program. The
English program will continue and the 7&8 English will continue to have a music program with
a specialized teacher, labs, specialized art teacher at Willow Road.
Under the current proposals, grade 7/8 French students will lose the science lab, arts
programs, specialist teachers, and extra-curricular activities that now exist at King George,
and become a much reduced elementary program incorporated into a JK-8 school. All FI
students will be affected by these changes, regardless of the school they now attend, and
parents of younger children will see the effects down the road. Even if you are a parent of a
kindergarten this will effect your child. We are losing a program.
Making you aware of what we are losing and to stress we take action and plan ahead so
programs will be in place once our children make the transition.
I am not sure of a plan but wanted to share with you my concern about the 7&8 program that
was so ideal at King George. It was a 50/50 split of French and English children. With over
300 children in 7&8. The teachers were able to focus on this large group and plan programs
just for their age group. These teachers did focus on their age group and developed amazing
programs, numerous extra curricular activities that ran before school, during lunch and after
school. How can we offer this kind of focus to a group of grade 7/8 which #'s are only 50
(approximately) These programs gave the students their independence so they were
established before arriving to high school.
What do we do??? Great question...
Information Received – thank you
November 26th to December 12th
HELLO AGAIN,
I still have not heard back from you regarding my request for information (see email below)
dated November 10, 2008. I realise it may take time to pull together the information, so I
was wondering if you could give me an estimated time for response? It seems to me that this is
critical information as the committee wrestles with this very issue at Victory and Paisley Road.
I also have a couple of follow-up questions –
First, since the Board has gone though the process of converting two schools (Edward Johnson
and John McCrae) from dual-track to single track, could we not collect information on the
“success” of those changes to the community? Even a simple questionnaire to parents of the
affected schools asking about the transition process, their current satisfaction and
recommendations for improvements to the process in the future could provide valuable
information to committee on the real impacts (positive and negative) of their
recommendations?
Answer: Fortunately, we have reps from both John McCrae, Priory Park and Edward Johnson
on the Accommodation Review Committee who are there to represent these communities and
provide the other members of the ARC with this perspective.
Second, at the November 19th Public Meeting, Deb Steplock responded to a question
regarding programming. She indicated that programming was the central issue of the AR and
pointed to the analysis instrument as a demonstration of this. However, when I look at the
analysis instrument section entitled “program considerations” I do not understand how the
criteria listed have much if anything to do with actual programming. It seems more a checklist
of how well the scenario meets the Board’s guidelines (4 considerations) and numbers (2
considerations – dual track balance and Number of schools a child needs to attend). I
recognize that the grade-level teaching partners and specialized teaching/learning do relate
to programming, but I don’t really see how the actual programming issues are addressed. I
don’t mean to be bull-headed about this, but I truly want to understand how programming
issues will be addressed. For example, take an issue like music which is something that is very
important to many families. How would the availability of a music room and musical
instruments with a qualified teacher fit into the considerations listed? What if the school has no
music room, musical instruments or music teacher – how would the committee rate the
scenario? Or what if the school has no science and tech lab now but with the addition of
more space and/or equipment and a qualified teacher the school could add that capability –
how would that be factored into the analysis?
Answer: You make a good point. As part of the ARC discussions, it will be made clear to the
members what the K-8 curriculum requires and therefore what these K-8 schools would offer
as far as facilities, equipment and specialist teachers.
Thank you again for your time. Please provide me with an estimate of when you expect to
respond to my questions.
November 26th to December 12th
(same contributor as above)
Thank you for your responses to my questions. I have not had the time to review them in
detail but I did notice that your response did not include a copy of the statement referred to in
Report #2 (page 66) that addresses the dual stream vs. single stream benefits/drawbacks.
Could you please provide this to me. Also, your response (below) states that Research does
not seem to support one system over the other. Couple you please provide me with the
references for this research that you are referencing and let me know how/where I may obtain
copies or summaries of this research?
Answer: The statement provided below by our Program Department is the only statement that
we have regarding the benefits/drawbacks of the single stream vs. dual track organizations.
