Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

If we fund charter schools with public dollars and they are so great and available to all, why can't we just have the same experience in public schools? Why do we need a higher tier publicly funded education when education should be universal and accessible to all taxpayers? What kind of democracy do we live in where we create more haves and have nots from childhood based on the wealth of their parents? It's an eventual self destructive system that punishes the less fortunate child.

Did you know that Charter schools in Alberta were an innovation experiment? The goal was for the charter schools to be flexible enough to try new education methods and then bring the successful methods back to the public school system.

Since Alberta charter schools started in the 1994, that was meant to be their function. In 2009 there was a report that still tried to pump the tires of "enhanced choice" but admitted the following:

• One of the original purposes of charter schools was that they would be centres of innovation and would share innovations with the rest of the system. This purpose has largely not been realized.

In my mind, if an experiment fails to fulfill its purpose you should either make adjustments to have it become successful or stop the experiment.

Here is another report from 2020 reviewing charter schools. To extract from the conclusions:

Compared to many states in America joining the charter school movement, Alberta’s regulatory structures (including a limited/cap system, non-profit obligations, non-denominational affiliations, and adequate funding equalling the same per-pupil funding as other public schools) has made Alberta’s public education system better-off. Under the current government, however, there are signs that regulatory reforms will open up the province to a more Americanized model of charter school competition that may undermine the public system. Lifting the charter school cap follows the same trajectory of liberalization that has occurred in the US, which has largely resulted in a differentiated public system and inefficiencies caused by running two parallel systems of public schools under separate governance arrangements. By removing the participation of local school boards in an effort to streamline the system of charter approval, inefficiencies, redundancies, and unsystematic planning should also be reasonably expected. Regulatory oversight of charter school development that is transparent, equitable, and measured so that only providers offering the best possible opportunities for learners that are in the interests of the public and truly accountable to the public are permitted to operate is paramount.

It is also far from a guarantee that charter school competition will spur innovation and efficiency, as proponents claim. The established system of charter schools in the US has demonstrated this much. Charter schools in Alberta as they currently stand, working in collaboration with local school boards, play an important role in promoting the growth of specialized and alternative school programs within the public system. Yet, standalone charter schools have proven not be effective or equitably accessible for all learners. This is because barriers to access remain that represent impediments to real choice, such as supplemental fees associated with attending charter schools and independently-determined selection processes, which will not dissipate by liberalizing the charter school market. So, what then is there to gain systemically from such reforms that are expected to overhaul the system? Education reforms that settled for charter school liberalization and parental “choice” exercised in quasi-market environments, instead of a full-blown voucher system as was proposed during the UCP’s annual general meeting in November 2019, indicate the governments’ ambition to explore opening-up Alberta’s public education system to the private market. It is a playbook of policy reforms intent on privatizing public choice.

I would say that after 30+ years that is enough time to run an experiment. Charter schools should be given a choice to either convert to private schools or come back into the public system and bring all of their great learnings with them. If they have received a public built school then the building comes back to the public system no matter what.

Then, to your point Fuzz, let's try to give everyone the amazing experience that a few people are getting out of their charter school.

[puffnstuff]

Originally Posted by woob

To Fuzz's earlier post about standardizing school construction across the province; we just had an affordable housing project that went up in downtown Calgary which was pre-manufactured off-site and then assembled on-site in 10 days. Manufacturing time and assembly was from April 15 to August 2025. Obviously there was design and planning prior to that, and there will be post site work after. Expected tenant move in to begin January 1. So let's call it a year.

Surely, data and information can be pulled from this and similar projects elsewhere, to develop a blueprint for prefabricated schools and then mass produce them to roll out to the designated sites they've chosen. Yes, I know there are elements of a school that maybe cannot be prefabricated (Gyms, Playgrounds, Theatres, etc.) but those could be in progress during the prefab builds.

Theres a reason all the Tims, McDs, etc all look the same...it works

[you&me]

Aren't Charter schools generally specialized, i.e. STEM, arts, etc?

The broader public system failing to integrate or adopt any of the Charter school educational methods doesn't strike me as a problem with the Charter schools and seems far more likely to be a problem with public boards' administration.

Children are different and parents' priorities are different. Lowest common denominator sounds like a terrible approach to education. A lot of this reads like crabs in a bucket...

[Major Major]

I used to work at Connect and now work at the CBE equivalent to Connect so I would say that article is out of date.

Charter schools with a CBE copycat version are...

Connect = Riverside, RTA, Louis Riel, Maple Ridge
FFCA = Many TLC schools
Calgary girls school = Stanley Jones
Westmount = GAIT schools
Calgary Arts Academy = Willow Park

That's just off the top of my head.

[Point Blank]

When problems come up with the public system, such as disruptive classmates, lack of personalized support, etc. it’s not an argument for providing alternative funding to less equitable systems. It should be an argument for giving more funding to public education.

Every teacher is well aware of the problems with inclusion without support. If you hate that your child’s class has to be constantly evacuated, think about how the teacher feels. No one is happy about having to do it, but teachers also understand that their job is to give good learning experiences to all students in their classroom. What these teachers need isn’t less funding, it’s an EA to give more one on one time with students, better equipment and furniture conducive to regulating emotions, better access to occupational therapists and specialists, smaller class sizes to focus on personalized learning and building student self-efficacy.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

That's just because they've been doing nothing for decades, and are all out of ideas.


