Submission to the Finance and Economic Affairs Committee



Download 107.65 Kb.
Date03.05.2016
Size107.65 Kb.
#34653


Submission to the Finance and Economic Affairs Committee

Pre-budget Hearings

February 2, 2016

Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario

The Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario (ETFO) welcomes the opportunity to participate in the 2016 pre-budget consultations. ETFO represents 78,000 elementary public school teachers and education professionals across the province and is the largest teacher federation in Canada. ETFO is looking to the government to develop a budget that adopts a more equitable and balanced approach to addressing the deficit and fostering economic growth.

Public Sector Employees take Brunt of Austerity Agenda


Public sector employees have felt the full brunt of the province’s public sector retrenchment policies. The 2013 Budget confirmed that one-time savings from the cuts to teacher sick leave and retirement gratuity provisions contributed $1.1 billion to the $5 billion drop in the estimate for the 2012-2013 deficit. The 2015 Budget reported that the Province achieved $1.6 billion in savings since the 2014 Budget through lower pension costs resulting from “constrained public sector wage growth” and better than expected investment performance.

In spite of the former premier’s rhetoric about asking teachers and other education employees to simply take a two-year “pause” in their wages, ETFO members, together with their colleagues in education, have been dealt actual salary cuts and permanent reductions to their sick leave and retirement benefits. With less-than-inflation-level compensation increases, the latest round of education sector bargaining has continued this pattern of retrenchment. ETFO members and the public sector generally have contributed more than their “fair share” to deficit reduction.

According to Statistic Canada, major wage settlements in the public sector across Canada are lower than in the private sector. In Ontario, after four years of public sector compensation cuts, it’s time for the province to focus on sustaining public services that provide fundamental services to all Ontarians. In the post-recession economy, following the loss of thousands of manufacturing jobs, a strong public sector also has an important role to play in ensuring there are middle-class jobs that contribute to the provincial treasury and fuel economic recovery.

Education Funding Shortfalls


The Liberal government has increased education funding since taking office in 2003, but the additional funding has only gone part way in addressing the $2 billion in cuts imposed by the former Progressive Conservative government. Not all cuts implemented by the previous government have been restored. Programs such as special education, English-as-a-Second Language, design and technology, physical education, and the arts continue to be shortchanged at the elementary level. Per pupil elementary grants continue to be considerably lower than grants for secondary students. Because of the historic funding differential between elementary and secondary education, elementary education offers few opportunities for further cuts.

Much of the funding increase since 2003 has supported important new initiatives like the reduction in primary class size and the introduction of full-day Kindergarten (FDK), but the government is not paying the full cost of the new mandated programs.1 The most recent public opinion survey of Ontarians’ views on education confirms that 61 per cent “favour increased spending on K-12 schools” and that there is majority support for paying higher taxes for education.2 In its 2007 election platform, the Ontario Liberal Party committed to reviewing the education funding formula by 2010. That review has yet to take place. A comprehensive review is long overdue.


Special Needs Students


Meeting the needs of special education students continues to be a pressing challenge. A focus on early intervention means even more of our younger students entering Kindergarten require services and supports. The number of students identified as requiring individualized plans and support to address their individual learning needs continues to increase and outpace the grants to support special education. Special education funding is based on a combination of enrolment and a statistical formula; it does not reflect actual school board needs.

Currently, approximately 17 per cent of elementary students receive special education support to some degree. According to the most recent Ministry of Education data available, approximately 83 per cent of these students are in regular classrooms. In order to be implemented successfully, the movement towards integrating students with special needs into regular classrooms means more resources are required to support the students as well as the classroom teacher in terms of training, human resources, and material resources. A one-size-fits-all model (e.g., full inclusion or full self-contained classes) does not work when dealing with individual student needs. There is a particular need to provide training for occasional teachers to assist them to address behavioural issues and adopt teaching strategies that support students with a wide spectrum of special needs.

The expectations for teachers to meet the needs of such a wide range of learners with special needs, along with the accompanying required documentation (e.g., Individual Education Plans) and meeting commitments are becoming unmanageable. Teachers are required to review existing Individual Education Plans (IEPs) within the first 30 days of the instructional year. Updating an IEP involves reviewing the Ontario Student Record, updating assessment information, meeting with previous teachers, and ensuring the information from the previous year’s annual review of the IEP is reflected in the updated document. The degree of documentation associated with supporting students with special needs is one of the top workload issues identified by a recent provincial study on teacher workload and professionalism.3 To fulfill their responsibilities for completing IEPs, special education teachers need release time during the instructional day. A reasonable amount of time would be to provide a teacher with one hour for each IEP. An occasional teacher should be engaged to provide classroom coverage for the period of time each teacher is given to complete the IEP process.

