[ Page 3783 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Education estimates. (Hon. Mr. Heinrich)

On vote 15: minister's office –– 3783

Mr. Heinrich

Mr. Rose

Mr. Nicolson

Mrs. Wallace

Mr. Kempf

Ms. Brown

The House met at 10:01 a.m.

Prayers.

Hon. Mr. Hewitt tabled the sixty-second annual report of the liquor distribution branch along with financial statements for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1983.

Orders of the Day

The House in Committee of Supply; Mr. Strachan in the chair.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF EDUCATION

(continued)

On vote 15: minister's office, $186,000.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: There was a question raised by the member for Nelson-Creston (Mr. Nicolson) at the close of yesterday's session, and I would like the opportunity to respond to that question if I could. The question was: to our knowledge, was any consideration given to student profiles before exams — for example, IQ tests and average grade 11 marks for each student? The response which those in the ministry have prepared is as follows. The question refers to the practice of IQ tests being used in the province to determine how many As, Bs, etc. were to be allocated to each subject area. The problem with this approach is that the question of standards is never really addressed. What happens in using the IQ method is that normal bell-curve distributions of letter grades are determined in advance, regardless of whether or not students meet the standards of achievement in each subject. The approach we are using is a criterion reference approach, where standards of achievement are defined in each subject area by subject-matter specialists. We do not predetermine letter-grade distribution using questionable measures of intelligence. If it happened that physics teachers of the province were able to bring all students to the A level of achievement, then all physics students would get A marks, and they would deserve it. I hope that that answers the question.

MR. ROSE: I regret that the minister got into this with the member for Nelson-Creston (Mr. Nicolson). I'm quite sure the member would like to go back at that, and I'm sure he will. But it really disturbs the flow of the subject matter, because I wanted to briefly respond to the minister's paper on secondary school graduation requirements that appeared at a press conference about half an hour ago.

First of all, I would like to thank the deputy minister for making certain that I got an advance copy. I appreciate that courtesy; I think it's very important. I have had a chance to glance at the paper and really no more than that. I notice that it's a discussion paper anyway. Nobody could really attack a discussion paper, and it's my intention to do that this morning. I congratulate the minister and the ministry for taking this initiative, because for the past two years we have been so concerned with salaries, fiscal frameworks and cutbacks of various kinds that we really haven't been concerned with anything much having to do with education or learning. It's nice to hear and to learn that there is this change of direction. presumably because the ministry feels it's got this distasteful part behind them.

I have a number of concerns, and I think it's important that I express them now. After all, the minister did call for public input, and since I regard myself as a member of the public, I thought I might give a little bit of input here. First of all, I would like to know whether the minister intends to hold public hearings around the province on this subject, and if so, how many.

MR. CHAIRMAN: If the member wishes to repeat the....

HON. MR. HEINRICH: You're through?

MR. ROSE: No, I'm not through. I'm waiting for your answer to determine the next question.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: On public hearings?

MR. ROSE: Yes.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: The matter of public hearings is something we have discussed. We have not made any decision as how best to field the concerns which are going to be raised by the community at large; but it's a matter that I think we have to seriously consider. The House is now sitting, making it somewhat difficult for the next little while; however, it's our intention to secure as much information from those who wish to advance ideas as we are capable of receiving.

I might add that a considerable amount of time is going to be required, because under this discussion paper we focus on the graduating class of 1987. I think that's an important point, Mr. Chairman. You can ask for information, but when it comes down to making any actual changes in the system, it's not that easy to do and does require some period of time. Hence the focus on the graduation class of 1987. We are concerned about those students who will be going into grade 10 in the fall of this year. They will then have the opportunity to review the courses which they would take in grade 10 for grade 11, preparing for their graduation. That gives them a suitable amount of time. I think it's only fair that students be aware of the thrust, the idea, the concept which we have introduced today in the discussion paper. That's going to give us further time past the end of May.

On the concept of public hearings, though — I'll be very candid with the member — we haven't determined exactly where, when and how, but there will be some discussion on that.

MR. ROSE: Mr. Chairman, there are some people who feel, first, that maybe there isn't enough time, even by 1987; and secondly, that maybe you're starting at the wrong end of the education system. You're starting at the top, which is like fixing the roof when perhaps the foundation might need some attention. But that's a matter that will come out. I hope, though, that the minister does proceed with public hearings, because I think there needs to be far more opportunity for the public to express themselves than is allowed for in this response form at the back of the paper. That was my next question. There has got to be more to it than that, because if there is only a response paper, it doesn't offer very much for

[ Page 3784 ]

public expression. We don't even know whether the responses to the questionnaire will be made public. The ministry has embarked on a course and intends to go ahead with it, and the only guarantee that the public has to have their views on education expressed is by the widest possible public exposure. By that I mean going beyond people sending in responses to a questionnaire, so that they can have the debate out in public about what they want for the future of their children. I assume that is going to be happening. The minister is nodding. He hasn't got the thing put together the way he'd like to in terms of where he is going, and when, but I assume that he is going to have public hearings of some kind. May I assume that?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: One of our ideas in this area is that it would be rather a healthy change for school boards to conduct hearings in each of the districts of British Columbia, for the very reason that the member has raised. It is rather nice to be able to talk about some of the substance in the education field — other than dollars — which we have been struggling with. We would encourage school boards to do that, but they haven't been formally advised. It is out for consideration and I would hope they would carry on hearings and inform their public as well.

MR. ROSE: What about the ministry?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Yes, the ministry will be involved; it has to be.

There is one other factor in here, Mr. Chairman, that I would like to raise, and I made reference to it three-quarters of an hour ago. The public is often under the illusion that the public school system needs some work done on it. If the public takes the time to look at the curriculum for grades 11 and 12 which is available and which many students now take, I think they will be suitably impressed with the work which is being carried on. I might add that what we are addressing under this paper is a matter of structure. I think that's important. In my view this will be a very healthy exercise. It's been some time, I suspect, since the public has had an opportunity to really see at first hand what the curriculum is for grades 11 and 12.

MR. ROSE: Well, I don't know. There's a tremendously ancient philosophical argument about whether form determines content or vice versa. That the ministry starts fiddling with the structure doesn't mean that the content's going to be superior. I think we always have to be on guard about that. I'll leave that for now. I'm pleased that there's going to be the widest possible public debate, and that will be encouraged.