The Board's Superintendent of Program has been clear that in her attempt to explore any
documentation on the issue, there did not seem to be support for one system over another
and therefore would not be able to draw any specific conclusions regarding it. This would
corroborate our experience with the two systems in that both are working successfully in this
Board. Should the lack of clarity on this specific issue continue to be troubling to you, it is
recommended that this could be raised to Trustees through a delegation at either a Business
Operations meeting or at a Board meeting.
Fifth, please provide me with any and all documentation that has been prepared that
addresses the dual stream vs. single stream benefits/drawbacks. I would like a copy of the
“statement” that is referenced in Report #2 (page 66) and would also like the supporting
information with regard to the benefits and drawbacks.
Research does not seem to support one system over another (dual vs. single track). Decisions
are made based on geography, size of the student population, size of the school, etc.
Hello,
I am writing to inform you of the importance of Fred A. Hamilton Public School to the families
in its neighbourhood. When my family first moved into this neighbourhood from having
previously lived near a different school, we immediately noticed that a sense of community
was missing. We had lived in a townhouse complex where a park-like setting, with open
spaces and several playgrounds, encouraged families to gather outside and meet neighbours.
Children would ride their bikes on the sidewalks found within the townhouse compound,
soccer matches would spontaneously spring up, games of “grounder” and “hide and seek”
would occur, and in the winter younger children would use the small hills on the property
for sledding. All this occurred under the watchful eyes of several parents, parents who would
use the occasion to socialize and make new friendships. Often, potlucks or picnics were
organized by these parents. The property owners also encouraged the community spirit by
hosting a yearly BBQ and providing free use of its swimming pool to tenants. At these events
neighbours from throughout the vast complex would come together. My family moved to the
Fred A. Hamilton school area expecting to find a situation similar to the one which existed in
our previous neighbourhood. It was not there and the lack of neighbourhood unity created a
feeling of isolation for my family. The FAH area has a high concentration of university student
November 26th to December 12th
housing and I came to realize that it is this factor which serves as an obstacle, especially on
my street, from meeting neighbours who are not just temporary residents. So, my family had to
depend on Fred A. Hamilton Public school as the place to meet other families from the
neighbourhood. It is at FAH where my children see and play with their friends. In the summer,
the school provides a familiar and safe place for my children to ride their bikes and gather
with neighbourhood children to play on the school grounds. It is here where soccer matches
and baseball games spring up spontaneously. In the winter, children slide down the hills
around the school and skate on the ice rink created by FAH parents. As for parents like myself,
it is where I have met other people from my neighbourhood who are at the same stage in their
lives as I am. It is where I go to socialize and connect with my community. Where we had
previously lived my family never relied on the school to bring us together with neighbours. My
family lived in that area for six years and my daughter attended the local school for two and a
half years. We had a wonderful experience there and I was very active on school council yet
never did I feel that the school was the hub of our community. Our family felt part of the
neighbourhood before my daughter attended the school and it was due to the family friendly
atmosphere found in the townhouse complex. It was the complex which played the role
of uniting the families who reside in the townhouses and creating this sense of community.
Now, living in the Fred A. Hamilton school area for the past four years, I can state with firm
belief that it is the school which is the heart of our community. At Fred A. Hamilton school, my
family found the sense of community we were searching for when we moved into this
neighbourhood. Fred A. Hamilton public school brings and holds the neighbourhood
together and this is of great importance to families like my own. I am aware that children can
adapt to different schools, my daughter did so without any problems when she transferred to
Fred A. Hamilton, but the loss of a neighbourhood school, especially one like FAH which
plays a significant role in the community, has broader implications. It will negatively affect the
connections families can make with one another in the neighborhood. It is why I ask the
accommodation review committee to reject the scenario which would close Fred A. Hamilton
and turn it into a French Immersion Centre.
Sincerely,
Information Received – thank you
I am a parent of two young children that attend Priory Park Public School and I have a
question in regards to the proposal to our school. My concern is that dual track schools are
being eliminated, yet Priory Park, Scenario #2, suggests our school become a dual track.
Your goals state you are looking for a long term solution. Could you please explain the long
term benefits that scenario #2 would be for us. I do not understand how financially this
makes sense or what it will do to our numbers long term, and, would this mean displacing our
students again down the line. Some of the kids have already been displaced with the whole
John McCrae issue which wasn’t that long ago.
I appreciate your time.
