Great, thanks for the answer. That makes sense. One of the things that has occurred to me – and I’ve expressed this in my opening comments about the difference in the standards or levels of education that students achieve depending upon where they live and what school they attend – is that high school students in particular probably don’t take the high school courses that they need to get themselves into post-secondary institutions because I don’t think they understand, nor do their parents understand, courses that are required for them to get into a post-secondary course or institution.
One of the things that I think is lacking in some of our schools is staffing, whether it be part time or full time, but staffing to provide counselling; and by counselling I mean counselling in proper courses and counselling in what the kids need to take to achieve their goals. I just wonder if the department has recognized this as a need, if there is any sort of assistance to education authorities, and to ensure that they do have that service to the students in every high school that we have. That would basically be career counselling, for lack of a better terminology. It’s to assist the kids in making the right decisions in the courses they take and in making the right decisions to get them on the post-secondary school path of where they want to go.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chairman. This particular area has been brought up even at the ASA forum and early childhood development discussions, having guidance counsellors. Using previous experience has been very successful, why don’t we have that anymore.
The funding that we contribute to the school boards, it’s at their discretion if they want to hire a guidance counsellor, per se. At the same time, we are in discussion or will be in discussion with the school board, as well, that there is a great need to enter into discussions with the school board on particular guidance counselling.
The Member alluded to maybe a half-time position, per se. Those types of discussions we’re currently having because we are in the process of developing implementation plans for ASA. ASA, when we were going around, we heard that same topic, a lack of guidance counsellors in the schools. There are also students who are in the process of completing a career action plan in Grade 9 that is reviewed annually. This is just going beyond that. A position into the regions. We will be discussing this with the school boards and how we can best rectify the situation to deal with those educational awareness with the parents and the students, the program they should be taking.
Thanks to the Minister for that. I’m really glad to hear that it’s on the radar, that this is an issue that is being addressed to a certain extent. I guess I would like to encourage the department to be more demanding in what they ask the education authorities to do.
As I mentioned when we talked about the Auditor General’s report some months ago, I think there is a need for the department to be a bit more autocratic and demanding in the things that… The department as a central body should demand certain things of the board and this is one of them where I don’t think the board should have any choice. They should make sure that they have this service for the kids.
I wanted to ask my last question with regard to inclusive schooling. This is an area where the program review office has done some investigation; they’ve done some analysis of inclusive schooling. It’s also an issue that has come from a number of boards. Particularly YK1 in Yellowknife has lobbied Yellowknife Members over the last while. There needs to be, I think, and I would look to the department for confirmation, but I believe there needs to be an analysis and evaluation of how we fund school boards for inclusive schooling and for particular individuals. I think – and we’ve had some conversations I think with the Minister – this kind of giving boards money as a percentage of their student population is not being fair to the schools and the teachers and the students who have a very large need, I guess for lack of a better way of putting it. I think there needs to be a total evaluation of how we fund our schools for inclusive schooling and for special needs students. I guess I would like to ask the Minister whether or not that is something that the department is considering.
This is an area that we’ve discussed within our department and even as far as a Cabinet discussion how we can deal with this matter. I’ve given my direction to my department that we need to explore it even further how we distribute funds on inclusive schooling to the school boards, whether it be based on percentage, and how can we deliver it even more effectively. The funding, the $26 million over all. We need to review that again within my department and working with the school boards. It has to be a united approach because we are dealing with the 33 communities and a population of 40,000. Yes, we are exploring those areas.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Ms. Bisaro, just noting your time is expired. If you have further questions, we’ll put you back in the queue. With that, we have Mr. Hawkins next.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m trying to get some details on a particular problem that’s highlighted at a number of schools. I’ve been an MLA for nine years and I hear this repeatedly as a significant problem, not just from parents but other MLAs and other ridings and regions. That particular problem is social passing. I wonder what the department is doing to stop social passing and making it prevalent within our school systems out there. Kids need a fair shot, obviously, but if they’re being passed under the guise of social passing, then they’re not really being set up properly with all the tools and mechanisms to be prepared for the future. That said, maybe the Minister could enlighten us on the Department of Education’s method or policy to stamp out social passing.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chairman. The peer passing has been brought up on numerous occasions. There are mixed feelings about this from the parents, even from the educators, due to research that has been done nationally and internationally that peer passing is benefitting those students and so forth. There are mixed reactions to this.
Within our department we’re doing what we can to assist those individuals so they can achieve or be prepared for a workforce environment. We know that post-secondary is not for everybody. Some students would prefer going straight to the workforce once they receive their certification. That’s what we’ve been focusing on. I’ll get my acting DM to just elaborate more on the peer passing that’s been in play and where it’s at and where we should be going with that.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Ms. Iatridis.