In addition to increased training and resources, it is also important to provide additional professional support from educational assistants, behavioural counsellors, psychologists, speech and language pathologists, and audiologists. These professional support personnel are often the first to feel the effects of budget cuts. As the Ministry of Education phases out its mitigation grants to address declining enrolment, at least 14 English public school boards are receiving less special education funding. They often deal with the cuts by cutting educational assistants and other support personnel. The Bluewater District School Board, for example, dealt with a more than $1.5 million cut in special education funding by eliminating 49 educational assistant positions. The lack of educational assistants can result in students being denied access to regular classrooms and to the inability of staff to cope with the behavioural issues that manifest when students with special needs aren’t supported. The Toronto Star recently reported on the extent to which students enrolled in Kindergarten to Grade 1 are being suspended for behavioural issues.4


Recommendations:


  1. Provide appropriate training and resources to support teachers with the growing special needs population.



  1. Provide release time for occasional teacher coverage to support teachers to fulfill their responsibilities for completing Individual Education Plans (IEPs).



  1. Increase funding for educational assistants, behavioural counsellors, psychologists, speech and language pathologists, and audiologists to better meet the needs of all students.


English-language learners


The demographic profile of Ontario has changed dramatically over the past decade. The number of children who speak neither English nor French when they register for school has increased significantly. As reported by the 2015 People for Education annual report on public schools, 73 per cent of English elementary schools have English language learners (ELL)5 compared to 43 per cent in 2002-03. These students face significant challenges in catching up to their peers and schools do not have the resources to adequately support them. As Ontario prepares to welcome an estimated 10,000 Syrian refugees this year, many of them children, school boards need to ensure they have the necessary language programs in place.

The provincial grants for ELL students are based on census figures related to immigrants who speak languages other than English or French; they don’t reflect the number of students born in Canada who don’t learn either official language at home before enrolling in school. The grants also assume that ELL students won’t require special language programs for longer than four years, an assumption that is not supported by reports from teachers who work with these students or by research on language acquisition6.

There is no direct accountability for school boards to actually spend their second-language grants on the intended programs. The latest data indicate that 23 per cent of English-language elementary schools with 10 or more ELL students do not have an ESL teacher7. All too often, the overall shortfalls in the funding formula have led to school boards using their second language grants for other purposes and short-changing ELL students.

Recommendations:


  1. Expand funding for English Language Learner programs and English-as-Second-Language teachers to meet the language acquisition needs of English-language learners.



  1. Require school boards to spend the ELL funding as specified in the grants.

Full-day Kindergarten: an important long-term investment


Full-day Kindergarten (FDK) for Ontario students is a significant education initiative. Preliminary Ontario-based research suggests that the investment is already producing strong results in terms of Kindergarten students’ early reading and writing abilities, the complexity of their drawings, social competence, and problem-solving skills. In the Peel District School Board, a longitudinal study of FDK has found that “children who participated in FDK in comparison to children who participated in half-day Kindergarten were significantly ahead in vocabulary at the end of Kindergarten and have remained ahead in Grades 1 and 2.”8 The study also found FDK students significantly ahead in self-regulation as well as early reading, writing and number knowledge. An assessment of the longer-term impact of FDK will have to wait till the students have completed Grade 2 and beyond, but the early research findings are positive.

To optimize the potential of FDK, the Ministry of Education needs to address issues identified by the front-line educators and Ontario researchers monitoring the program. These issues include class size and physical space, professional learning to support the teacher and designated early childhood educator team, preparation time for the designated early childhood educator, and deeper, systemic support for the inquiry, play-based learning philosophy underlying the program.

Although the Kindergarten program is funded to have an average class size of 26 and an average staff-child ratio of 1:13, there are a considerable number of classes with 30 or more students. In April 2014, the Ministry of Education reported that eight per cent of FDK classes (640 classes) had more than 30 students. ETFO members consistently raise concerns about the challenges of setting up activity-based programs for that many young children. The recent Queen’s-McMaster-Ministry of Education report9 on the preliminary research stated: “Classroom space alone does not provide a barrier to favourable child outcomes,” but many program staff report that they are not working in optimal environments. Overcrowded classrooms limit the ability to take full advantage of the play-based program and they create stressful, overly noisy, and dangerous work environments.

