Mr. Chair, part of the process will be the regs that will be before us would have to require those individuals to have the qualification. We will do our part, as a department, to provide the necessary training, necessary support mechanism that needs to be in place. Throughout the licenced early childhood programming, we talk about the daycares and junior kindergarten, a mixture. Yesterday, we got into more detail about how we can provide training.
That is information that is available and we will provide that specific training to qualify people in our education system to deal with the children of the Northwest Territories. We are moving forward and we will be putting those mechanisms in place as we start implementation. Mahsi.
So some things I caught there were support mechanisms and specific training. As you heard yesterday, there was a lot of concern with stages of early childhood development. I do support the junior kindergarten programs in the small communities and the way it’s coming out, but we also need the prenatal to five and six, even to there, as a strong initiative.
I want to ask the Minister, in terms of specific training, if he’s familiar with the BC Early Learning Framework where they’ve actually developed child care licensing regulations. They have a child care sector occupational competencies. I wonder if he is familiar with that and if that could be a teaching tool for the department, a tool in terms of how we set forth since this government has really taken the initiative on early childhood development. Perhaps we can use that as a reference to develop these occupational competencies that set out things like knowledge skills, things that the early childhood educators need to demonstrate. I went through it briefly as best as I could and there’s a lot of really good information in there. I would like to ask the Minister and his staff if they are familiar with the BC Early Learning Framework and whether or not they will be developing some type of occupational competencies for the child care sector. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Most definitely. Those are the areas that we are currently researching with our contacts in BC, not only BC but Alberta. As you know, Dr. Corriveau was in Alberta for a short period. He made all kinds of connections there with educators and administrators. We are taking full advantage of those resources that are available to us, but most specifically in BC, as the Member is alluding to. Those are some of the areas we want to get our hands on and start working on within our department and the Northwest Territories operators. Mahsi.
I think, developing some occupational competencies, when we develop this, is going to be very handy not only for this government but it will set the future for our educators. Yesterday I was really hoping I would be able to get through all my questions and answers in the 10 minutes.
I’m a strong supporter of where the department is going. However, I’ve come to realize that this page alone, education and culture, is 79 percent of the overall ECE budget, so there will definitely be a lot of questions. If you look further, it’s 15 percent of the overall budget that we’re going to be approving within this government. I’m looking at the time and I’m going to have to be put back on the rotation here.
Sticking with early childhood development, I would like to ask the Minister in commitment number six where they are looking to address the infrastructure challenges in the small communities, under one of the deliverables it mentions, “To ensure infrastructure is adequate for junior kindergarten in schools.” Seeing as we’re going to be going into our first year of junior kindergarten, has this deliverable been addressed already? Has it been identified? Do we know what the needs are and the inventory? What are the needs moving forward, so we can make sure that when we roll out this junior kindergarten we aren’t stuck with challenges where the infrastructure is not there. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We have already started working very closely with communities, the district education authorities and district education councils to identify the infrastructure needs in the communities. Again, we are working very closely with Health and Social Services and Public Works and Services. So those are some areas we’ve identified based on the numbers that have been produced by the district education authorities and councils. So we’ve been working with those numbers in communities. The information that has been shared with us, we are fully aware of infrastructure in the communities. Again, based on enrollment at the community level, most of the schools can accommodate junior kindergarten as an initial step. There may be some challenges with infrastructure, so we have to work with those guidelines as well. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Continuing on this activity for first round of questioning, I have Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to focus some of my area of concern around inclusive schooling funding. I’m not sure if anyone else has covered this particular area, but I’m just going to ask a few basic questions before we get into the detail of where we’re going. Although we have the global number of $26.5 million for inclusive schooling funding, maybe if the Minister could break out, not only just for Members but the public, how that money is broken out by school district. So let’s put on the record how many school districts and how that money is spread out across the districts. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. Inclusive schooling, as Members know, is a territory-wide funding allocation to the school boards. I don’t have the detailed breakdown of all the districts, but we cover most of the schools and the school boards we have to work with. Based on that, there is a breakdown from the school boards to the schools and agencies they work with. It could be complex information that we can share with Members, but I just have the breakdown of the school district, whether it be Beaufort-Delta, Commission scolaire, Dehcho, Sahtu, South Slave, Tlicho, YSC, YK No. 1, Detah and Ndilo, for a combination of $26.670 million. That’s what we have on file currently. Mahsi.