In response to your email message, we would like to clarify with you that dual track schools
(or schools offering both english and french immersion programs) are not being eliminated.
The intent behind considering a scenario where a JK-6 french immersion program is being
moved to Priory Park (and therefore making the school a dual track school) was to attempt to
November 26th to December 12th
utilize the facility better due to additional space that is projected at the school, once the
Westminster Woods students move into their local school in approx 2010. According to our
projections for this scenario, the enrolment at Priory Park is projected to grow to just over 300
students in 10 years. Since the school's capacity is 272 pupil places, this could mean that 1-2
portables may be necessary on the site. Our projections do not indicate that the english
program would need to be displaced and this was not the intent of this scenario. Hopefully
this information has been helpful.
Hello,
I would like to urge the board to keep all 7/8 French Immersion students in Guelph in one
location. They could be housed in an existing building, or you could amend plans at the new
John McCrae location, or adjust any school renewal projects currently in the works (in which
case you could keep King George open for another year or two, or use College Ave).
For meaningful and varied programming to occur, we need a critical number of 7/8 students
in one location. The K-8 model may work reasonably well in the English stream, because a
larger number of 7/8 students is assured. Many English schools have up to 10 7/8 classes
and enjoy good programming as well as access to a variety of clubs, sports teams and extracurricular activities. By contrast, the FI program only has about 200 7/8 students city-wide,
and is losing the outstanding facility at King George that kept all of these students together.
If you separate this cohort and disperse them in two groups of 100 students each in a K-8
setting, we would only have about 4 classes in each location. This scenario would severely
curtail programming and dilute the 7/8 experience. It would, moreover, constitute an
unequitable treatment of French immersion students compared to their English stream
counterparts. It is deplorable enough that the French immersion community is losing the
excellent program at King George. But allowances must be made to ensure that we at least
receive programming that is on par with 7/8 programming at other schools. FI parents will not
accept an impoverishment of their children's 7/8 experience just because the currently
philosophy of the school board supports the K-8 model.
I sincerely hope that members of the review committee and the board have the vision and the
leadership to make an executive decision that makes sense, rather than trying to force the 7/8
FI cohort into a rigid model that compromises the educational experience and personal
growth of students.
Thanks kindly for you time.
Information Received – thank you
Hi Bob
We are parents of three boys. We have already been caught in a school review when John
McCrea was changed from a duel system to a single French School and English School. Our
kids were then moved to Priory Park because of the review. Our oldest son was then at Priory
for one year then moved to College Ave for two years then moved to Centennial. Now our
middle son will get through this but our youngest son will be caught in this review.
November 26th to December 12th
The proposals on the table now does NOT take into consideration that these kids have
already had to start over. They have had to learn how the new school works and all new
teachers and kids. When this change took place we where told they would be at Priory till
grade eight. Now five years later the board is doing it again, NOT thinking of the kids that
have already gone through this before, and the parents that have to learn how another school
works, and learn the new teachers again for one year.
We think you should look at another school to move around. As this review is playing out it
shows that the board does NOT have a clue on what you are doing. Because here you are
going back to a dual track system. You closed College Ave to keep the 7 & 8's at there
school, now you say there is not enough kids to make this viable. Did we lose a bunch of kids
somewhere because there was only one class of grade sevens last year and still one class of
grade 8's this year. Two years ago the proposal was to move the 7&8's to Jean Little but that
was no good because you wanted K-8 schools. Now the first batch of grade 8's are
graduating and you plan on moving the grade 7's out for there last year.
You know if the board was thinking properly you should have made Rickson Ridge a French
school and none of the other schools would be going through this mess. I would imagine the
cost of busing the French kids to this school would be no different then busing the English kids
to every other school with this review. When the new school is opened up in the south end in
2010 how is that going to effect these school now. Are you going to come back and say we
don't need one of these school and close it and move the same kids again.
In conclusion if you are going to move grade 7&8s to Jean Little how about you leave the
grade 8s next year where they are for there last year. Because when they go into grade 9 they
have a lot more adjusting to do. Another new school, a lot more students and a different
system than what they have been use to.You where able to leave College Ave with only one
grade for one year.
Parents of Priory Park
Thank you for your recent e-mail regarding the Central Guelph (FI) Accommodation Review. I
have forwarded your message to our Planning Staff so that it will be sent to all ARC members
and included in all the correspondence received from the public.