Funding shortfalls affect Kindergarten classrooms in other ways. The lack of funding for lunch-room supervisors and other non-teaching staff means designated early childhood educators are often assigned significant supervision responsibilities outside of their classroom. The education funding formula does not fund preparation time for designated early childhood educators. Consequently, the supervision assignments make it virtually impossible to schedule joint planning time for the educator team in the Kindergarten classroom. Joint planning time is a fundamental aspect of creating an effective and collaborative professional team.


Recommendations:


  1. Cap full-day Kindergarten class size at 26.



  1. Fund 30 minutes of preparation time per day for designated early childhood educators.



  1. Allocate funding for professional development to support the full-day Kindergarten teacher-designated early childhood educator team and to support joint planning time.



  1. Provide funding for non-teaching staff to perform supervision duties such as lunchroom supervision.


Smaller Class Size: Important for Student Success


Like full-day Kindergarten, the investment in smaller primary class size reflects the importance of focusing on early years education in order to promote student success and to achieve longer term savings. Based on the research, we should be protecting our smaller classes at the primary level and moving to reduce them in grades 4 to 8 as well. Class sizes in grades 4 to 8 are the largest in the K-12 system. There is no pedagogical rationale for grade 4 to 8 classes being larger than those at the secondary level. Lowering class sizes in these grades would provide teachers with greater opportunity to develop strategies and interventions tailored to the learning needs of each student.

The early Ontario research on class size, led by University of Toronto professor Nina Bascia, demonstrates that smaller classes enable teachers to provide more individual attention to students and to employ a greater variety of instructional strategies. Students with the greatest educational needs benefit the most from smaller classes, but the improved learning environment benefits all students. Smaller classes improve student behaviour and peer relationships and increase student engagement and achievement in the early grades. These factors, in turn, contribute to increased graduation rates and the accompanying savings from fewer students staying on beyond the required four years of secondary school. The Ontario research indicates that the policy could have even greater impact if better supported by teacher in-service. The Ministry of Education’s professional development budget is one of the unfortunate casualties of the recent across-the-board cuts.


Recommendations:


  1. Cap grades 4 to 8 class size at 24.



  1. Allocate funding for professional development that promotes the use of differentiated teaching strategies suitable for smaller classes.

Safer, healthier places to learn and to work


Ensuring that our school communities are safer and healthier places to learn and to work is an important factor in student achievement and educator efficacy. Longstanding health and safety issues such as lack of training, workplace violence, poor indoor air quality, incomplete emergency planning, and risks of exposure to hazardous materials such as asbestos remain leading concerns with significant potential to impact the wellbeing of people in the school community. There are practical solutions to all of these issues based upon legislation, policy, best practice, common sense and stronger working relationships between education partners.

The quality, frequency, and duration of legislated health and safety training vary considerably among school boards across the province. There is a lack of clarity about how legislative requirements under both the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the Education Act are to be met. 


Recommendation:


  1. Allocate funding for the health and safety training of principals and educators to ensure that school boards meet the requirements of the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the Education Act.

Finding Savings in the Education Sector


For many years, ETFO has identified the government’s expenditure on the Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO), the provincial student testing program, and the plethora of diagnostic assessments performed at the school level as the most obvious targets for education savings. The 2012 Budget applied a minimal 2.5 per cent reduction ($2.4 million) to the EQAO’s $34 million annual budget over a three-year period. By 2014-15, the EQAO budget had increased beyond the 2012 benchmark to over $36 million. If Ontario were to follow the lead of Finland, the highest-performer on international student assessments, it would find savings by eliminating the annual provincial tests in grades 3 and 6. If it were at least willing to take a step towards this model, it would change EQAO testing from annual census assessments to random-sample tests. This would achieve the goals of both evaluating the effectiveness of provincial curriculum and teaching strategies and achieving education expenditure savings.

It is not only front-line staff who are calling for fundamental change to our assessment regime. Ontario-based education experts10 advocate a new vision for education reform that is not focused on standardized test results. Their vision is based on creating supportive and collaborative school cultures where educators are afforded greater professional autonomy regarding their classroom practice, development of curriculum, and use of assessment strategies. There is growing support for moving to a random-sample model in Ontario, including from People for Education, the provincial research and advocacy organization. The most recent recruit to this position is the 2013 report, authored by scholars of Action Canada, a national fellowship program, entitled, Real Accountability or an Illusion of Success? A Call to Review Standardized Testing in Ontario.

