Pages

March 09, 2009

The Question of Religious Education Funding in Ontario’s Schools

On Friday John Tory announced he would be stepping down as leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservative party, after a humiliating by-election defeat to Liberal Rick Johnson in the riding of Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock, near Peterborough. The by-election was held after PC MPP Laurie Scott agreed to step aside and allow Tory to run in an attempt to gain a seat in the legislature, after he was defeated in his home Toronto riding of Don Valley West in the 2007 election. The rural Kawartha Lakes riding was considered a lock, after Scott had defeated Johnson in 2007 by 10 000 votes, but Tory’s career as party leader fizzled as lost by 906 votes. I almost feel bad for him.

The 2007 election was largely dominated by the single issue of funding for religious schools, after one of the most curious and self-defeating policy gaffes in recent memory. John Tory came out in favour of extending public funding to religious schools beyond the Catholic School Board, provided they met the criteria laid out by the province. This issue was met with huge backlash, and Tory later retreated to the promise of a ‘free vote’ if elected. Liberal leader Dalton McGuinty argued in favour of the status quo, with Catholic schools the only non-secular institutions receiving public funds, and the provincial Greens argued for a singular, unified secular board in Ontario. This is a large part of the reason why I supported the Greens.

To fully understand the issue, as with any issue, one must understand the history behind them (thus the importance of learning history). When Canada was created with the signing of the British North America Act in 1867, there were two dominant groups in the country; English Protestants, mainly in Ontario, Nova Scotia, and parts of New Brunswick; and the French Catholics, residing mainly in Québec. Education was inherently religious in nature, and incorporating and assimilating children into these dominant Christian faiths was seen as beneficial for society. Taken to the extremes, this resulted in Residential Schools, where native children were taken from their homes and indoctrinated with western values; abuse that we are still apologizing for.

But over the coming years, immigration increased, and from different parts of the world. Society diversified, and multiculturalism became an official national policy. The ‘English Protestant’ board gradually transformed into the inclusive, secular board we see today. A ruling by the provincial court in 1994 even officially declared the board secular, after certain religious groups asserted that the public education provided was ‘humanist,’ and ran in opposition to their views. Even in Québec did society become more secular, after the Quiet Revolution of the 1970s, with their school systems eventually becoming two secular systems, one serving the English population, and the other the French. Ontario and Alberta remain the only two provinces providing funding for Roman Catholic schools.

For those of us born in the 1980s in Ontario, fully funded Catholic schools will seem like the norm, but it must be realized that it wasn’t until 1985 that funding for Catholic schools was fully extended to include grades 11-13 to create a fully funded Catholic board. Waves of Catholic immigrants in the 60s and 70s had created an electorate that was 1/3 Catholic, and all three parties were vying for these votes. This decision came about after numerous court cases on various aspects of religious education had been filtering through the Ontario courts since 1928.

Mr. Tory is right. To continue to fund, at the expense of the public education system, only one separate school board providing education to one religious group is unjust. It is even a practice condemned by the United Nations, as it runs in contravention of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, for discriminating in favour of one faith over others, even though it has repeatedly been declared not a violation of Section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. With the ever changing face of Ontario and ever shifting societal values, public institutions must reflect these changes. Especially institutions fostering the development and growth of our children. By placing all children at an equal level in an inclusive, secular education system, they are all able to learn from each other and we best suit the needs of society. The opportunities and experiences presented to these pupils learning together is one of greater inclusiveness and social harmony. By dividing children and bussing them around the city based on religious lines will only lead to a further divided society.

A certain amount of upheaval would surely result from reducing our education system to one single publicly funded board, but in the interests of providing the best level of education for all of Ontario students, this is a step which must be taken. Similar factors were faced by the people of Newfoundland, with their public schools divided amongst many different Protestant denominations (and no secular board), and half-empty buses were shuttling students all across the cities to reach under-funded schools. A 1997 referendum in the province, moving to reduce the schools to one single public board, garnered 73% support, and has led to a better school system for all of Newfoundland’s students. With changing provincial values and demographics, and positive results seen in other parts of the country, Ontario must follow suit.

Russel MacDonald

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

mr. macdonald!

you appear to be misleadingly mis-using the term "single board". ontario is divided into sections - much like electoral districts (actually, frankly - they are electoral districts by their own right) - and each board is run as a seperate entity unto it's own beneath the vaguely governing blanket of the provincial MoE. each board maintains its own unique set of rules and guidelines, set by locally elected board official who have no other affiliation with the MoE. as such, funding differs between EACH board (entirely) regardless of their religious/non-religious affiliation, based on their needs, successes, and unique demands.

also, la revolution tranquil had its greatest strengths in the 1960's, with the most reflective and yet only vaguely related point of contention "finally" being the crise d'octobre (yes, i only learned these terms in as part of my french catholic education) in october 1970. the point of all this (excluding the radicalism of the crise d'octobre) is generally seen by historians as less of a specific act against catholic education too, and as more of a revolt against the pre-vatican II views of the catholic church. As such, (from the flip side of your coin, I suppose), attitudes toward Catholic education in Quebec at the time were more the reflection of societal feelings toward the pre-V.II church as a whole, and less a reflection of the value or lack of value of the actual education itself.

having worked for both public and catholic school boards, i guess that i'm just trying to say that your knowledge of statistics seems impressive, though your actual working knowledge of the ontario education system could perhaps do with a more indepth understanding, should you wish to argue your points with greater conviction to those who follow the argument from a closer standpoint.

food for thought, anyway.
-a.s.