This isn't complicated. Build more schools, hire sufficient staff. It keeps getting worse because those are the two things they never do.


Why we don't build a standard school design across the province to reduce engineering and materials costs is beyond me. Yes, one size doesn't fit all, but you could easily make them in ways that allow for variances. Instead we have god knows how many different school boards all doing their own thing and efficiencies go out the window. There are ways to reduce costs, but they involve simplifying and consolidating our school system, and we must have one of the most disparate and complex in the developed world. For example, Canmore has three different school systems and six schools all over the valley. Busing costs and logistics alone eat up resources, and you don't have the flexibility to move teachers between school systems. Then you duplicate administration, and it all starts to get silly and expensive.

Essentially we do, there is a standard design model for every school with some variance allowed for local condistions.





http://www.infrastructure.alberta.ca.../SCSchools.pdf

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Inclusion without support is abandonment.

Going after the kid or blaming the kid is horrible. This is a child that needs help and all you want to do is punish them.

This is the problem when you underfund a system and force all kids into the same classroom and pretend that is "inclusion". Inclusion without support is abandonment.

The public school system should have the funding to build classes/schools where different kids can go at different paces. Where kids who need extra help can get extra help. The education melting pot is intentional sabotage by people who want public education to fail so they can pull the money away.

Inclusion without support is abandonment.

If you feel like I should be ok with another child throwing a chair at my child then we are going to have to agree to disagree.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Major Major

I used to work at Connect and now work at the CBE equivalent to Connect so I would say that article is out of date.

Charter schools with a CBE copycat version are...

Connect = Riverside, RTA, Louis Riel, Maple Ridge
FFCA = Many TLC schools
Calgary girls school = Stanley Jones
Westmount = GAIT schools
Calgary Arts Academy = Willow Park

That's just off the top of my head.

Oh awesome. Can you clear up a few questions for us?

Did you get paid more at Connect?
Was there a slush fund created?
Did Connect kick students out that were not the right 'fit'?

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

If you feel like I should be ok with another child throwing a chair at my child then we are going to have to agree to disagree.

Don't be daft, no one should be throwing chairs at anyone.

But if you want to blame someone blame the UCP that has underfunded the system and abandoned that child, not the child that is obviously struggling.

Maybe we should abolish a charter school or two and instead create a school to help this kid learn in a way that works for him.

[RandyHolt]

I have no idea what the solution is, but when there are 5-10 kids in each grade in a busy school that have little to no chance at ever learning at the same level as the rest of the class, there's a systemic issue that needs to be addressed.

My kids have had an EA in their class full time and it doesn't help. There are still tantrums that require evacuation (although not as often as 30 times in two months thankfully). There are kids on the playground intentionally hurting other kids, and nothing is done about it. There are kids that don't know the language who are just mixed in with everyone else and expected to learn at the same rate.

What ends up happening in my experience is the 5-10 kids in these classes take up 90% of the teacher's time, and the other 20 get no attention even though they need some. I agree that class sizes and more EAs will help, but some of the kids that have no chance of ever catching up just need to be separated into a different class/school so that they can get some education, but not disrupt the education of the other 20-30 kids.

[Point Blank]

Originally Posted by RandyHolt

I have no idea what the solution is, but when there are 5-10 kids in each grade in a busy school that have little to no chance at ever learning at the same level as the rest of the class, there's a systemic issue that needs to be addressed.

My kids have had an EA in their class full time and it doesn't help. There are still tantrums that require evacuation (although not as often as 30 times in two months thankfully). There are kids on the playground intentionally hurting other kids, and nothing is done about it. There are kids that don't know the language who are just mixed in with everyone else and expected to learn at the same rate.

What ends up happening in my experience is the 5-10 kids in these classes take up 90% of the teacher's time, and the other 20 get no attention even though they need some. I agree that class sizes and more EAs will help, but some of the kids that have no chance of ever catching up just need to be separated into a different class/school so that they can get some education, but not disrupt the education of the other 20-30 kids.

That’s totally fair. There’s usually specialized programs like PLP, The Class, and Bridges to support these kids, but again, demand is high and resources are low.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

If we fund charter schools with public dollars and they are so great and available to all, why can't we just have the same experience in public schools? Why do we need a higher tier publicly funded education when education should be universal and accessible to all taxpayers? What kind of democracy do we live in where we create more haves and have nots from childhood based on the wealth of their parents? It's an eventual self destructive system that punishes the less fortunate child.

I actually think this is a pretty fair question.

We do offer a lot of these same experiences in public school, the CBE does offer "traditional learning", Science, Art, All Girls... options.

Some of the key problems with the CBEs offerings is that they don't nearly meet demand, and they make it rather difficult to know how to apply (in comparison to the charter school).

I don't know if Malcolm in right or not, I have has some personal experience that would indicate that he is right in a way where they are take small and informal steps to manage their applicant pool towards a high "quality" of applicant prior to needing to engage in cherry picking of students.