[10:15]

1 have some other concerns. I would like to ask the minister whether he's concerned about the proposal in here that asks children — young men and women — to make irrevocable career choices by grade 10. While we deal with that and the minister has an opportunity to hear from his officials, I'll carry on. Is the minister concerned about the lack of flexibility in the specialty courses in grades 11 and 12? A student can't just take one of those from now on, if this proposal goes through; he'd be required to take prerequisites. If he hasn't got those prerequisites, no matter how much he would want a particular course in grade 11 or 12, he'd be unable to take the specialty courses. It seems a bit ironic, if not contradictory, to be going into a time when we're expecting to change careers three or four times in our lifetime — if we don't blow the whole world up — and at the same time as we're expecting that flexibility in the workforce, to be limiting it in the secondary schools. I want to know if the minister is concerned about that.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: The fact is that choices are made now. It seems to me that when you examine the curriculum.... If you look at the proposal, there is the opportunity to take, for example, applied arts and science but still take some of the courses under arts and science to ensure that they would be able to secure admission to a post-secondary institution. There are many students who take prerequisites now. What this particular paper does is try to address a large number of students who shop around and take a number of courses. It seems to me that it makes eminent sense to suggest that there ought to be some form of major as we go through the school system, so that when somebody graduates they won't have a handbasketful of courses, which many do; there will be some consistency in what they have in fact studied. Those choices are now made. All we have to do is look in the system now. How do people secure entrance to a post-secondary institution? One of the big items in the paper which we are proposing is that three subjects, English, phys-ed — health and guidance combined — and social studies for grade 11 be the only compulsory subjects required in grades 11 and 12 –– I repeat: English 11 and 12, socials 11 and phys ed. I just think that we ought to be able to tighten that up a bit. Having said that, we also must recognize that a good number of students already take the minimum which we are suggesting and more. But those are students who don't really require very much guidance; they're the top 8 or 10 percent. We don't worry about them. But I'm talking about a large number in the middle who we feel ought to take advantage of the opportunity that is there.

MR. ROSE: The minister can make all the noise he likes about whether or not this 8 percent takes these courses anyway. We all know that — that's nothing. Because he's cutting down the electives from six to three, he's forcing those people into other courses. Some of the courses that they have to take — and they'll be looking ahead — will require certain prerequisites, which limits the courses even in grade 10. I know the counterargument to that: the buffet approach mentioned here in the paper, or the dog's breakfast, a smorgasbord of electives. I know the objection to that. The point is that this is a proposal for a much more structured, much more demanding and much more highly academic program for most children. That may be what the public wants. Maybe that's a good thing, but let's not let it escape notice what's it's actually doing here.

Let me mention a couple of other concerns. I'm concerned about the funding. On the one hand it looks as if the courses of the kind that more people will be taking will be cheaper, actually. It doesn't take much equipment to teach English: some chalk. Social studies is the same: a few textbooks and some maps, right? So if you force more people into electives such as math and other things like that and get them out of the gym, you don't need big gymnasia and that sort of thing. On the other hand, the accent on technical training — computers and that sort of thing — is going to be more expensive. What assurances do we have that the ministry has considered those things? Is the fiscal framework

[ Page 3785 ]

prepared to fund them? I noticed in science, which is being emphasized here.... Will the school districts be given funds for science? I hear all the time that the elementary schools don't have science equipment; they are certainly not up to standard. There have been recommendations to improve those. So if we are going to make the academic program much more intense, we certainly have to be able to fund it. The directions clearly have been just the opposite over the last two or three years.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Chairman, with respect to the last point raised, we have been aware for some time that dollars will be required. We know that. On the earlier point, the framework generates so many dollars per student. That's recognized at the beginning. Any changes coming in are not going to affect the amount of money which is advanced into the system under the framework.

Are you busy, Mr. Member?

MR. ROSE: No, I'm not. They're just bothering me. If they go away we'll be fine.

MR. HOWARD: We're asking him to interpret what you're saying.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: I see. That's fair comment, Mr. Chairman.

I repeat. Number one, we have been aware for some time that funds will be required to accommodate any proposed increases in science if, in fact, they are implemented. Remember, this is a discussion paper. We're looking for response. I think it's only fair to let the public know what the feeling of the government is in this particular direction. That's why it's there. I'm not being cute about it. It's in the paper and it's right on top of the table.

Number two, the framework makes provision for students. It's primarily enrolment-driven. So there's not going to be any reduction in funds as a result of somebody teaching with some emphasis on English, history, social studies or math. The big items in schools are laboratories — the labs for sciences — and some of the technologies which are offered, particularly in the area of computerization. We find that some of the present electives in the system are the most expensive courses in the schools and often, I am advised, have the lowest enrolment. That's something which we are going to address. But I don't want the member to be under any illusion that we are advancing something and not knowing that there is a dollar sign attached to it. There is.

MR. ROSE: This is my final observation and concern on this subject. I wonder if the minister is aware that the proposals look a great deal like the 11-plus system of Britain that was abandoned some 20 years ago as pedagogically unsound. Take grammar schools: they are the arts and sciences proposal — for the bright ones. Then there are the technical schools. They are for the applied arts and sciences program for the medium ones. For those who are academically incompetent there are the secondary modern, or the career program. I wonder if that minister has been struck by that resemblance to that program abandoned in Britain 20 years ago.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Well, it's not my last one....

MR. ROSE: I know that. but we're doing fine here.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: I can give an unequivocal answer that it's not modelled on anything from Great Britain. I can advise you that I have not examined anything from Great Britain at all. We're looking at a school. We're looking at one school, and there can be movement sideways among the three proposals or categories which we have advanced. We're talking in theory right now, because it's a discussion paper, but if somebody were to take subjects listed under applied arts and sciences and then suddenly said, "No, you know, I think I can do better than that and I want to be admitted to a post-secondary institution, or as a matter of interest I would like to take a more difficult course," they can move over and take electives under the arts and science. They may very well say: "Look, I'm career-oriented. I want to get right out of applied arts and science and move over to career preparation." That's available, and it's within one institution. I don't believe that that opportunity is afforded students under the British system.

MR. ROSE: Well, it's not easy here.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: We agree on that.

MR. ROSE: Just one other thing: I hope the at the minister is going to restore the money for counselling so that students can make informed choices. One of the big problems, though, in Britain and elsewhere.... I think it was Vance Packard who labelled the American high school as being one of the most undemocratic, class-ridden institutions in America. However, I don't want, if we can avoid it, with certificates or various other little labels, to return to the class system that once prevailed in the high schools. I want the minister to assure us that that is not going to happen and that this program will not have us rushing headlong into the 1960s.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Headlong into the 1960s?

MR. NICOLSON: I thank the minister for his response to my question yesterday. However, he has confirmed what I suspected, which is that somehow the government has come up with the solution to a problem that has eluded educators since the time of Socrates — the perfect test. Somehow the minister has come up not only with a perfect test, but the perfect test in algebra, biology, chemistry, English, English literature, French, geography, history and physics, because he is saying that the A standard is determined by the achievement in this particular test, and that students.... I just knew, somehow, that your ministry would try to sidetrack my question and put it all in terms of the IQ test. I have the courage to use the term IQ test, as a professional educator who taught physics, who marked physics in government exams several times and who one year in my two classes of physics 12 — and it is pretty unusual to have two classes of physics 12 in a school of around 500 students, but I managed to do that — managed to get two-thirds of them a government scholarship with their physics mark. So that's the background I'm speaking from. But I will say that as highly as I might think of my own achievement as a physics instructor, I don't pretend that I could ever begin to construct the perfect standard for physics achievement. I want to ask the minister: had each item on each of those exams been pretested for a reliability coefficient before it was placed on the exam?