Peer passing, I guess, is related to inclusive schooling and, really, inclusive schooling responds to the strengths and needs of each individual student. It’s really not limited to students or persons with disabilities. It really allows students to work at their own pace but to follow along with students within the same age range.
In regard to students who may not be working at a specific grade level, they would have an individual education plan that would allow them to work at the pace that they’re able to. It’s really about looking at the needs of the individual students and allowing them to work with their peers, and developing a program that suits their needs. It also includes not just students who may not be at the grade level but also students who have excelled in their programs and need additional work to challenge the day-to-day learning. I hope that provides some clarification.
Thank you, Ms. Iatridis. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My next question to the department would be: Do they have a defined policy on social passing?
We don’t have a defined policy on social passing but we do have an inclusive schooling directive that was revised in 2006.
Would the department be willing to supply that to all Members?
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chairman. The revised version of 2006 we can certainly provide that for Members for their review.
If there’s not a defined formal policy on social passing, where does it come up in the dialogue or policies under ECE? Where is it referenced? It seems to be an acknowledged policy or informal policy, so it must come up on something.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Ms. Iatridis.
It’s not a policy. It’s a ministerial directive that was approved in 2006.
I’d like to request a copy of that ministerial directive, if possible, to be given to all Members.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Lafferty.
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I’ve already committed to that.
As I mentioned earlier, this is a significant issue with a number of Members here and I’m glad we’re starting to have this type of discussion. I would like to now move a committee motion on page 10-17 and I will read it as follows:
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. We’ll just allow a minute here for the motion to circulate to the committee members.
A motion is on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I anticipate other Members will speak to this particular motion, but it has caused concerns of parents that I have spoken to in the riding, as well as I’ve mentioned my colleagues have expressed concerns. Since I have been an MLA I’ve heard this numerous times in committee. I don’t think this is a bureaucracy problem, but I think this is something that we could re-engineer and ask ourselves why are we doing this and are we setting our students up for the best abilities going forward in the future. I recognize that this dovetails into the Inclusive Schooling Policy and that is why it is part of the motion, but what the question really comes down to are we really helping them.
I have had parents tell me they have asked for their children to be held back. For specific reasons, the schools do not want to. They keep referencing Inclusive Schooling Policy or other particular reasons and say it’s better to keep the kids with their peers. That said, yes, I couldn’t fully disagree that that doesn’t have some benefits. With that said, I’m not sure that we’re giving the kids the best start. This type of positioning should be cause to re-examine why we are doing this and re-evaluate our policies, and that said, it would be best preferred and recommended that we discontinue it at this particular time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m going to lend my support to this motion. It speaks about the functional grade level that the Alberta Achievement Test showed us sometime in March. It talked about the grade levels in our small communities, that we are measured at a lower grade level than the larger centres and that in the small communities students were graded or measured lower than, far too low than my expectations compared to the regional centres and Yellowknife. That is totally unacceptable and if the social passing has some contributing factors to those low score levels, than we need to make some changes.
For example, through the Alberta Achievement Test, the Grade 9 students were very low in our communities. Only 15 percent of Grade 9 had shown an acceptable standard in the English language arts compared to 53 in regional centres and 61 in Yellowknife. Small communities also showed that 12.1 percent of Grade 9 students have achieved acceptable standards in mathematics compared to 40 percent in regional and 38 percent in Yellowknife.
We have a high level of low standards in our community. Many of our students who are graduating from high school are requiring upgrades before they enter college or university. Even when they enter into the workforce, they require extra training and extra schooling. The data suggests that it is the results of social passing, particularly with respect to high school students and a number of students who are exempt from taking the AAT, the Alberta Achievement Test. Many would be exempted because they would be two or three years below the enrolment of their grade level.
The Alberta Achievement Test results are terrible. The data says nothing why this is the case. The performance of school and the education system is obviously one potential reason, but there are many other social factors that contribute to the child’s success in the school. We have been trying to deal with that in the last eight years since I have been an MLA. This is my ninth year. There is a real difference between the Alberta Achievement Test and the functional grade level. I think that the government, the department needs to start looking at the social passing issue and get our students a fair chance in life and in this world to make it and not to allow this to continue when we have communities that are struggling, communities that we celebrate at graduation every year.
As we sit there, we think well, this child has to go back to school next year. These Grade 12 students only have to take one Grade 12 subject to get a diploma. That is not fair, Mr. Chairman. They should be able to take Grade 12 courses to be in Grade 12. Students do not have to…almost a norm, an acceptability that once you take your Grade 12 you would have to upgrade even to go to work unless you are very committed, strong parents, strong discipline to say I am going to take more than what is expected of me so I can go into university or college.
