Public Funding of Private Religious Schools, redux

[Birdy]

yah i can see that being a huge issue.

i'm also in favour of a system of checks for teachers, or refresher courses if you will. i don't know if anything like that is already in place but it should be. i mean after five years of teaching the same curriculum i can see one getting too comfortable with it all. there needs to be something that keeps teachers on their toes, keeps things fresh and modern, keeps the information flowing, keeps the desire to learn new.

i think a solid grasp of technology should be mandatory for all teachers and upgrade courses every six months or so to keep on top of changes and new technologies.

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Meanwhile, back in other education news...

PEI Professor Fired for No-Show Marking.

[ollie]

Meanwhile, back in other education news...

PEI Professor Fired for No-Show Marking.

I think this prof is a genius.

Weale said his offer was an effort to deal with chronic overcrowding in classrooms, weeding out students who weren't really interested in his course.

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

I think I'll have to use this as a topic suggestion for my Ethics class' term papers.

[bradm]

I saw someone mention something on TV that I hadn't known before: apparently Quebec (and Newfoundland, I think) abolished public funding of Catholic schools a couple of years ago, and it raised hardly a stink at all. (Can anybody confirm this?) Given that Quebec is probably the province with the closest ties to Catholicism, this seems a little strange, but at the same time fairly encouraging, because if Quebec can do it without major problems, why couldn't Ontario?

Aloha,

Brad

[bradm]

I think I've confirmed it. According to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_school

In the Quebec education system there were separate Protestant and Catholic school systems until 1988 when the system was replaced with linguistically based secular school systems. Similarly, Newfoundland and Labrador had schools organised on a confessional basis with separate denominational schools for Catholics, Seventh-day Adventists, Salvationists, Pentecostals, and an integrated stream. This was abolished by referendum in 1997 and a single secular system was introduced to replace the previous streams.

There are some other interesting points in the article, such as rumours that Catholics were told not to respond to a survey about public vs. separate education funding.

Aloha,

Brad

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Leave it to bradm to answer his own question before anybody else manages to click "Send" .

Quite right, though. Funny how Quebec replaced denominational divisions with that other identitarian obsession.

A good read on all this, though slightly dated, is Lois Sweet's God in the Classroom (1997). I still see it good and cheap in those discount bookstores from time to time.

[Edit to add:]

This thread has got me thinking Zeno's paradox: could bradm produce a right answer with such expediency that not even he could come up with the question in time...?

I still can't believe you're on dialup!

Edited March 6, 2006 by Guest
Mulling over how fast bradm's hand must type.

[StoneMtn]

I haven't read this whole thread, but I have one comment on the topic.

When I was growing up, my parents had to struggle to afford to send me to a very expensive Jewish dayschool, as they wanted me to learn about my culture. One day, I became old enough to learn that Catholic Schools are free for taxpayers in Ontario, although every other person must pay privately for their children to be versed in their culture/religion at school.

I couldn't believe that such a double-standard could possibly exist. I still can't.

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

I don't like the double-standard either. It's always dismissed in the courts as the unfortunate fall-out of Constitutional compromises from 1867, but the fact that other provinces have dealt with it kind of undermines that whole premise.

The UN, for its part ruled that the system is screwy and must change - that had been the conclusion from the case that Arieh Waldman (parent having to pay for private Jewish school while also shelling out in taxes) brought to them in the late 1990s. The Ontario government responded first by shrugging, then bringing in that tax-credit under Jim Flaherty, then going back to shrugging again with the Liberals.

Imo, on balance, I'm in favour of de-differentiating the two systems and leaving the private schooling to the pay-for-it-if-you-want-it people; there's just too much to deal with if suddenly money has to get thrown at every kind of charter school out of some abstract notion of fairness. As the Convervatives' bill had it, all you would need to start up a private school was at least five students - and that was about it. There's no provision of monitoring what goes on, and only the most superficial standards to be observed.

But it is a difficult situation; there are a lot of interests at stake.

[StoneMtn]

I agree with your approach. I think it would become impossible if we had to fund a school for every religion.

If it's worth it to you, you pay for it. If you can't pay for it, you teach your children about your religion at home after school.

(I suspect this may be one of the first times Birdy will be posting that he agrees with me; but we'll see... )

[Birdy]

she.

and yes, i do agree with you stone.

i was wondering when you'd come around.

[StoneMtn]

"She?" My apologies. :blush: I swear; long ago, I thought you were a "she" and for some reason I changed my mind on that. Thanks for clarifying.

So, today shall go down in history as the first (and likely the last) day that we agree. All is harmonious at jambands.ca for one fleeting moment.

[color:purple]

Come on people now.

Smile on your brother...

[Birdy]

*marvelling in the glory of it all*

maybe we could call it a 'breakthrough' and that way, by traditional definition, the door will be open for future progress.

[SmoothedShredder]

I hope it lasts longer than a day...

[AD]

I hope it lasts longer than a day...

I strongly disagree!!

I hope it lasts for longer than two days!

ad

[StoneMtn]

I disagree with all of you; three days!

Now, who wants to fight over it?!? Huh? Huh?

[SmoothedShredder]

This is like sit-com hell:

[color:purple]Here we go again!

[Birdy]

wouldn't we really all be agreeing if i said i hope it lasts longer than four days? i mean if you hope it lasts longer than one day, then surely you hope it lasts longer than two days, then surely you hope it lasts longer than three days, and then surely you would agree when i said i hope it lasts longer than four days.

i don't know.. maybe we could be friends.

it's a stretch.. i know

but in all sincerity, even though we may disagree from time to time, i respect you all and appreciate your thoughts (whether in agreeance or not).

[StoneMtn]

in all sincerity, even though we may disagree from time to time, i respect you all and appreciate your thoughts (whether in agreeance or not).

I think that's generally implicit here. I think that most people here are the type that don't bother to argue with people we don't respect. (At least I'm that way.)

If someone on this board posts something I entirely disagree with, but I already have no respect for that person's opinion anyway based on things they've said in the past, I usually just ignore them rather than reply.

As an aside, I have great life-long friends with whom I virtually never agree. For example, I think Velvet and I were friends for five years or so before we ever agreed on anything; ever. I can't remember what it was, but that was probably pretty much the last time, as well.