[ Page 3786 ]

[10:30]

HON. MR. HEINRICH: The examination questions were not protested, as you suspect they were not. That information is now being assembled. I think that we have to raise this point on the first round. There are some concerns which are now being raised, and those are the matters that are going to be addressed.

I tell you what I would like from the member. He is obviously somebody who has a great deal of experience in a particular area, in physics specifically, and I would like — and I mean this sincerely — some learned comment from him as to what he would suggest we could do to make the system better. I ask for that because there were a lot of people involved. In the preparation of those examinations there were involved physics teachers who were specialists. They were the ones who prepared those examinations. They are just the same as you and I and everybody else: they cannot prepare a perfect exam.

As I mentioned yesterday, it went through a number of committees, starting with the preparatory committee consisting of teachers. It was then advanced to another committee involved in measurement and accuracy. It then went to a third committee to determine the accuracy of the examination question and the acceptable answer. After that was concluded, it went back to the preparatory committee. Now when we get into the field, after the examination was written.... A group of physics teachers looked at that examination and said: "All right, we now have to put in some cutoff levels with respect to As, Bs, C-pluses, Cs and so on down the line." They made that determination in advance of marking the exam. They looked at the level of difficulty of the paper, then they made the decision. They were then marked, and there was also double checking on marking to ensure that once marked.... They would go back and randomly select papers again to ensure that other markers would mark those papers.

If there's a problem.... I can't specifically respond to the concern that the member has raised. I don't have any experience in marking physics papers, and my ability in physics wouldn't exactly have made me a scholarship candidate in the classroom of the member for Nelson-Creston. Although now is not the appropriate time, I would like him to give us some help, if he thinks he has something to help us, to avoid getting into a problem which he thinks we will get into if we go in the direction which we are now going. I want him to know that the information is now being assembled, and I am sure that those people who were involved in the preparation of the physics exams may very well have the same concern that the member is now raising.

MR. NICOLSON: Mr. Chairman, I thank the minister for his candour. But it comes down to this: we are not using a reliable testing instrument for what we are measuring. I am not saying that one has to use an instrument.... There are real problems in testing the validity and reliability of every item on a test prior to actually implementing its use. It tends to get you into just using multiple-choice. If you're going to have some subjective testing, you have to make up the type of questions which over the test of time have been fairly reasonable questions. It would appear that what was done here was that various committees that constructed the tests created their expectations, and these expectations are from a very small group. There was not complete cooperation from the BCTF in volunteering their members for this, from what I gather from the minister.

I'm talking about the students — not the teachers. Let's just look at the sum of the As and Bs in the various courses: algebra, 20; biology, 35 — this is according to exam standards by adding up the 13 and 22 in biology; chemistry, 32; English, 25; English lit, 11; French, 17; geography, 22; history, 22; physics, 23. My advice to a student would be that if you're going to.... You're going to have to take English, okay. Probably you're going to have to take algebra, although there are ways of avoiding that. It would seem to me that the best thing for a student to do would be to take biology and chemistry, because the expectations of the marking committees do not appear to be as demanding in biology and chemistry as they are, for instance, in English literature, where there tends to be a very high expectation. Only 1 percent of the students were awarded an A and only 10 percent were awarded a B.

The normal kind of curve thing, which seems to be followed overall in the other cases, would be to give about 5 percent As. That would mean that you would have to have four classes of 25 of English literature to give out one A across that whole group. I doubt if there are many schools that enrol more than one class of English literature. There may be two classes of English literature in some of the very large high schools. So it would be almost the toss of a coin as to whether one of them would earn an A, based on those teacher expectations of the marking committee.

Obviously the expectations of the teachers taken collectively around the province was a little bit higher. They saw people who elected to take English literature as being maybe a little bit above average. I would venture that that would be the case. People who elect to take English literature, French, physics.... If you were to look at their grade 10 and 11 achievement as a grade-point average and look at their overall grade 12 achievement on exams and then try to get some sort of comparability toward those and the pool of students who take other electives It's very serious. Entry into colleges is very competitive.

To be personal about this, I have a son taking grade 12 courses, and he wrote some of these exams. Luckily for him, he took biology. He chose to write biology this time, and he got a pretty good mark. Based on this, I should have counselled him away from some other subjects. It's nice to try to bring up standards. I'll also get on a bit of a personal note here: when I was in my second year of university — my first year of engineering — I was taking a thermo-dynamics course. Out of a class group of about 150, I got the third highest mark, which was 23 percent. You have to have a 60 percent average to even get into engineering. Yet that is the kind of thing that happens with teacher expectations. We had a teacher; it was his first year out from England — he was from Oxford or Cambridge or someplace — and I guess he had very high expectations for us. It's rather amazing that out of about 150 students, only one person got a so-called passing grade of over 50 percent. That student got about 60 percent. The next....

MR. MOWAT: This is your life.

MR. NICOLSON: Well, I guess I expose myself to that kind of attack by doing this, but if I can't draw upon my life experience and try to share it with this House on what I consider a very serious matter, it is.... In fact, students in

[ Page 3787 ]

grade 12 who are entering post-secondary education or the workforce and taking that kind of step in their life take this as a very serious matter. And I take it very seriously that if you look beyond what was going on in the ministry at that time — if there is some research into this — and look back to the work of Dr. Conway, who used to be in charge of statistics and measurement in the Ministry of Education, you will find that they abandoned the system of setting these so-called standards and expectations, and they went to some way of distributing marks equitably so that students were not making this choice of going into another program. What is going to happen is that students who are otherwise getting....

Let's say a straight-B student: a straight-B student somehow finds that while he's a straight-B student, he's only a C student in physics or French but he's an A student in biology, because they're giving out 35 percent or 36 percent of the marks in biology to A and B students whereas in English literature only 11 percent or in French 17 percent. There are about half as many As and Bs in French, according to these exam standards, and 23 percent in physics. I'll tell you that those groups tend to select themselves.

Now to come back to what I said earlier, it's a little bit of an idle boast to say that I got two-thirds of my students a government scholarship, because the first couple of weeks of teaching I used to have all kinds of dropouts, and a natural selection would take place. There weren't too many D and E students left in a class after the first couple of weeks, even in physics 11. There was more selection in physics 12. What I'm saying, then, is that you do not have a homogeneous group in each of these subject categories.