Is it safe to say that that money is broken out evenly? I think there are 10 school boards that are represented there. Is it safe to say that it’s broken out evenly amongst the school boards? Thank you.
The information I shared is $26.6 million based on the enrollment of the schools. Some school facilities are small, so they would get a smaller portion than the larger centres. It’s all based on enrollment. The contribution is based on that. Mahsi.
So would the Minister be correct by saying that it’s based on a pupil ratio? Is that what he’s saying? It’s calculated down to for every student you have you get $10, so if you have more students, you get more money, less students, you get less. What type of figure do they use for their calculation? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. For that response, we’ll go to the deputy minister, Ms. Eggenhofer.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The difficulty with determining the funding levels to each education authority based on need is we’ve learned over the years that the smaller communities do not have the same diagnostic services that the larger centres have in the NWT. So if you were to divide the funding based on need, then you would basically provide a serious advantage to Yellowknife and other larger communities where the diagnosis could be done, whereas in the Beaufort-Delta, for example, in smaller communities they are at a disadvantage because they don’t have access to the same services. So in the meantime, the funding is distributed based on the enrolment, but the inclusive schools review that the Minister spoke of yesterday is looking at a better way to divide the inclusive schooling funding pot to align it perhaps a little closer with need as opposed to just enrolment.
Although, of course, we’re not on page 10-6, I would draw people’s general attention to it, and it cites under inclusive schooling it ensures through guidelines and contributions that all NWT students are entitled to access an educational program in a regular institution setting in their home community. I appreciate the insight Deputy Minister Eggenhofer has offered, and that said, I’m just curious now about the diagnosis portion of it. I didn’t realize that was actually part of the funding of it, and if it is, can we help to figure out what the funding is and how that’s broken out, because as I understood it, it was about access to educational programming and being able to be in an educational setting, so please. Thank you.
Apologies if I didn’t articulate this clearly. Because there is not an equal access to diagnostic services throughout the Northwest Territories, that tool cannot be used to determine the need, because in smaller communities there aren’t the speech pathologists and psychologists and other specialists available that could determine how many kids, for example, in a given school have needs for special assistance. Therefore, right now we are using what could be described as a rather crude instrument to divide out the inclusive schooling funding, but hopefully, we will look at providing a better way to divide the funding with the conclusion of the inclusive schooling review, which we hope to bring to committee in May.
Is it fair to assume that the money is broken out on best guess based on, I’ll say, the experience and situation of these types of schools, that there is need but it hasn’t been technically diagnosed? In other words, we have students we know that are there but they haven’t been formally diagnosed under some type of, we’ll call it, structure or professional basis. Is that a fair observation or understanding of what, in a small form, the deputy minister is trying to say? They’re providing money based on that best assessment?
Yes, I think that’s a fair assessment. We also, obviously, go by the individual education plans and student support plans that school education authorities submit to the department that identify where needs are required for students, and with the introduction of TINET, which is a new program, it will be a lot easier to track these individual learning plans.
My last couple minutes I’m going to use focusing in on assessment and in some manner or form linking it to the particular student as and when necessary. It’s a good refresher here, and I thank MLA Bisaro for reminding me of telehealth mechanisms, tools, and instruments we have in many small communities, maybe not every one. I believe the funding should follow the student once we’ve identified them for what particular need they are so we cater appropriately for them.
Has the Department of Education used these types of tools and instruments such as telehealth in order to help identify this? Because I realize that if you’re in Sachs Harbour, you may not have the ability to send someone out to a speech pathologist to be properly diagnosed, but we could use mechanisms like this so then we know which students through identifying and then we can target the money. I mean, at the end of the day, I want the money to be targeted at the student who needs it most, not just the district to where we’re just guessing.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Most definitely, we are using telehealth. The Member mentioned Sachs could be a challenge, but we are fully aware that the Beaufort-Delta on the e-learning and other technology enhancement that they’ve had, they’ve been dealing with the telehealth in their schools as well. Those are some of the accessible technologies that we have, so we’ll take full advantage of it. We have and we will continue to do so.