According to the most recent information available, the Ministry of Education allocates $142 million to its Student Achievement Division, including $45 million that it transfers to school boards to support their literacy and numeracy initiatives. In January 2013, the Ministry of Education issued a Policy and Program Memorandum (PPM 155) governing teachers’ use of diagnostic assessment tools and establishing guidelines designed to limit their use. The memorandum responded positively to ETFO’s longstanding request to address the over-use of these assessments and to recognize teachers’ professional judgment regarding which tests to use, which students to assess, and how frequently to use the various assessment tools. If the policy is respected by school boards, it should lead to a significant reduction in the need for diagnostic assessment tools. This should result in considerable savings to school boards, savings that can be applied elsewhere to support student learning. It should also enable teachers to focus more on the curriculum and to spend more time working with their students.

There are other opportunities for finding efficiencies in education finance. Beyond requiring coterminous school boards to adopt more shared services, ETFO believes it is time for Ontario to move toward a single, secular public school system that respects French-language rights. Savings could be found particularly in small, rural communities where there are often an insufficient number of students to effectively provide a full and viable program and where there are school buildings with empty classrooms. The increasing diversity of Ontario’s population also makes it difficult to defend a school system devoted to one religion.


Recommendations:


  1. Require EQAO to move to a random-sample model of student testing.



  1. Take steps to move toward a singular, secular school system in Ontario that respects French-language rights.


Addressing Ontario’s Child Poverty Rate


In 2008, the provincial government committed to reducing Ontario’s child poverty rate by 25 per cent by 2013. That deadline has come and gone. Ontario didn’t achieve its 2013 reduction target, but was able to reduce child poverty by 9.2 per cent between 2008 and 2011 through increases to the minimum wage and the Ontario Child Benefit (OCB). Through more recent budgets, the government has implemented a schedule of inflation-level increases to the minimum wage and the OCB. These increases are modest and still leave those living on social assistance worse off than they were prior to the slashing of social assistance levels during the Harris government. In spite of recent modest increases, social assistance rates “have fallen behind the rate of inflation, declining 5 to 7 percent since 2003…”11 The anti-poverty organization Ontario Campaign 2000 recommends increasing the OCB by $100 annually until 2018 and fully indexing the benefit to inflation.12

The government has recommitted to addressing child poverty but has failed to establish deadlines for its 25 per cent reduction target. Reducing the provincial rate of child poverty must become a higher government priority, particularly in regards to the higher than average poverty rates experienced by immigrant, racialized, and First Nations children. The government should use the 2016 Budget to get back on track in terms of its poverty reduction target. As reported by Ontario Campaign 200013, countries like Denmark and Norway that reduced poverty levels to less than seven per cent a few decades ago did so through a comprehensive strategy that included investments in child care, affordable housing, and post-secondary education.


Recommendation:


  1. Increase the hourly minimum wage to $14 and index it to inflation.



  1. Commit to building affordable housing units and provide a housing benefit to low-income tenants.

Accessible Child Care: A Foundation for Economic Growth


Access to high-quality, licensed child care is essential for parents who are working, studying, participating in job-retraining programs, or simply seeking enriched child development experiences for their young children. Access to child care is more important than ever given the connection between workforce participation and economic recovery.

In making their case for the central importance of child care services, advocates have received increasing support from economists. A 2012 TD Bank report14 found that:

“…total public spending in the [child care] sector in Canada has fallen short of many of its peers. At 0.25% of GDP, Canada ranks last among comparable European and Anglo-speaking countries...Even looking at family support, including child payments, parental leave benefits and child care support, public spending in Canada is 17% below the OECD average.”

A 2009 study by economist Robert Fairholm reported a number of positive economic benefits, including that every dollar invested in child care increases the economy’s output (GDP) by $2.30. The It’s More than Poverty report identified expanded access to affordable, regulated, flexible child care as a central strategy to address the growing phenomenon of precarious employment, a problem affecting all income groups in the province.