The social program passing, we need to change that. It might take awhile, but in the long run it will help us. It will help us with our students. We have to start somewhere. I have been an MLA for nine years. I can see it every year. I go back. The leaders tell me that the students who have graduated are walking around with hands in their pockets in town. I heard it two years ago. I heard it last year, and say how come our education system…
We are pumping a lot of money into our education system. There might be some concerns that students who are 16 might be in Grade 4 or 5 and that is the issue we have to face in our school. We are not really doing any service to our children.
For myself the social passing is the easy way to get a diploma. It is a soft way. I think we need to make some changes that when a child enters into our education system, you know that child coming out at Grade 12 has a Grade 12 solid diploma and that Grade 12 diploma could get you into university, college or get into the workforce and say yes, that is a good school and the world will go around, that education is solid in the Northwest Territories. It is solid in our communities. They could go right into a university or college program in our community.
This motion hopefully will kick-start that long-term planning, struggle and work with the issues that need to be worked with. I look at that not only as an MLA here but also as a parent. It is a very fine line. Where does the MLA take a backseat and the parent comes out? Where does the parent come and take a backseat and the MLA comes out? That is a very fine line that I play, Mr. Chairman. I am very concerned. I have many constituents whose parents also have this issue with social passing, so much that they are sending kids out to Hay River, Yellowknife, Fort Smith and Edmonton because they are saying our education in our communities is not the way we want.
In closing, I take this analogy of also training my son to be a hunter or trapper. I would train him properly and train him so that when he is done at 16 or 14, I know he could survive on the land; not that I have to worry so much about him. That’s how I look at my education for my son on the land. That I could leave him there and he could survive and he’ll know how to hunt, he’ll know how to trap off the land. That’s what we need to look at for education for our children, but once they finish Grade 12 you’ll know that they can write a formula on how to get a mathematical problem, they know the formula and won’t have to take their computer or their calculator and say here it is, but they can actually explain a formula to me and they can write their name and they know that they can get a good job.
So we’ve got to be very, very serious about education. That’s how I look at it when I put it into the context of being on the land with my son, train him well that I know that if I die tomorrow that he will be okay and he can make it in the world. So that for me is an education and that’s how we need to look at our high school education.
Social passing for me, I think we’re taking the shortcut. That’s for me. My son is worth more than a shortcut to his education. So that’s why I’m supporting this motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Speaking to the motion I have Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I appreciate my colleague bringing this motion forward. I will also be supporting the motion. We have talked about this before in committee and with the Minister about the decision to go with social passing based on data exclusively from the South. I know in discussions we’ve often talked about the need for northern data to really assess that decision and we’ve never received that information.
We have quite a different situation in the North with many very, very small communities. Everybody knows each other and it’s quite a different situation. I certainly agree with the comments of my colleagues, though despite their best efforts, you know, trying social passing, pupil to teacher ratios that are off the charts and now we’re talking about the Aboriginal Student Achievement Initiative and so on. A lot of good thinking has gone into that, but our graduation rates are not acceptable. Our various achievement scores do not show the progress we want and it is really guesstimating. When we see the bewilderment that our graduates experience when they finally realize or when they go on maybe for the next step in advanced education, that they do not have the qualifications that they are carrying certificates for, or the bewilderment or consternation of our businesspeople who have hired our graduates and are startled to find the lack of basic skills that depend on a good education causing grief to the employees as well.
So I would expect that the department would do due diligence here following this and making sure that we’re on the right track. I would also urge, once again, that the thought and priority be given to the earliest years of early childhood development, because again I see the potential there for even this issue to be very much advanced with such an approach.
So that’s it, Mr. Chair. I will be supporting the motion. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Speaking to the motion I have Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, too, will support this motion moving forward. In my previous positions working with youth and working in various sectors of governments and community organizations, volunteer groups, concerned citizens at the table, interagency groups who have brought this as a concern for years, literally years we’ve been talking about this and to see a motion as such brought before the House, to see some action that needs to be taken to address a situation that’s failing our society – not just our students, it’s failing society – I strongly support this motion and I do believe that we will garner a lot of support with this motion from residents across the Northwest Territories, professionals, business sector. We’ll get a lot of support from all avenues across the Northwest Territories. Like I said, it’s something that we’ve been discussing on numerous occasions at interagency groups, local community groups and I’m glad to see such a motion is brought forth.