R.J. (Bob) Borden,
Trustee, Town of Orangeville and
Chair, Upper Grand District School Board
To Whom It May Concern:
As concerned Fred A. Hamilton P.S. parents we feel compelled to write another email
regarding the French Immersion Accomodation Review involving Fred. A. Hamilton Public
School.
November 26th to December 12th
We value French instruction in our schools and its role within a well rounded Canadian
education. It is a wonderful part of our national heritage and Canadian cultural identity
however we feel deeply disappointed that we are undergoing a French Immersion Review
which has, at its roots, much deeper issues once examined more closely. We strongly believe
that the overall theme needs to be on compromise and partnership.
French instruction should be embraced by all of the schools within our community. We would
offer that the current trend towards the creation of French Immersion Centres is actually
building walls not bridges and creating unnecessary tension within our school communities.
Without the institution of a cap on enrollment, it is very difficult to set long term strategic
plans in terms of transportation, infrastructure or funding. Is this fiscally responsible?
The fact that bus transportation costs rise in-step with French Immersion enrolment also places
significant additional strain on already stretched finances. It should be remembered that
transportation costs are non classroom spending when classroom resources are already
pressured. Additionally, is increased bus transportation appropriate in the context of a
growing focus on environmental issues within cities? Bussing children to one centre from a
large geographical area does not seem to be a "green" solution. FAH is a walking school and
to transform it into a primarily "bussing" school would indicate that priorities have become
scattered in the pursuit of the French Immersion model that is currently being implemented
within UGDSB. (i.e. The trend of creating French Immersion Centres). With these issues in
mind it is very difficult to comprehend why dual-track schools are being phased out?
As an educator that has worked in several dual-track French Immersion schools I have
observed first hand how well the program works in conjunction with the English stream. Dualtrack French Immersion is a partnership and a compromise. It is a blending of two worlds that
builds bridges not walls. Furthermore, in these schools French instruction for all students
began in the first grade. Children did not need to wait until the fourth grade when the
excitement and motivation to learn a new language may not be as high.
Full Immersion French instruction can also be a difficult decision to make for parents as their
children enter Junior Kindergarten. For students with exceptional learning needs, it may not
be the best option. Many children require solid English language instruction focusing on best
practises in early literacy before the third grade to be successful students, especially with
English reading and writing. Perhaps if French instruction was offered to more children earlier
(i.e. Gr. One) it would be a better way of exposing ALL of our UGDSB students to the French
language. Waiting until the fourth grade at the latest to begin French instruction may be what
the Ministry mandates as the latest possible start, but some boards have compromised and
started earlier to meet the needs of more students.
We understand that the Accommodation and Review process can be a stressful one, with
many parties wanting to be heard and understood. We thank-you for taking the time to hear
our concerns.
Respectfully,
Information Received – thank you
November 26th to December 12th
To: The Upper Grand District School Board and the Accommodation Review Committee,
I am writing this letter on behalf of the Hanlon Creek Neighbourhood Group in regards to the
UGDSB Central French Immersion Accommodation Review.
If F.A. Hamilton ceases to be a community school and is changed into a French Immersion
Center, where the large part of the population is bussed in, it will irrevocably damage our
group and the surrounding community.
Our group operates out of F.A. Hamilton school. We draw our volunteer base from F.A.
Hamilton school, as well as the majority of our program participation from here. The
community surrounding the school relies on Hanlon Creek Neighbourhood Group to provide
information and support regarding Student Rental Housing and opportunities such as; St.
James holiday party, Salvation Army Hampers, Earn a Bike, Lunch on the Run, and free
community building events. In reading the other scenarios presented, no other
Neighbourhood Groups would be affected to the same degree that ours would. This is
because none of the other neighbourhood groups operate out of the schools involved in the
accommodation review. In moving our community children to three different locations, of
which only one is in our Neighbourhood Group's catchment area, you are essentially
fragmenting the community. Our group would not be sustainable.
Please take our entire community into consideration when you are looking at the numbers. It's
not just the 200 hundred students you would be moving out of the school, it is our group and
our community as well, and that adds up to much more than simply 200.
Thank you.
on behalf of the Hanlon Creek Neighbourhood Group