Despite the provincial government’s promise to “modernize” child care, it has failed to keep the sector from its constant state of crisis. The 2012 Budget established $242 million in one-time funding spread over three years. The 2013 Budget extended its additional funding for a fourth year by allocating an additional $39 million in 2015-2016 to assist the sector adjust to losing four- and five-year-olds to full-day Kindergarten. This funding, according to child care researchers, falls short of what is needed to stabilize existing child care programs, let alone expand the sector to better meet the demand. In 2013, Craig Alexander, chief economist for the TD Bank, addressed the inadequate support for child care:

“The usual push-back on calls for increased investment in early childhood education is that it is too expensive and the return too far off in the future. It is true that raising Canada to the average level of investment in other advanced economies would cost $3 to $ 4 billion dollars, but that is evidence of the magnitude of underinvestment at the moment. Make no mistake, governments do have to live within their fiscal means, but prioritizing education is important – and we need to think more about education starting earlier in life.”15


Recommendation:


  1. Increase the funding for licensed, high quality child care to more effectively address the current instability in the sector and to expand the number of spaces.

Tax Policies that Address the Widening Income Gap


Across Canada, only Alberta has a greater level of income disparity than Ontario, where “the richest one per cent now takes, on average, 16 times more income than the bottom 90 percent. Thirty years ago, that ratio was 10 times.”16 In response to this income gap, ETFO adds its voice to those calling for personal and corporate income tax reform. The province has the responsibility to take the lead in a public discussion about how the tax system contributes to economic prosperity, social cohesion and greater equity among its citizens. Economist Jim Stanford sums up the current conversation about taxes this way:

“Taxes are increasingly portrayed as a burden from which government should be granting us relief. No more do we hear about the obligations – and the benefits – of our common citizenship, about how taxes tie us to one another and the common good…Gone is the language of citizen, replaced by the atomizing language of consumer and taxpayer.”17

In its 2015 Fall Economic Outlook, the government boasts that the corporate income tax rate is lower than in any comparable American state. It also reports that Ontario consistently has the lowest per capita spending program among all the provinces and has held annual program spending to less than the rate of inflation. These pronouncements may please bond rating agencies, but they mean that Ontario is undermining its ability to build a more equitable society and support the public services its citizens rely on. Over the last five years, program funding has fallen behind inflation and population growth and resulted in a deficit of social needs. According to a recent Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives report, “over the last five years, the decline can be measured as a cut in real per person investments in public programs and services of 6 per cent , or more than $ 7 billion.”18 A similar point was made by Ontario’s Financial Accountability Office:

“In 2015-16, government spending is 5.7% below what it would have been if real, per capita spending simply stayed at 2010 levels. That’s a $6.9 billion gouge in public services that makes itself known through the affordable housing waitlist, the missed targets in the Ontario poverty reduction strategy, and the growing class sizes students and teachers find themselves facing.”19

There is growing expert opinion in support of increasing personal and corporate income taxes. In the recent federal election, Canadians witnessed a major political party launch a platform based on tax reforms and a policy to sustain a deficit while investing in infrastructure projects designed to create jobs and stimulate the economy. It’s time for Ontario to abandon its austerity agenda and engage in the conversation about the important role taxes play in economic sustainability and supporting the public services Ontarians expect and deserve.

Ontario should no longer rely on its low corporate income tax rates as a strategy for economic growth. In 2012, former Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney drew attention to the more than half a trillion dollars that corporations had hoarded rather than invest in research and technology or job creation. He referred to the stockpiled funds as “dead money.” A recent Canadian report concludes that “there is no statistically significant relationship between corporate income tax (CIT) regime and growth.”20 It further concludes that there is evidence the CIT rate reductions actually contribute to slower growth because it encourages firms to spend less in order to expand their earnings share and corporate size.



ETFO is looking to the Ontario government, through the 2016 Budget, to abandon its short-sighted austerity agenda and introduce a more balanced approach to addressing its revenue challenges that includes substantive tax reform.

Recommendation:


  1. Introduce personal and corporate income tax measures in the 2016 Budget to address the growing income gap in Ontario and increase the government’s fiscal capacity to invest in the economy.

VM:VO
RECOMMENDATIONS

  1. Provide appropriate training and resources to support teachers with the growing special needs population.



  1. Provide release time for occasional teacher coverage to support teachers to fulfill their responsibilities for completing Individual Education Plans (IEPs).



  1. Increase funding for educational assistants, behavioural counsellors, psychologists, speech and language pathologists, and audiologists to better meet the needs of all students.