What we are going to here is a system that was in place back in the 1940s. I don't know when the classical little change in philosophy took place, but I know that by the time I took education courses in the early 1960s it was a fairly classic lesson in testing and measurement. It appears to have been missed here, and what I see.... Okay, what's the prediction? The prediction is that we are going to discourage students from taking the courses here such as.... Well, the worst discouragement would be in English literature. Another discouragement would be in French. Geography and history, at 22 percent, are probably where they belong, and physics at 23 percent — I'm sure you'd find that it's a very select group.

I say that using IQ is not a good measurement of an individual, but it can give you some pretty rough ideas about the potential of a group. Using the actual letter-grades achieved in grade 10 and grade 11, or going back to grade 7 or wherever — but don't spend too much money on collecting the statistics — and looking at the actual records of achievement of those students and then creating a profile gives you, I think, a more realistic expectation than a small group of five or ten physics teachers could come up with. I wonder where they came from. Were they actually in the classroom or recently retired or people who were between jobs, or a combination thereof? Probably a combination. If that test was anything valid, it would not have been necessary for about six of the test items in the physics exam and several items in the biology exam to be thrown out. In fact, if those tests were valid, you would not have had creeping into the biology exam language that has fallen out of use in that science. That would hint to me that somebody very long retired was a part of the construction of the biology exam; somebody very much not up to speed was involved in that for such a question to creep into that test.

[10:45]

So I take the minister's offer, and I would certainly be pleased to sit down with a committee of some of the people in the testing and measurement branch of his ministry to voice my concerns, but I think that this first step.... Well, really, some remeasurement would be in order. I would recommend that these tests be rescaled and recombined and a new set of marks go out — although I guess that would be almost impossible now because it would require not only that certain areas go up but that others go down, and that would be pretty unpalatable.

Mr. Chairman, that more or less summarizes what I have to say, and the minister might wish to respond to that.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Chairman, very briefly, we recognize what the member is saying and we appreciate his concerns. I'll put an invitation to you right now: you're always welcome to speak to those people in the ministry who are involved in this particular area — anytime you wish. However, there is something more that we are prepared to invite you to if you wish to attend. There is going to be an informal session in the latter part of March or perhaps in April, at which a number of people will be present — their names are Messrs. Levirs, Meredith and Evans; maybe the member will recognize those three gentlemen — plus ministry staff. The meeting will be held here in Victoria to discuss the very subject which the member has raised. If the member wishes to make contact with my deputy, Mr. Carter, in the fourth week of March to get the date and place, he is welcome to attend.

MRS. WALLACE: Mr. Chairman, I hadn't really intended to talk about exams, but in reviewing some of his life experiences my colleague from Nelson-Creston brought back vividly memories of government departmental exams, as we called them in those days in the province where I went to school. The exams began at the grade 8 level at that time, and my memory of them and their results is that I had a great time from grade 8 on because I never had to do any work. I had either the fortune or the misfortune to be able to read a textbook one day, regurgitate it the next day and forget it on the third day, and that's what I did all through high school. I didn't do any work and I really knew nothing when I got out of high school, because I had forgotten everything I had crammed for the exams.

Interjection.

MRS. WALLACE: Yes, perhaps it is a very unfortunate thing to have that kind of ability, because it certainly doesn't make for a sound, well-rounded education. I had to really scratch and expand my knowledge when I went out into the work field and realized that I had to know something and be able to apply it. I took correspondence courses and did all kinds of things to upgrade my education, in spite of the fact that I had passed those departmental exams. We didn't have As or Bs in those days; we had percentage marks, and mine ranged in the 90 percent field all the time, no matter what the subject. That is what exams do to people who have that ability; it doesn't make for a well-rounded education. It encourages teachers.... I can remember teachers giving us the departmental exams from preceding years, and very often those questions were repeated on the next year's exams.

[ Page 3788 ]

You study for the test, you teach for the test, and the rest of the curriculum is incidental.

I just wanted to make those few remarks regarding my feelings about instituting government exams, as is now being done. It is a retrogressive step. I think those standards can be set within the individual learning institution and you can have a much broader field of education if in fact you are proceeding to teach the whole subject throughout the year. I believe children are much more receptive to that. I know of one instance where a teacher had decided to deal with a socials class curriculum by dealing with each country at a time: the art, culture, geography and history, all sectors of that country, country by country, rather than dealing with it as that particular textbook set out, according to the history, geography, art and culture and so on. That particular class was actually recreating a country. They were dealing with all facets of it, and learning very well. They were very interested in everything they were doing, country by country. When test time came around, certain teachers said to certain classes that weren't doing this: "We have gone so far in the textbook, so our tests will be on history — or geography, say. We won't be dealing with art, culture or other things for all countries." Some of the children in the other class, who would have been having a different test, became concerned because they hadn't covered those subjects. They talked to their parents, the parents talked to the principal, and eventually that class had to be dropped because of the pressure put on the principal of that school as a result of the parents' concern that their children were not learning the same things as the other children. By the time the year was over, they would have covered the whole curriculum; and they would have covered it in a way that was much more meaningful and with much more understanding about each country on the part of those children. But because of that pressure, because of the test — which wouldn't have been applied to that group.... It was pre-understood that it would be a different test. Because of the public pressure from the parents, as a result of the students communicating, that whole program had to be dropped. That was most unfortunate. As I said, I didn't really intend to talk about that.

Some time ago — back in May, I think it was — an organization of which I am a member, the Business and Professional Women's Clubs, presented a brief to the Premier. In that brief they included a resolution on education. I'll just read the last few paragraphs of the background paper:

"We therefore urge the government to provide sufficient funds so that every child in this province will have available to her or him instruction in life and recreational skills'so that each one will be adequately equipped to face a world of declining employment opportunities.

"Skills such as home economics, art and music may be necessary in the world of the future, along with computer technology."

They're talking about a very broad-based educational program that has to put some real emphasis on leisure-time activities. We're facing a situation, whether we like it or not, in this highly technological age, in which we will find that more and more people will not have permanent jobs or will be working shorter hours. There is a real need to develop alternative interests. That's particularly true when we have so many who have no jobs at all. There must be opportunities for not just young people but for all people to expand their knowledge, to develop those life skills, to have some interest to fill their lives, which otherwise would be very bleak and difficult to face. That's just not happening as a result of this minister's program.

I have two school districts in my constituency. One of them is in the 4,000-10,000 bracket of enrolment; the other is in the zero-1,500 bracket — a very small school district. They are Cowichan and Lake Cowichan respectively. In the Cowichan School District they have been able to run a very tight ship. The minister will agree. I know he has told me in discussions we've had that that budget has been well managed. The district has been well managed. In fact, the estimate that I have is that they expect that by the end of 1986 they will only have to cut 0.17 percent from their budget — which is pretty close on, Mr. Chairman. What has that small percentage meant to that school district? I can tell you some of the things it's meant.