Is the Minister able to put on the record how many students have been diagnosed through using telehealth so, again, we can appropriately spend the right inclusive money on the students that need it most? Rather than just targeting based on estimates, I’m really a believer that the money should follow the student, and regardless of where that student is going to, so whatever institution, to me, matters little. Quite frankly, it’s a matter about ensuring that appropriate funding is there for that student and the institution being able to facilitate regular instruction in a proper instructional setting.
Would the Minister be able to highlight how many times telehealth has been used in this ability? I think he just said that it’s a tool they use. I’d like to know a little more detail as to how often they use it and maybe about how much money, time and effort they’ve been using and for how long, of course.
Obviously, I don’t have the detailed breakdown because we still have to get that information from the district education council, but as soon as we get that we can share it with the Members.
Thank you, Minister Lafferty. Mr. Hawkins, your time is expired. If you need to get back on, let me know.
Committee, just a reminder, we’ve had one round of questions on this activity, and the chair recognizes that this is a fairly large activity by number and I will allow another round as needed for completion. I would ask though, committee, to shorten the preamble still a little bit more and try to get more questions in during your time allotment.
That being said, next on my list for second rounds on this activity is Mr. Bromley, followed by Ms. Bisaro and Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I do have a lot of questions. I’ll see what I can get through here, and I appreciate very short, concise answers. Junior kindergarten, what’s the junior kindergarten implementation dollar amount for the 29 communities scheduled in ’14-15? That’s the year under discussion.
Secondly, I know the Minister has agreed that a fully qualified ECE worker is needed for every junior kindergarten group. I don’t call them a class because that implies teaching. We’re talking child development. The Minister has agreed with that, but I still haven’t heard him commit to meeting this precondition. Will he make that commitment? Two questions there.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. In order to achieve the 29 communities by the 2014-15 school year on junior kindergarten, it will cost us approximately $2.8 million on an annual basis. The Member is referring to the qualification. We’ve highlighted already the types of training that will be required and training that we’re going to be delivering to these individuals and also the operators. More specifically, when it comes to junior kindergarten, we have to work with the kindergarten teachers as well. We’re understanding of and share the Member’s concerns, and we’re going to be developing an action plan towards that. We do have some time to roll that out. This is an area that I’ve highlighted of providing various training pertaining to that, so we’ll continue to push that forward.
Would the Minister commit to providing committee a briefing in writing or in person on the various levels of qualifications for early childhood education workers and how many of each level – I think he gave us some information on that but perhaps he could provide that in writing – that are available by community, and what level of ECE worker qualification is provided by Aurora College programs currently, number of graduates and what the plan is for the immediate future in terms of training actually fully qualified ECE workers?
For sure, we’ll provide all that information, because we want the Members to work with us, as well, with as much information as we possibly can to deliver to them. In addition, we can provide those spaces that are available that I had mentioned, I believe, yesterday. We’ll provide that detailed information on all those questions that were asked.
Thanks to the Minister. Very briefly, a comment, this will be my last comment hopefully on ECD, early childhood development. The premise that junior kindergarten is the way to go rather than focussing on zero to three, I know the Minister is aware that this is a contention here. Particularly on the claim that because services for zero to three age classes are fragmented, is a great leap and highly debatable, huge assumptions made there and I totally disagree with that. I think we are missing the boat. There is little evidence that the issues we are seeing can be addressed through junior kindergarten nearly as much as a coordinated effort in the early, early years. I’ll leave it at that. That’s my strong belief and I believe I can back that up with evidence.