  1. Expand funding for English Language Learner programs and English-as-Second-Language teachers to meet the language acquisition needs of English-language learners.



  1. Require school boards to spend the ELL funding as specified in the grants.



  1. Cap full-day Kindergarten class size at 26.



  1. Fund 30 minutes of preparation time per day for designated early childhood educators.



  1. Allocate funding for professional development to support the full-day Kindergarten teacher-designated early childhood educator team and to support joint planning time.



  1. Provide funding for non-teaching staff to perform supervision duties such as lunchroom supervision.



  1. Cap grades 4 to 8 class size at 24.



  1. Allocate funding for professional development that promotes the use of differentiated teaching strategies suitable for smaller classes.



  1. Allocate funding for the health and safety training of principals and educators to ensure that school boards meet the requirements of the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the Education Act.



  1. Require EQAO to move to a random-sample model of student testing.



  1. Take steps to move toward a singular, secular school system in Ontario that respects French-language rights.



  1. Increase the hourly minimum wage to $14 and index it to inflation.



  1. Commit to building affordable housing units and provide a housing benefit to low-income tenants.



  1. Increase the funding for licensed, high quality child care to more effectively address the current instability in the sector and to expand the number of spaces.



  1. Introduce personal and corporate income tax measures in the 2016 Budget to address the growing income gap in Ontario and increase the government’s fiscal capacity to invest in the economy.





SOURCES

Alexander, Craig (2012). “Early Childhood Education has Widespread and Long Lasting Benefits,” Special Report TD Economics.


Alexander, Craig (2013). “Investment in Early Childhood Education Can Boost Skills and Reduce Inequality.” Perspective TD Economics.

http://www.td.com/document/PDF/economics/special/InvestmentInEarlyChildhoodEducation.pdf

Bascia, Nina and Eric Fredua-Kwarteng (2008). Class Size Reduction: What the Literature Suggests about What Works, Toronto: Canadian Education Association.

Errol Black and Jim Silver, (2011), “It’s Not Just About Wages: “Unions also protect human rights in Canadian workplaces”, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/commentary/fast-facts-how-unions-protect-our-human-rights

Brennan, Jordan (2015). Do Corporate Income Tax Rate Reductions Accelerate Growth? Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.

Cummins, Jim (2012). Teaching English Language Learners. Research for Teachers, No. 9. ETFO and OISE/University of Toronto.

http://www.etfo.ca/Resources/ForTeachers/Documents/Research%20for%20Teachers%20-%20Number%209%20-%20Teaching%20English%20Language%20Learners.pdf

Després, Sébastien et al. (January, 2013). Real Accountability or an Illusion of Success? A Call to Review Standardized Testing in Ontario. Vancouver: Action Canada

Directions Evidence Policy Research Group, LLP (2014). The Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario (ETFO) Teacher Workload and Professionalism Study. Submitted to the Ontario Ministry of Education.

Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario (2010). Is EQAO Failing our Children? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBn9-W4sgLA

Fairholm, Robert (August, 2010). Early Learning and Care Impact Analysis. Milton: The Centre for Spacial Economics.

Financial Accountability Office for Ontario (2015). An Assessment of Ontario’s Medium-term Economic and Fiscal Outlook. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

Hargreaves, Andy and Dennis Shirley (2009). The Fourth Way: The Inspiring Future for Educational Change. Corwin. Thousand Oaks, CA.

Hargreaves, Andy and Michael Fullan (2012). Professional Capital: Transforming Teacher in Every School. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

Hart, Doug and Arlo Kempf (2015). Public Attitudes Toward Education in Ontario 2015: The 19 OISE Survey of Educational Issues. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto.

http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/oise/UserFiles/Media/Media_Relations/Final_Report_-_19th_OISE_Survey_on_Educational_Issues_2015.pdf

Hennessy, Trish (2013). It’s Time for an Equality Premier. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives blog:

http://behindthenumbers.ca/2013/01/29/its-time-for-an-equality-premier/

Hennessy, Trish and Jim Stanford (March, 2013). More Harm than Good: Austerity’s Impact in Ontario, Toronto: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives – Ontario.

Himelfarb, Alex and Jordan Himelfarb, eds. (2013). Tax is Not a Four-Letter Word: a different take on taxes in Canada. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.

Mackenzie, Hugh (2015). Harris-era hangovers: Toronto School Trustees’ Inherited Funding Shortfall. Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.