We have a large Indian population in Cowichan. We have two alternative education classes for children. One of those classes is completely gone. If ever we needed to provide incentive for young Indian people to become involved in and stay in the educational system, it is now. We talk about high unemployment rates. The unemployment rate on the Cowichan Indian reserve is in excess of 50 percent. We really need both of those courses. One of them is gone.

Our music courses are completely eliminated. We are not teaching music in Cowichan any more. This is only to deal with a 0.17 percent decrease in the budget. This is the kind of effect that very minor cut in a very well run school district is having on the quality of education in that school district.

Summer school is completely gone. This means that if a young person happens to be in the category that fails one of those government exams, they lose a whole year, because there is no way that they can pick up that course at summer school. That summer school is gone.

[11:00]

Swimming is gone. There are no more swimming classes. Certainly a lifestyle class. Field trips have had to be cancelled in order to supplement the transportation budget. The minister and I have had many discussions about transportation in Cowichan. The board is presently charging, in the south end, $4.50 per child per week to travel on school buses. Now $4.50 may not sound like much to the minister, but that amounts to $18 per month per child. And if you have three or four children in school you are looking at $75. If you're on social assistance or even on UIC, as so many of our people in Cowichan are –– 30 percent of them almost — that's a lot of money. So what's happening? Those kids are walking or biking or getting to school as best they can, because they can't afford that. They're having to cross a four-lane highway. The hazards, the minister would agree, are drastic. Even to bring that down to that amount, the school board has had to cut out field trips. There are no more visits to other parts of the province, no more trips to the museum or the Legislature. These are things that serve to broaden the basic education of young people. If there are to be skiing trips or skating excursions, the expense of that has to be borne by the school or the parents. What we're doing, Mr. Chairman, is creating a class society within the schools. Some parents can afford to pay those expenses, can afford to contribute to school endeavours, can pay that extra transportation cost for the child to go on a school ski trip or skating or swimming excursion, and other parents can't. That's a fact of life. Those children are being segregated into a class society within the school. That

[ Page 3789 ]

is not right or just in this province — or anywhere. It concerns me very gravely that that is happening.

Classes are slightly larger. One school in Cowichan is being closed next June: the Crozier Road School, a fairly new school with a good gymnasium and playground facilities. Secretarial time has been cut. The one thing they have been able to maintain is Charles Hoey, with special aids there. That is an extremely great institution. I'm sure the minister is aware of Charles Hoey School and what it does for exceptional children. It's an excellent institution. It's still carrying on, at the expense of some of these other things, because that school board is determined that Charles Hoey will not be disrupted. Those cuts are the result of a 0.17 percent reduction in budget.

[Mr. Ree in the chair]

Now let's look at Lake Cowichan — the small district — zero to 1,500. They are facing an 11.55 percent cut. Can you imagine what that is doing to the educational quality in Lake Cowichan? Sure, their administration costs were high. They recognized that, and they have cut back. They reduced the number of trustees from seven to five. They closed one and a half schools last year, and goodness knows what's going to happen next year. They'll probably even have to close the high school, which means the kids will have to go into Cowichan. The delivery of every program is affected. The people who are living in Lake Cowichan are being denied access to equitable education facilities. They are trying desperately, but facing that kind of cut, it is just impossible to maintain that quality of education — to maintain the sort of thing that the business and professional women are talking about in their brief to the Premier, whereby we must ensure that the quality of education is not infringed upon. We're talking about educating a future generation that has to face a highly technical world. We're talking about educating a generation that will have to deal with some very complex problems, and we're not providing the quality of education that those young people need.

We're particularly discriminating against the small area where population has been declining. Certainly that's been happening in Lake Cowichan because of the horrendous blows they've had in the forest industry, with mill closures and cutbacks. A declining population, facing a cut like that, and trying to continue to educate their children. Many people are in receipt of social assistance or UIC; there's a very high unemployment rate. That's the kind of reality that's out there in the educational arena. It's a direct result of this government's determination not just to hold the line but to cut back. At least there should be an increase to represent inflation, but that's not there. You cannot provide services in 1984-85 with '83-84 dollars, or with even less than '83-84 dollars. At least that inflation factor should be included.

It's short term certainly, and probably not as important as what we're doing to the children, but putting off maintenance means it's going to be more costly to maintain those facilities in later years. We're talking about having to increase the pupil-teacher ratio. That's certainly a two-edged sword. You're cutting the funding to the point where you are doing away with secretarial staff. You are limiting any teachers' aides because of the cuts in funding and at the same time you're mainstreaming. I don't object to mainstreaming, but if you're going to mainstream you have to fund for it. You don't cut back, you don't make a larger class. You don't ask that teacher to deal with exceptional children who need a lot of individual attention and can be very disruptive in that class, or to deal with a larger class with no assistance.

That's what's happening under this minister. The quality of education is being eroded drastically. The minister sits there and looks at the bottom line and the dollars and cents, and talks about full-time equivalents and cutbacks of 0.17 percent or 11.55 percent, or whatever his computer spews out, and somehow doesn't realize that he's talking about the very lives and the very futures of young people in this province. I am extremely disturbed that this minister is not able to grasp what he's doing and is not able to go to cabinet and encourage them to increase the support that is so badly needed for the future of young British Columbians.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: A few points have been raised by the member. First of all, examinations. I acknowledge the reasons advanced with respect to those who can perform well on external examinations, to the detriment of classroom activity during the school year; hence the acknowledgment and the waiting and the use of 50 percent. That argument has been made for some time; consequently, we looked to 50 percent classroom performance and 50 percent external exams.

With respect to the issue of life and recreational skills, while I recognize the interest expressed by a number of districts in this area, I think we now have to consider, under our current economic environment, the matter of priorities. When we add all of the items which the member referred to — summer school, swimming, the field trips — while they are desirable and helpful, just how much can we expect the public school system to deliver with the dollars which we have made available?

The member may argue that I am only concerned with the bottom line. Well, I am concerned with the bottom line; I make no apologies for that, because the public, generally, has said that they agree with the amount which is being advanced to the system, but they can't let us have any more. The biggest contributor to the public education system, as far as funding is concerned, is non-residential and consolidated revenue. Recognizing that consolidated revenue is primarily made up of personal income tax as well as royalties from a number of resource areas, and recognizing that those areas have been in decline, it was incumbent upon our government to recognize the problem and do the very best we could with the funds which had been made available.

I have never denied that there is going to be some pain suffered in all districts. I think it is important that we respond to the school districts to which the member has referred. I'll first deal with Cowichan, School District 65. In 1984 we are talking about a budget which is 99.6 percent of 1983 — that's 0.4 percent. The enrolment has declined from 1975, when there were 7,832 students, to 7,153 in September 1983, which is roughly a decline of 700 students. That was recognized.

