School organization and governance Bill 40 tabled
The moment the educational community across the province has been waiting for finally arrived yesterday afternoon.
Minister of Education and Higher Education Jean-françois Roberge tabled Bill 40, ‘An Act to amend mainly the Education Act with regard to school organization and governance.’
The explanatory notes of the bill include the following description.
“The purpose of this bill is mainly to revise the organization and governance of the school boards, which are to become school service centres administered by a board of directors composed of parents, community members and members of the school service centre staff.”
CONT’D
CONT’D
Following the explanatory notes, the Bill includes roughly 90 pages of amendments to not only the Education Act, but dozens of other Acts, mainly so that they would now read ‘school service centres’ instead of ‘school boards’.
After a quick first read, Eastern Townships School Board Chairman Michael Murray said it was too soon to go into detail, but what he remarked so far was the notable absence of how the omnibus bill might improve student success.
“This is the biggest attempted reform of education since linguistic school boards in 1998,” Murray said.
The bill outlines different procedures for English and French boards to choose the new boards of directors for the service centres, preserving universal suffrage for key English positions.
While concerned that there would be a two-tiered system for how governance was established, Murray said from what he saw, the mandate and powers allotted in the proposed bill were similar or identical for French and English service centres.
Ultimately, Murray said before taking a position, the ETSB will study the bill in detail and confer with neighbouring French boards.
“We’ll try and pull together. There is a great deal of common ground,” Murray said, referring to a loss of democracy and a total loss of local governance.
Decisions are made by administrators in the name of efficiency according to a rulebook, Murray said, while commissioners can make exceptions and look at a situation based on the needs of a school or community.
Murray pointed out that some aspects of the bill seem unrealistic given the size of the territory the ETSB covers. Four members of the community would be elected to the new proposed board of directors by universal suffrage from across a territory otherwise divided into close to a dozen wards.
“That’s not practical,” Murray said.
If cost savings were a motivation for the reform, Murray pointed out that while commissioners’ stipends would be abolished with Bill 40, the new boards of directors for school service centres would be paid for attending meetings. “There is no indication they would be paid less than what a commissioner earns now,” the chairman commented.
Murray described the bill as part and parcel of a larger centralization of power into the hands of the ministry.
“There has to be some sort of intermediate recourse without bureaucracy and administrative red tape,” Murray said. “An attempt to really transform education requires consultation,” he added. “The public needs to understand what’s happening here.”
Murray said he hopes the ministry won’t rush anything, and that they will demonstrate some flexibility before setting anything in stone.the proposed bill, from what Murray understood, could put more responsibilities onto school principals, whom he said are already overloaded.
The burden on parents with the proposed new model would be equally daunting, he said.
“It’s a huge task,” Murray explained. “You’re asking parents, some that don’t have time to read to their kids, to attend meetings, grapple with finances and complex educational issues,” Murray said.
The coming weeks will involve intense study, as Murray put it, to fully understand the proposed school organization and governance bill.
Yves Gilbert, President of the Commission scolaire des Hauts-cantons, released a statement regarding Bill 40 yesterday afternoon.
"No one will be surprised to hear me say," commented Mr. Gilbert, "that I am deeply disappointed that the CAQ government has conducted its reflection on school governance reform without involving us. I fear for the autonomy of the region and especially for semiurban and rural areas, such as the one where our school board is located. “
According to Gilbert, "it is obvious that we cannot comment on this bill in detail without understanding all the consequences it may have on the life of our schools and communities. For me, the government, through this bill, is threatening the autonomy of the regions, the ability of the community to become democratically involved in school life and the possibility of having an influence on its development and influence, especially in rural areas. “
Gilbert concluded by saying that in the coming weeks, "we will discuss with all Commissioners and decide by mutual agreement on the position we will take on Minister Roberge's bill. We will keep the media informed of our opinions on the latter. One thing is certain; we want to establish a dialogue on the future of school governance with our communities and our elected representatives in the National Assembly. School democracy must not only be decided in Quebec City. It also concerns the regions. “