Ontario Campaign 2000 (2014). Child Poverty, 25 Years Later: We Can Fix This, 2014 Report on Child and Family Poverty in Ontario. Toronto.

Pelletier, Jeanette (March 2014). Key findings from Year 3 of Full-Day Early Learning Kindergarten in Peel. Toronto.

People for Education (2015) Ontario’s Schools: The Gap between Policy and Reality. Toronto.

People for Education (2013). Mind the Gap: Inequality in Ontario Schools. Toronto.

People for Education (March 25, 2010) “Champions of standardized testing change their tunes”. http://www.peopleforeducation.ca/pfe-news/champions-of-standardized-testing-change-their-tunes/

Schanzenback, D.W. (2014). Does Class Size Matter? National Education Policy Centre.

Boulder CO.Retrieved February 19, 2014 from http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/does-class-size-matter.

The Common Front (2015). Blackslide: Labour Force Restructuring, Austerity and Widening Inequality in Ontario. Toronto.

The Social Program Evaluation Group – Queen’s University, the Offord Centre for Child Studies – McMaster University, and the Ontario Ministry of Education (2013). A Meta-Perspective on the Evaluation of Full-day Kindergarten during the First Two Years of Implementation. Toronto.



Tiessen, Kaylie (2014). Seismic Shift: Ontario’s Changing Labour Market. Toronto: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives – Ontario.

1 Hugh Mackenzie (2015), Harris-era Hangovers: Toronto School Trustees’ Inherited Funding Shortfall, Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.

2 Hart, Doug and Arlo Kempf (2015). Public Attitudes Toward Education in Ontario 2015: The 19th OISE Survey of Educational Issues. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto.

3 Directions Evidence Policy Research Group, LLP (2014). The Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario (ETFO) Teacher Workload and Professionalism Study. Submitted to the Ontario Ministry of Education.

4 Toronto Star, “Suspensions spike in Toronto’s K-3 grades,” December 6, 2015.

5 People for Education (2015) Ontario’s Schools: The Gap between Policy and Reality. Toronto.

6 Cummins, Jim (2012). Teaching English Language Learners. Research for Teachers, No. 9. ETFO and OISE/University of Toronto.

7 People for Education (2013). Mind the Gap: Inequality in Ontario Schools. Toronto

8 Janette Pelletier. (March 2014). Key findings from Year 3 of Full-Day Early Learning Kindergarten in Peel. Toronto.

9 The Social Program Evaluation Group – Queen’s University, the Offord Centre for Child Studies – McMaster University, and the Ontario Ministry of Education (2013). A Meta-Perspective on the Evaluation of Full-day Kindergarten during the First Two Years of Implementation. Toronto.

10 See Andy Hargreaves and Dennis Shirley (2009), The Fourth Way: The Inspiring Future for Educational Change. Corwin. Thousand Oaks, CA.; Andy Hargreaves and Michael Fullan (2012). Professional Capital: Transforming Teacher in Every School. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University; and Joel Westheimer profiled in the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario video entitled: Is EQAO Failing Our Children?, February 2010: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBn9-W4sgLA

11 The Common Front (2015). Blackslide: Labour Force Restructuring, Austerity and Widening Inequality in Ontario. Toronto.

12 Ontario Campaign 2000 (2014), Child Poverty, 25 Years Later: We Can Fix This, 2014 Report on Child and Family Poverty in Ontario. Toronto

13 Ontario Campaign 2000 (2014).

14 Craig Alexander (2012), “Early Childhood Education has Widespread and Long Lasting Benefits,” Special Report TD Economics.

15 Craig Alexander (2013). “Investment in Early Childhood Education Can Boost Skills and Reduce Inequality,” Perspective TD Economics.

16 Ontario Common Front (2015).

17 Alex Himelfarb and Jordan Himelfarb, eds. (2013). Tax is Not a Four-Letter Word: a different take on taxes in Canada. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.

18 Cited in Kaylie Tiessen (2014), Seismic Shift: Ontario’s Changing Labour Market. Toronto: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives – Ontario.

19 Financial Accountability Office for Ontario (2015). An Assessment of Ontario’s Medium-term Economic and Fiscal Outlook. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

20 Jordan Brennan (2015), Do Corporate Income Tax Rate Reductions Accelerate Growth? Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.


Download 107.65 Kb.

Share with your friends:




The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2022
send message

    Main page