The cost per pupil in the area in 1984 — this is an important figure in Cowichan — was $3,253. I would then like to go and look at Lake Cowichan, where the enrolment has declined from 1,482 in 1975 to 1,114 in 1983, which is a decline of roughly 368 students. It is a small district, and I recognize the reasons why there have been some declines as well — you raised the issue of forestry. The cost per student in this small district, if you want to compare North Cowichan with Cowichan....

[ Page 3790 ]

MRS. WALLACE: Lake Cowichan.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: I beg your pardon, Cowichan with Lake Cowichan. If you look at the cost per student when we take everything into consideration for 1984 — Mr. Chairman, I hope that the member would hear this particular figure — at Lake Cowichan the cost per student is $4,203 all included. That's the amount being advanced in 1984, including the phase-in allowance.

[11:15]

The provincial average is $3,259, so it is roughly $950 more per student, with an enrolment declining from 1,482 to 1,114. I also recognize, Mr. Chairman, that small districts like this still have those mandatory expenses involving a district office. It would be rather interesting if, in fact, somebody advanced the idea...and I'm not saying this, but you know the issue of amalgamation is important, and perhaps this is one way we can add...

MRS. WALLACE: Are you sure you're not saying that?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: I am just raising some of the items which are now coming to the top of the barrel when we see these problems. Now it seems to me that when we find a school that could have 1,114 people in it — one school in one district — and we have a whole district out there with all the accoutrements, it might be something that we ought to consider. We ought to look at it. I think you would agree with that point. Perhaps all the money which is already being spent in Cowichan could answer the problem and allow more money into the classroom. But I leave with you, Mr. Chairman, the cost per student in Lake Cowichan as compared to the cost in Cowichan. I think that's an important issue. By the way, the drop for Lake Cowichan under the framework, and without looking at the additional moneys generated within the district or the phase-in allowance, is 3.4 percent for 1984; but we also had a decline in enrolment of, I think it was, 268 students.

I am not going to dispute that there is some hardship. People may have to adjust their desires and perhaps focus on what I think we all agree to be the priorities. I can't really say much more than that. I recognize the concerns which are being advanced, but I'm not going to stand here and say that there is an instant solution. There isn't. The only thing I can say is that, as much as possible, all districts are being treated equitably the first time around.

MR. KEMPF: Mr. Chairman, I won't take up much of the time of committee this morning. I want to speak for just a few moments on independent schools and their relationship to the new exam system.

However, the minister's last few words brought up a couple of points that I'd like to read into the record. As a northerner I certainly do agree, as I believe the vast majority of my constituents do, with the shakedown that is taking place in the public school education system of our province. I think it is long overdue. I believe that for some time now our public school system has in fact been seriously out of control in relation to student-teacher ratios, the amounts of money that are spent and have to be paid by the taxpayer, and the education of our students and children in British Columbia. There was a definite need for change, and I commend the minister for moving in that direction. However, I would caution the minister, and I am sure he is aware, that there is a vast difference between what has gone on and is going on in the education system in the urban areas of British Columbia and in the rural areas. There is quite a difference in enrolments, for one thing. Contrary to what is happening in Victoria and Vancouver, our school enrolments in the northern part of this province are on the rise. Therefore I believe that has to be a strong consideration when speaking of restraint in the public school system of British Columbia.

As the minister is from the north, I probably don't have to remind him that there are additional costs pertaining to the educational system that school boards in the northern part of this province have to bear. One of those very real costs is that of transportation, because of our vast distances and our very harsh weather conditions. I think that has to be a prime concern of this minister when considering the dollars that are allocated to northern school districts as compared to those in our large cities.

I'd also like to suggest that more attention be paid by the minister, when speaking of restraint, to the area of administration. Although we're practising a lot of restraint in our educational system in British Columbia, we're still spending far, far too much money on administration. I think we've got to pay far more attention to that particular budgetary item, Mr. Minister.

What I wanted to speak about this morning was the question of independent schools, particularly in respect to the examination program where it pertains to independent schools. I've spoken to a number of independent school people in my constituency and in other areas around the province, and I believe that I'm correct in saying that they are in agreement — not total agreement, but I would say certainly the majority — with a testing system. They're not concerned that the academic standards of their schools be tested. I think they're willing to put those academic standards up against any public school in British Columbia. But it is my understanding that there still remains a very grave concern among independent schools in this province for their very autonomy. The members opposite were not all here back in 1977, but I remember very clearly the opposition NDP running from this chamber when the vote came on the independent schools act. I believe there still remains in the minds of independent schools people a very grave concern in regard to the present exam being offered by the Ministry of Education. I accept that concern, because it can have a very grave effect on the very reason those schools came into being in the first place, which is that they have a very real philosophical difference when it comes to the education of their children. I think we as legislators have to understand that.

I would like to read parts of a letter. I have received many, and I think it is indicative of the feelings of the people in the independent schools system. It's a letter that I received a copy of; it's addressed to the hon. minister and dated January 24, 1984. It reads as follows:

"Dear Mr. Heinrich,

"Several times you have been approached by representatives of the private schools in this province regarding proposed government examinations in these schools. Your refusal to consider a different type of exam as the ones used in public schools to be set up jointly by your department and representatives of the Christian and other private schools seems to indicate that you are determined to impose the same so-called neutral philosophy on private schools that prevails in our public school system. It is our opinion

[ Page 3791 ]

that parents, first of all, are responsible for the education of their children. Parents who pay their share of public school taxes, besides the 70 percent of the operating costs of private school and the 100 percent of capital costs of that school, have the right to choose which philosophy should determine the nature of that school's curriculum. You ought to be well aware of the fact that academic standards are not the issue here at all.

"Your department has monitored academic achievements in private schools for several years now, and, as mentioned earlier, we have no objections at all to exams. Mr. Chairman, I believe that to be true. I don't think independent schools people have any problem with an examination system which will prove the academic standards of their students coming out of their schools. It is my understanding that independent schools still have a very grave concern predicated on their philosophy and on the present exam that's being perpetrated upon them."

My questions, and there are few, of the minister are these. It's my understanding that prior to seeking further discussion — and I think this is fair — the independent schools people are willing to have their students write the June exam to see what grades they will achieve. In so doing, I think they are being very fair. My question to the minister is: having written that exam, if there is still that very real concern for the content — the philosophical content, if you like — of that exam among the independent schools people of British Columbia, will there be further serious consultation with the independent schools people with a view to putting together an exam which will in fact recognize the philosophical differences?

Interjection.

[11:30]

MR. KEMPF: All subjects. The member interjects, and I know this is a very touchy subject with the NDP, because they have no use for the independent school system at all — none whatsoever. They've indicated that, and they have shown that on the floor of this House. They would like to get on the bandwagon at this time, because they think it is popular. They have shown their interest in the independent school system of this province time after time, but I won't talk about that this morning.