I’m just wondering: I see the Aboriginal languages section of this division is very important and I have spoken out consistently in favour of that work. I just want to point out to the Minister what I think is a kernel and that is a TED Talk by a lady, I think her name is Patricia Kuhl, entitled “The Genius of Babies.” In that 10-minute TED Talk, it demonstrates, with massive amounts of data, that the window of opportunity between the ages of five and seven months, a five to seven-month-old human being, is absolutely amazing for picking up language and providing the basis for the rest of their life for multiple languages. So I would love to see the department take advantage of that opportunity, realizing that the department is not delivering all the programs, but this would be important information to get out to our partners and to use to guide at least the significant amount of our funding on languages. Can I just get a brief comment from the Minister on that? Mahsi.
Mr. Chair, those are just some of the discussions that we need to have with various researchers out there, programs that have been successful, as Members indicated one of the programs on Aboriginal language, so we need to compile that information. At the same time, we are working very closely with the Aboriginal governments. As indicated in my Minister’s statement, we are re-profiling funding back to the communities, back to the Aboriginal governments because they are the experts when it comes to Aboriginal language, and we are there to assist them and to support them and work closely with them. So, I agree with the Member. All that information is out there. We have been researching, and working with and enhance what’s before us and if there are best practices, by all means we’ll take full advantage of it. Mahsi.
Thanks to the Minister. I find myself returning to early childhood development, probably not surprisingly. Just in terms of the work to establish family resource centres, child and family resource centres and activities in communities, I think we’re a year and a half into the work in Ndilo and Detah, which already had some work already going on there. What is the outreach plan for other communities and what is the long-range plan for those centres, and particularly how are they being focused on the early years? Mahsi.
Mr. Chair, we have contacted two pilot projects in two communities and that’s been successful to date. We just want to find out, I guess, how it turns out and so we’ve been quite impressed with that.
As we move forward, we’re going to be working very closely again with the Department of Health and Social Services to identify what came out of the pilot project, and based on that, part of the process will be to start implementing particular programming into other communities as well. We’re at very preliminary discussions right now with the two departments, and as we move forward, we will definitely be sharing that information with the Members. If we’re going to be identifying let’s say a community that we’re going to do another project or program delivery, then we’ll definitely give a heads-up to the Members before we start that. Mahsi.
A huge disappointment here, obviously. This is molasses at 40 below. The committee has been clear that we want these on-the-ground community programs in place. So, based on what I heard, if I heard it accurately, extremely disappointing.
As we know, last year at this time, when we looked at the budget, the money had not been delivered to those communities, or perhaps it was delivered during the week that we were discussing it. So within a few weeks they had to spend all that money, probably frantically and inefficiently. So, again, I’m not impressed and I think this department needs some serious tune-up in this area, if I am hearing the Minister accurately. I’m just not hearing much that makes me grin. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. I didn’t quite hear a question in there Mr. Bromley, is there a question?
I would love to hear the Minister respond and correct me.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Lafferty.
Mr. Chair, all I can say at this point is that two pilot projects have been a success. We gave the contribution and they have expended the contribution. Future programming, we’re still talking about that with the two departments, so if we move that along, we will definitely be sharing that information with the Members. Mahsi.
Thank you, Minister Lafferty. Mr. Bromley, you have a few seconds left on the clock. Mr. Bromley.
Yes, just to finish that off, Mr. Chair. Thank you to the Minister. Did the communities receive the same funding this year as they did last year, or did they receive the full amount last year, and are we committed, are these long-term programs now, or are we still trying to portray these as pilot projects that nobody is going to invest in?
We’re still trying to figure out the numbers here. To my understanding, through the briefings that I’ve received, both projects, both communities have received the fullest contribution, and if I am mistaken, then my staff can correct me if I’m wrong. That’s my understanding. The Member is also referring to if this particular project will continue, and those are the discussions that we are currently having with the Department of Health and Social Services as part of the Early Childhood Development Action Plan. We need to discuss those more in detail. Mahsi.