But I think there is also an extent to which it is a self-selecting sample towards academic quality. The people taking the time to research school school options, send in special applications, make extenuating transportation arrangements for their kids.... are the type of people with the resources and interest in helping their children excel at school.

I think what is being somewhat ignored here is that even if a person laments the erosion of public education and the antithetical attitude the government shows towards education. It still might be rational to choose to put their children in an environment where they are surrounded by others who have more academic drive (internal or external). Because environment maters a lot, if your friends and peers are expected to complete their homework and get good grades, you are more likely to hold yourself to that standard, and as a parent if you send you kids to a school where you know other parents maintain that standard, then you know your kids are more likely to have those types of friends....

I respect the fight, but I don't think Charter Schools or the Attendees are the problem here.

I'm all for arguing that Webber, Edge, and Rundle should not be getting per student funding from the province, if Families are willing to put $20,000 - $30,000 / year into those schools and they are offering things that public schools cannot offer, I see no reason they shouldn't reduce their offering or raise their price by $9000.

But Charter Schools are not doing this, fundamentally they are making similar offerings at similar price points to public schools. The families choosing them are not going there because they have the resources to drop an extra $10K / student / year on school. They are going there because they were offered something that exists in the public system, but they did not have access to for whatever reason.

The Fight is with the fact the provincial government wants worse public schools, and with the CBE for not having the ability as a board to allocate their resources in a way that meets customer demand.

If you are arguing that charter schools should not be funded that i view that as the same argument as saying CBE should eliminate, the Arts school, the science school, the all girls school, the TLC schools, the language immersion schools, IB programs.... you are just drawing the line in a different place.

[RandyHolt]

Originally Posted by Point Blank

That’s totally fair. There’s usually specialized programs like PLP, The Class, and Bridges to support these kids, but again, demand is high and resources are low.

That makes sense. Not that it will ever happen under Smith but I'd love to see the public funding taken away from Private schools and put 100% towards specialized programs for these overly disruptive kids.

This would hopefully give the kids some sort of chance, and get them out of the class for the other kids who they disrupt. I would hope the teachers would also be given some sort of authority to get them removed and placed in this school.

I don't know enough about Charter schools to know whether or how their funding should work, but it should be pretty common sense that private schools don't need public funding.

[Duruss]

Economist Gillian Petit, who conducted an independent analysis of the ADAP framework, said the government’s projections overstate the benefits of the program.

She argued the lower base benefit combined with reduced exemptions means most recipients will be worse off unless they can maintain steady, higher-paying work.

“This ADAP program is going to fail on all the metrics that the government’s promised,” Petit said.

“It’s going to fail to empower Albertans with disabilities because it removes their choice, and it’s going to fail to provide higher earnings exemptions. People are going to have lower benefits unless they’re working at least a part-time minimum wage job.”

https://www.ctvnews.ca/calgary/artic...eepen-poverty/

This is going to be yet another boondoggle by the UCP.

[Finger Cookin]

Yeah these are definitely the ####os who should run a provincial pension plan

[WideReceiver]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

Yeah these are definitely the ####os who should run a provincial pension plan

And a whole country

[para transit fellow]

this government is really bad at math

Chris Ryan, a Calgary lawyer living with progressive multiple sclerosis, has been on AISH for years while struggling to find work.

He says his experience highlights both the potential and the pitfalls of the government’s new approach.

Ryan acknowledges that people like him, who may be able to return to higher-paying work, could eventually benefit — but stresses that most Albertans on disability programs are not in that position.

“Not a chance. I don’t buy the argument at all. They (the UCP) were voted into office on the promise that they would increase benefits to index them to inflation, which they did, but now they’re trying to take that away, which is upsetting in a democracy,” he said.

“They give one example in their materials of a guy working an extra 68 hours a month, but he’s only taking home an extra $500. That’s a lot of work for not much gain. You’re working for less than minimum wage.”

[#-3]

Nm

[Fuzz]

It's also not really helpful to a lot of people. If you get disabled later in life, you probably have a TFSA and RRSP. Those are non exempt assets, so if you have over $100,000 it counts against your benefits. And if you can work some amount, the help of the program is going to be reduced. So you burn through your retirement savings you may reasonably think you will have to cover the increased costs of aging while disabled, and then become dependent on the government for the rest of your life. They essentially are demanding the disabled live in poverty.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Don't be daft, no one should be throwing chairs at anyone.

But if you want to blame someone blame the UCP that has underfunded the system and abandoned that child, not the child that is obviously struggling.

Maybe we should abolish a charter school or two and instead create a school to help this kid learn in a way that works for him.

More resources would be great, no question funding should be higher. And to be clear I'm not blaming the child, I'm blaming CBE administration.

Because I don't think "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" is the right response to "this child throws furniture at his classmates multiple times per week". And that was the response at multiple levels of CBE - I dealt with the principal, area principal, and district superintendent.

I deeply believe in public education. My wife taught in public school for many years and there was no question about sending our kids to private school even though we could afford that. But Charter schools aren't the problem here - it's inadequate per-pupil funding overall, not offering publicly funded alternatives open to all.