I just want to know from the minister whether, if after the June exams there remains a concern on behalf of the independent school people in this province for the exams being offered by the provincial government, there will be serious consultation with a view to drafting an exam. I see no problem with having two sets of exams.

Interjection.

MR. KEMPF: Knowing your philosophy, Mr. Member. you would. I see no problem with a dual exam system, which will recognize the philosophy of the independent schools curriculum. I see no problem with that. I would like to know from the minister if subsequent to the writing of the June exams there is still a concern in the minds of the independent schools people, will he seriously consult with them with a view to drafting the kind of exam that will adhere to their curriculum?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Chairman, three items have been raised by my colleague the member for Omineca, and they're three valid points. First of all, transportation costs. I am very much aware of the concerns of northern communities in that area. When we prepared the framework, the hard evidence before us were the costs for 1982. Remember, this was introduced in July 1983, and it is only now, by February 15, that the school boards submitted their '84 budgets. We will only have the audited actuals for 1983 by the end of March, so we relied upon the costs for '82. I recognized those districts which would have transportation costs of some concern, and I will tell you that one of them happens to be 57, where the members for Prince George South (Mr. Strachan) and Prince George North are from....

Interjection.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Well, it's true, and we might as well throw it right out. I have not heard of a problem from the school districts of Burns Lake or Nechako, although I suspect it may have gone to the ministry. I don't recall the letter. But it wouldn't surprise me, Mr. Chairman, because we do have a bit of a problem in this area, and it's something which we will be addressing. I hope it will be rectified for the 1985 budget.

Now in the area of administration, I appreciate the views of the member. I think what we ought to do, perhaps, is refresh our memories and go back to the legislation and the thrust of the framework, and the concern which has been expressed by members on both sides of the House, to my knowledge, about excessive administrative costs. This has been a wonderful exercise — the framework — because it has pushed it to the top so everybody can see what the costs of administration have been, and where some districts have been prudent managers and other districts — with all due respect — have not been. But with a little help, and some direction, through the framework and the policy which we have introduced involving school boards and school financing, we've been able to address that issue. The framework provides about 4.2 percent of the total budget for that area. Now if a school district — and some still do — spends more than that amount which has been allocated, the interesting thing is that that becomes public knowledge. People can ask their school boards. This information which we're providing, and with which I respond to inquiries from members, points out by function what the costs are. It's the first time this has ever been done in the history of the province. It seems to me that all of us are in this boat together. We represent the taxpayer; the taxpayer pays our bills and everybody else's, and I think the taxpayer is entitled to know where those funds go. We don't have an instant solution, but I think, as this whole framework evolves over a period of three years, a lot of our questions will be answered.

On the touchy issue of independent schools, a point of clarification: the member for Omineca has advanced that it involves the entire independent school system. Well, that's not quite right, because the concern being advanced is from one segment of the independent school system, and primarily involves the Christian schools — or parochial schools, as my colleague corrects me — and statements to this effect have come to me. Having said that, I recognize the concerns which have been advanced. It's a problem which we are looking at and will continue to look at. I don't know if there is any profit in extending the debate in this particular area, but I want the member for Omineca to know that I have

[ Page 3792 ]

met with groups from that particular segment of the independent school system. Many of them have said: "We prefer not to have them, but we're prepared to go along and see what happens in June." We agree on that particular point, but that doesn't necessarily address the issue you have raised. It doesn't address it totally. It's a problem. Although a very small number are involved, it is of significance to them. I think we must remember that we represent everybody in the province. I am looking at it carefully.

MR. KEMPF: I certainly thank the minister, but I disagree when he says it's just a very small segment of the independent school system that's taking exception to the exams. I have many types of independent schools in my constituency, and I've made a point of contacting them and speaking to them. It's not just the Christian or parochial schools, as you say; Catholic schools, schools that are being operated by other groups, are also concerned. They may not be as vocal. They're not as vocal on many other subjects in the province, but I think they can probably be considered the silent majority as far as the independent school system is concerned.

As for the response to the administration costs, Mr. Minister, I'm happy to see you're riding herd on it. I'd like to see a little tighter rein, if you like, because when you give school boards the authority over matters concerning their own expenditures, I think it's like sending the wolf to tend the flock. It's very difficult to get a handle on situations such as that. In my estimation, it's rather like having teachers on school boards in this province — a conflict of interest. It's like sending the wolf to tend the flock. How do you ever expect to get a handle on it until that's changed?

One other item before I sit down, and that is in regard to total school board budgets being made public. Very recently I sent on to the minister a letter which I received from a constituent of the member for Cowichan-Malahat (Mrs. Wallace). It's too bad she isn't here this morning.

AN HON. MEMBER: She's here.

MR. KEMPF: The lady who wrote sent me a newspaper clipping published back in 1951 or '52, I believe. In those days itemized school board budgets were published in newspapers for the public to see. I'd like to see that once again.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Chairman, the member has raised a most valid point in his second item. I want the members to know that I think it's not a bad idea. My colleague suggests that we should let the sun shine in. I think we should advise the House that that point has been registered. We have been on that and are looking at that matter right now.

Only one other comment with respect to the items advanced by the member for Omineca, and that is regarding enrolment. Interestingly enough, to my knowledge there are only six school districts in British Columbia where enrolment is climbing. All of the others, it would appear, are in decline. We know that in 1983 there were more babies born in British Columbia than in its history, and of course we will see evidence of that in the schools about five years from now. But I should tell you that only six.... We've noticed a decline in the school districts of Burns Lake and Nechako as well. The member might be interested in these figures. In 1975, Burns Lake School District had 1,987 students; in 1983, 1,681. In Nechako there is a decline, but not nearly as appreciable: in 1975, 3,349; in 1983, 3,216. In both of those school districts we have also reduced the funding available for 1984 as compared to 1983, and both districts, to my knowledge, are managing quite well. I met with some people of the Nechako School District on Saturday, and their advice to me was: "We're doing just fine, and we'll get through this difficult period."

[11:45]

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

MR. KEMPF: I'm aware of those figures, Mr. Minister, but I just wanted to bring out the concern I had for the additional costs those school boards could incur. We've had a couple of easy winters, and it has been fairly easy on them, dollar-wise, as far as maintenance of schools is concerned. That could change very quickly. We have also had very easy winters as far as transportation is concerned. I know we have shortened a lot of the bus routes, but I think should we get into a situation where we have some tough winters, that's going to perpetrate some pretty severe hardships in getting to and from school on, in many cases, very young children. I wanted that on the record.

MS. BROWN: I'm going to be going for a long time, so it's up to the minister whether he wants to take a lunch break now, or whatever, because I'm not going to be brief What do you want to do?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Go ahead. Get warmed up.