Thank you, Minister Lafferty. Moving on with the second round of questions on this activity, I have Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just to follow up on Mr. Bromley’s comments and the Minister’s response before I go into what I’ve got, I’m disappointed that at this point in time we don’t know whether or not we’re going to continue to fund the two pilots that we started in this current budget year. I guess I have to leave it at that. There’s no question there, but I guess I feel really strongly that if these were pilots, we should have known before… One month before the end of the budget year, we should have been looking at evaluating these pilots and determining whether or not it’s going to be ongoing funding for the next year.
I wanted to ask a further question on junior kindergarten and it’s similar to the pilots that were run for the child and family resource centres. My understanding was that we had, I think, two junior kindergarten pilots in this current budget year. I’d like to know whether or not the Minister or the department can tell me if there has been an evaluation of those two junior kindergarten programs that they were running. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. The Member refers to the two pilots. Again, we are working closely with the Department of Health and Social Services on part of the Healthy Family programming, so we will do what we can to deliver similar programming as we move forward with ECD Action Plan. If there has been an evaluation of the junior kindergarten, the pre-kindergarten, at this time we haven’t done a review of that, but we are fully aware of the program delivery and we’re getting as much information on the deliverance of the program. So we’re still compiling all that information.
Thank you. I guess I would ask the Minister, once they have evaluated these two JK projects that were ongoing in ’13-14 if committee could be apprised of the results of the evaluation. Thank you.
Mahsi. Once the evaluations in occurrence, once it’s completed, by all means we’ll be sharing that with committee.
Thanks to the Minister for that commitment. I wanted to ask some questions about inclusive schooling, and I’m going to kind of follow-up where Mr. Hawkins left off. I’m really disappointed to hear the deputy minister say that we cannot fund inclusive schooling by need. It’s a statement that this will not happen. My understanding is we currently fund per capita or per student, but I also have an understanding that there is supposed to be, and I think it’s been about a year and a half now we’ve been hearing about a review of the inclusive schooling funding formula.
So the deputy minister indicated that the report on the inclusive schooling review is supposed to be coming in May, but when I hear a flat-out statement that we can’t fund based on need and that we haven’t got the review yet, that really sends up a flag for me and suggests that the decision has already been made. I have to point out that it may be difficult to fund on need and it may be difficult to establish need in communities, but there are many ways of doing it. You don’t have to have an expert in every community in the NWT. We certainly have planes and we can fly people in and out. We certainly have planes and we can fly children in and out. I need to point out that there are magnet communities in the NWT and those communities with services attract students with special needs and those communities who attract students with special needs do not get funded to the level that they need to be to properly allow for the assistance that are required for certain students.
So I sincerely hope that what I heard is not what has already been decided. I hope that once the report is done that there will be an opportunity for committee to have some input, for school boards to have some input. I would like to just ask the Minister, when this report comes out in May, is it going to be a done deal, or is there an opportunity for input from Members and all other stakeholders? Thank you.
Mahsi. When it comes to inclusive schooling, this is what we have to date. There’s legislation that we have to follow, but we are listening to the Members. That’s the very reason we’ve listened to the Members, now we’re going to reviewing. We’re reviewing the inclusive schooling. So we want to make changes that reflect on the students’ needs as well. Based on the review, based on the input from the school boards, the school boards will be actively involved and will give us options to make some decisions if this is going to be based on students’ needs, the community’s needs and so forth. So we’re seeking out that information and it will be coming in May. We will be addressing this with the standing committee prior to May on the information that’s been compiled. We can obviously present that to standing committee, get their input and then develop some action plans towards that.
The school boards are actively involved, they will be actively involved and the review will give us some options. Mahsi.
Thanks to the Minister for that info. I’m struck by the Minister saying that the school boards will be involved. I would hope that in doing any review that there would have been some canvassing of the people that are providing programs and running inclusive schooling. If that hasn’t been done then I have to say I can’t put much credence in the report or the review that is coming forward.
I’d like to ask a question about the amount of school contributions. On page 10-17 if I look at the ‘14-15 Main Estimates it indicates about $131.7 million and yet I go to the next page and education authority contributions are $152 million. So can I get an explanation of what the difference is, what are the school contributions on page 17, what are the school contributions on page 19? Thank you.
