Page Content
Too little too late
Rose MacNeill, teacher, Don Bosco School, Calgary
After sorting through the barrage of government media releases of recent weeks, it is difficult to be more than modestly optimistic about the future of education in Alberta. As a teacher, I am deeply concerned with the deficits I see in our classrooms; the government's good news is almost too little too late. The damage done to our students, whose class sizes increased as their funding was brutally slashed, is still not calculated. Many of those students with special needs or who required remediation are already beyond the elementary level which the new funding is targeting.
Although we are being rescued from the burden of matching technology costs, nowhere is there funding for professionals to become proficient teachers of this technology. In the final analysis, the message is that we are returning to pre-slash-and-burn funding, with no recognition of those professionals on the front lines who have borne the brunt of these tactics; more emphatically, there is no recognition of or apology for the damage done to our children. The final bill for that may be years in coming but it will come, reinvestment or not.
Should we say "Thank you"?
Karen Beaton, principal, Lorelei School, Edmonton
The premier has referred several times to a "home renovation" that has inconvenienced Albertans in the past few years. For those of us in schools, particularly the youngest children, it has been more of a famine. It will take more than a renovation to give children the opportunities that they need to build on the foundation of learning they are missing after the cuts in kindergarten and class sizes going out of control in this province.
This announcement is certainly welcome because we can't argue with money being put into education but this amount over three years will not even get us back to 1994 levels and we had big problems then. Class size continues to be the biggest issue and since we don't yet know in what form the money will come, and with what strings attached, we cannot be sure that class sizes will go down.
Do we say "Thank you," as if this government is valuing education? It is simply responding to a crisis that it created in the first place.
Not much left over
Ruth LeBlanc, St. Albert Protestant Schools' superintendent
I'm relieved and pleased that some increased funding is coming our way. The amount sounds good, but we don't get the full benefit until 2000/01—$171 million is for enrollment increases, take that off and consider the rest is spread over three years you're not left with much.
Little reason to be grateful
Peter Mueller, teacher, Crescent Heights High School, Medicine Hat
So the government, swimming in an embarrassment of surplus oil dollars, agrees to loosen its choke hold on health and education-those sinkholes of social spending. It's wonderful that more money will be spent on special needs programs, that a few more young teachers will be hired, that buildings will be renovated and needed schools built, and that technological programs will be upgraded. But I can't ignore the scars inflicted on the social landscape of Alberta in the last five years-the lost jobs, the missing hospital beds, the missing environmental protection, the missing industrial safety inspectors, the overcrowded classrooms, the under-equipped schools and hospitals, the understaffed social agencies. Five years of pain and dislocation and uncertainty of life are not remedied by giving back that which should not have been taken in the first place.
When someone finally stops beating my head against a brick wall, I may be relieved but I am not grateful to that person. I find little reason to be grateful to the present government of Alberta.
More special education teachers are needed
Barb Cavers, principal, Senator Buchanan School, Lethbridge
The recent announcements will raise public expectations for services in special education and early intervention programs. However, the number of staff positions to be created will not meet these needs-one new teacher assistant for every 1,500 students.
Having run a successful early intervention program in our school for the past six years, we are familiar with both research and practice in that area. We hope that Alberta Education will provide the leadership and direction to replicate the essential components: one-to-one daily instruction, trained teachers, a diagnostic approach and strategies-based instruction.
Are we keeping up?
Rodney Lee, principal, Harry Balfour School, Grande Prairie
The increase in funding is better than nothing, but as usual with this government, there is far more sound and fury than real substance. Only about 50 per cent of the increase is actually designated for the instruction of students currently in Alberta schools. Roughly 40 per cent is for enrollment growth. This is not a reinvestment in education, but should rightly be considered a cost of the Alberta Advantage.
The increase in the instructional block that is not designated for students with mild and moderate disabilities amounts to less than five per cent, spread over three years, or an average of less than 1.7 per cent per year. Alberta's inflation rate was recently reported as being 2.1 per cent for 1997.
Are we keeping up? The answer is clear.
New funding must reach classroom
Liz Dobrovolsky, president, Alberta Home and School Councils' Association
The government's reinvestment in children's education marks the first increase to education spending since 1987. It is reassuring to know that the refunding priorities were set by all the education partners—teachers, administrators, school boards, parents, students and government. It is absolutely imperative that all new funding dollars reach the classroom to positively enhance the teaching and learning environment. The challenge will be for all partners to demonstrate fiscal accountability by ensuring the new funds have a positive impact on student learning.
Reinvestment is a bandage, not a cure
Larry Thomsen, principal, Hamilton Junior High School, Lethbridge
Per pupil funding for education was increased by $174 for the 1998/99 school year. Of this, $75 per student has been targeted for special needs students. That leaves $99 per student. For 1997/98, teachers in my district have a collective agreement that includes staged increases in September and May. The cost of those increases and increments earned by my staff will see salary costs charged to our school budget (approximately $70 per student). That leaves only $29 to improve services to our students—$29 per student will allow us to restore some things that we lost during the past four years, but it certainly doesn't put us back where we were.