MS. BROWN: Okay. First of all I want to say that I disagree with the member for Omineca (Mr. Kempf). I've never been able to understand why it's okay for doctors to sit on boards that make decisions about their professions, and it's okay for lawyers and other groups to do it, but whenever teachers are concerned, we have to continually listen to people on that side of the House questioning their integrity and cheering and clapping when comments are made about the fact that for them to sit on school boards would be like putting chickens in charge of wolves. I realize I don't know as much about wolves as the member from Omineca, but....

Interjection.

MRS. BROWN: Or wolves in charge of chickens. That's how my dyslexia manifests itself.

I just want to go on record as saying that I am dissociating myself completely from the sentiment that teachers should not be permitted to sit on school boards.

Interjection.

MRS. BROWN: Yes, I noticed he left the room as soon as he said that.

The other thing is that everyone has been talking about examinations this morning, and I hadn't intended to make a comment on it except to say that I can see the impact that it is having on my grade 12 student. My own son is going through it and has changed his entire attitude toward school as a result of having to face these exams in June. He was previously willing to take risks and explore and look at other initiatives and options in the educational field, but he is not doing that any more. Now he is studying for his exams in June, and

[ Page 3793 ]

although he'll probably end up like the rest of my kids academically at the same places they are — he's not going to be as educated as they are, because he will have narrowed his field of interest by his compulsion to do well in those exams in June. I think that's kind of sad. I've tried to talk to him about it, and he explains to me that to him the most important thing is having the kinds of grades that will make it possible for him to get into the university of his choice, and that's not going to be possible if he explores these other options and really tries to expand his interests in the way he was doing before when he did not have to worry about having to meet specific marks in certain subjects.

He has also changed based on the results that have come down with the students on the semester system who wrote. He is doing the kinds of things that the member for Nelson-Creston (Mr. Nicolson) pointed out. He is looking at the courses that seem to have the highest percentage of kids getting As and Bs. Based on that, he's thinking of switching the exams he'll write, and I think that's unfortunate. But if the whole point of the exam is to change a direction which students take in terms of their life goals, then it is going to be successful and you will find more and more kids channelling their academic planning in the direction that they think they can get the best grades, rather than really looking at and exploring other options and directions. I just wanted to comment briefly on that.

I want to speak specifically about School District 41 in Burnaby. I had a meeting with some of the trustees and went over some of the issues which concerned them about the impact of this budget. The ministry sent out a memo to all of the school districts asking them for details about critical policy decisions that they would have to be making as a result of the budget which was planned for the upcoming year, and I would appreciate it if the minister would respond to some of those details which were submitted by the trustees of School District 41 in Burnaby.

For example, they talked about the fact that there would be a decrease in course options in arts and language instruction. When you take into account the large percentage of students in the Burnaby school district who speak English as a second language, you realize what effect a decrease in that particular course option is going to have on the district as a whole. They said they were going to be forced to scale down secondary work experience programs. The school district was very proud of the fact that a number of the students would spend a part of their academic year actually working in the community, supervised by teachers in the classroom as well as in the on-the-job situations. That's not going to be possible anymore as a direct result of the minister's stated goal to fiddle around with the pupil-teacher ratio and bring it to the 1976 level. Incidentally, it is already higher than the 1976 level in Burnaby at this present time. We've more than reached the goal which the minister established for us — to our detriment, I might add.

The other thing they pointed out was that there was going to be reduced district curriculum development activity due to erosion in assisting teaching support for skill areas such as math, the sciences and the languages. These are the very areas that the teachers are going to have to be developing their skills in, in terms of helping the students meet the end-of-year exams in those particular areas. They say there is going to be a virtual elimination of district supervision and coordination of instruction in specialty areas such as PE, music and industrial education. Burnaby is a community that's made up of people who work for a living, and the number of students who use industrial education classes is quite significant. The supervision and coordination of instruction in that particular class is very important. In addition, all students everywhere need the physical education courses. There are all kinds of studies done — I think one was done in Prince George, the minister's own area, at one point — that show the correlation between good academic achievement and the good physical and nutritional condition of the students. Now we're finding in Burnaby that those courses are going to lose their coordination and supervision.

The music courses in the school. We're very proud of the level of music instruction in the Burnaby schools. The bands and orchestras are of very high calibre. I know that at the Armistice Day service which I attend every year — November 11, in the armoury — the Burnaby South band usually plays. It's excellent. They are of a very high quality. That now is going to be in jeopardy as a result of the impact of the budget on the area.

Then they talked about the reductions in adult basic education and in English-as-a-second-language offerings through community education. The pressure in those two areas is very intense, because there are a number of adults in the community who use the community education service. For people who live in Burnaby, education is a lifelong experience. It's not something that begins in kindergarten and is completed at grade 12, or is completed when the course at BCIT or PVI is completed. A large number of the community really use the English-as-a- second-language course because of the large immigrant population which we have, and in terms of upgrading skills and preparing to change jobs, the impact of technological change and women re-entering the labour market. For a number of these reasons we find that the adult basic education program is very heavily used in our community.

As a direct result of this budget, there is going to be a reduction in those offerings at a time when more than ever we really need them in a time of high unemployment. A number of jobs are being phased out. Adults are beginning to say to themselves: "Now is the time that I should be upgrading my skills or changing my skills or looking at other options. This is precisely the time when the school board is not going to be able to meet that particular need in the community, as a result of this budget.

The other question asked of them was about critical policy decisions in the area of staffing — whether there are going to be additions or deletions to the staff. Their response was no response to the large class-size situation, other than less than desired reorganization due to deletion of any contingency staff allocation. They said that 50 people took advantage of the early retirement incentive program; coupled with a no-replacement policy, when possible, it has cut out many of the mid-level supervisory personnel. They did this in order to avoid disruption in reorganization in January. They also said the reassignment or non-replacement of curriculum staff development and pupil services personnel has significantly reduced our capacity to respond constructively to crisis situations.

Interjection.

MS. BROWN: I think that is serious. There's no point in saying "aye," because I stated when I rose to my feet that I was going to be going for more than the 15 minutes that

[ Page 3794 ]

showed on the clock. In any event, at a time when the BCTF is telling us that really what education is all about is equality and excellence, we find that we can't achieve this in Burnaby under the budget as it now stands. Part of the reason for that is this business of not being able to have the pupil-teacher ratio at a level which is significant, and certainly not being able to respond constructively to crisis situations.

On the surface of it, our pupil-teacher ratio doesn't look that bad. The reason for that is because of the special staff we have in the schools to meet students with special needs. We welcome the integration of disabled students and students with special needs into the school system. We have the staff to meet that. But the result, coupled with the budget that the district has to live with, is that in other areas it doesn't balance out.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

The committee, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. Mr. Nielsen moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 12:01 p.m.