(ps, if this appears twice, i blame blogger.)

Will said...

Cool, constructive feedback, and from someone other than my mum.

I will admit that I lack an in-depth understanding of the Ontario education system, and a lot of this is based on my experiences and observations from my entirely English public education in the province. Most of the stats and facts I got I borrowed from a paper I wrote for a fourth-year History of Education in Canada class, and were reappropriated perhaps more colloquially for this piece.

As for individual school boards within the province (sorry if I was mis-leading; you are correct), they may have a certain level of autonomy from the Ministry of Education, but they all must provide an adequate level of Catholic education to meet the demand, no? And do any of them have the power to designate public funds for, say, a Jewish school? I'm not positive, but it would seem that as education is a provincial matter, they would set the grand policy on how public money is allotted.

As for my point on the Quiet Revolution, I was highlighting the shift in values in Québec towards a more secular society, rather than a particular point about the education. (My suburban Toronto English education may have dealt more briefly with the QR, and I don't know anything really about the Second Vatican Council apart from what wikipedia told me before I responded here...). My point was, though, that if 'Protestant' education becomes legally secular, and traditionally Catholic Québec can embrace secular education, then there must be a case to be made for entirely secular education in Ontario. You are correct in that the Quiet Revolution occurred in the 1960s; I get the date confused with the relatively unrelated October Crisis of 1970.

I appreciate the feedback, especially from someone who's been involved with both public and Catholic boards, and comes from a French Catholic education background.

Any more thoughts on the issue?

Russ

Anonymous said...

haha - i've got more than a few more thoughts on the issue, though not enough time to type them all out. a few might go as follows, however:

-in response to your comment that, "...it would seem that as education is a provincial matter, they would set the grand policy on how public money is allotted.". i get your point - though i suppose that my point would be that Catholic schools ARE public schools. at least, mine was. there were no uniforms, no fees outside of library fines and textbook deposits for the semester, and as such, it i would venture to say that the province obviously does have a grand policy on how money is allotted, regardless of how "p.c." such funding may appear.

-my catholic school experiences may not match everybody else's, but at my school, we were taught not only basic catholic ("catholic" being used in its true meaning as "universal") values in a global way ("treat each other as you would wish to be treated"), but we were taught the values of non-Vatican II-kosher ideas, such as safe sex through condom use and such, and have recently opened a new elementary school that openly embraces the celebration of Ojibway spiritual traditions - smoke ceremonies and all. We had Jewish students and atheist students amongst other beliefs, and were all given plenty of opportunities to not only study the various religious &/or non-spiritual points of view of pretty much EVERY other belief system outside of Christianity, but were also encouraged to openly debate and explore any issues with any of these belief systems, regardless of "the Board's" point of view. Evolution was taught as a theory, and dieties of any form were left out of science.

-the Catholic and public school boards that I used to work for share bussing, amongst many other other-wise costly things.

-until very recently the Catholic Board in my district still received less funding than the public board, despite more efficient publically acknowledged use of their funding, substantially increased enrollments, and a higher percentage of special needs students - especially within the aboriginal population.

-Quebec's move toward secularism has much to do outside of just the Church. The french of Quebec moved away from the aristocratic views of their forefathers, and as the king/emperor was typically viewed in diety-like status, their views on the Church evolved away from the Church as part of the natural society progression away from the Empire. Quebec, for instance, also has the highest number of common-law spouses/unmarried couples living together out of any of the provinces/territories in Canada, which might suggest that perhaps the rest of the provinces are far more old-fashioned, and not ready to take on Quebec's "forward thinking" views on life/religion.

Fully realizing that I am rambling on issues that are more fringe in substance than your article actually addressed, I'll stop here with a final thought:
At what point does Political Correctness become The technique to smother all other beliefs, effectively forcing itself as a belief unto its own upon us? If years of history have ever shown us anything (from Aboriginal rights to religious wars), it may possibly be that we are not wise enough to all ever agree on a way of life. Perhaps the answer isn't then one secular educational route, but maybe just a maintaining of the belief that if you support me, i'll support you and somehow, we'll both respect each other in the end.

thanks for letting me vent.
-as