I commend my colleague Mr. Hawkins for drafting a motion and bringing it before the House. So to see that some action is going to be taken, I strongly support the motion. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Moses. Speaking to the motion, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have to confess that I’m quite conflicted by this motion. As a teacher I understand the rationale behind the motion, but I have great difficulty in supporting the motion as it’s written.
I actually lived through the implementation of the Inclusive Schooling Policy many years ago and it was hotly contested at the time. Teachers were not totally in support. It was probably 50/50. At the time we had classrooms where students were pulled out, special students were pulled out and were taught separate from other students. I don’t support that. I think students should be included in with students in regular classrooms, but I think there’s also an opportunity for students to be pulled out and to receive special teaching, whether it be on the lower end of the scale or the upper end of the scale.
I considered early start, late start for my own children and it’s a difficult decision to make. Very often teachers can assist you with that. This policy takes away that flexibility that I think teachers and schools probably should have.
Thanks to modern technology, I’ve had a quick look at the directive and I think the operative part is that it states that students receive their education program in regular instructional settings in their local school with their age peers and the exceptions are only allowed in rare instances. I think that’s part of the problem here. There’s no flexibility on the part of the school or on the part of the teacher to make an exception for some student to stay back or some student to move forward.
It’s a really complex issue for me. It’s not just as simple as saying let’s get rid of social passing. I’m not even sure what social passing means, or peer passing, whatever we want to call it. I think that as the acting deputy minister pointed out, many, many students have an individual education program and they are taught differently from their classmates, but they’re in that classroom and they have the interaction on a regular basis with kids at their own age level and that’s a good thing. To have, as Mr. Yakeleya said, a 16-year-old in a Grade 5 class, many people consider that not to be the way to go. I wonder how the child is going to feel. It’s not going to make them feel all that great, but there are instances when children should be held back, and in reading this policy it tells me that no we can’t do that.
So I think this needs to be evaluated. I think it’s probably time that we did an extremely thorough, extremely comprehensive review of the Inclusive Schooling Policy or directive. It’s been in place for quite a number of years and I think that the thinking in the education field is changing a bit and I think some people are starting to think that pulling kids out is not the horrible thing that we thought it was about 20 years ago. I would urge the department to look at a really comprehensive evaluation of the policy and do some in-depth analysis of what this is doing. And that means talking to students, it means talking to parents, it means talking to the boards, it means talking to businesspeople. You know, we have to do a full cross-section evaluation of what our residents think about this policy and the impact that it has on them as individuals, as families and as business owners and operators.
That said, I am not going to vote against this motion but I will abstain. I appreciate where my colleagues are coming from. I just don’t feel that this motion speaks to what I think is necessary, so I won’t vote against it but I won’t vote for it. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Again, speaking to the motion, we have Mrs. Groenewegen.
I will not be supporting this motion for quite a number of reasons. I think that as Ms. Bisaro mentioned, we need flexibility. I don’t think that all children mature at the same rate. I think that where a child may have a slow year one year they’ll catch in the next. It’s kind of like when kids are growing, you know, and the same as when they’re developing intellectually. I mean, it comes on.
I don’t think anybody really counts the cost and the effect that it has when a school system labels a child to have failed. If I could just share a personal experience: My oldest brother, who was kind of the leader of our little gang of five in our family, came home from school at the end of Grade 4 and hid behind the rocker on our veranda and cried. I remember that because I was his little sister and I watched that. That affected him for the entire rest of his life. Was he a smart guy? Sure he was. Was he book smart and school smart? No, he wasn’t. Did he become a fully functioning member of society and support himself as a tradesman all his life? Yes, he did, and raised two fine young children into adulthood. But he was told that day, I’m sorry, you’ve failed. You’re a failure.
I think there needs to be some discretionary latitude for parents and teachers to look at different situations. Every child is different. Every scenario is different. If you want to talk about how we’re turning students out at the end of Grade 12 and what they’re equipped to do, let’s look at are we funding inclusive schooling properly, not to distract the teacher completely with children with special needs. That’s a question we should be asking ourselves. Let’s look at whether we’re teaching the basics in the curriculum that equips people for basic tasks in life. That’s a question we need to ask ourselves.
Members on the committee get tired of me talking about it, but I was not a great student, but I’ll tell you, even not being the top of the class student, I left high school with the ability to perform mathematical tasks and speak, and I knew about grammar, and it was all based on a very old-fashioned form of teaching. You know, phonetic spelling. Not new English. Not new math. Not all this new-fangled stuff that people try. But, you know, I guess that’s the education system and where it’s gone.
I can tell you from many experiences, both of my boys – I shouldn’t talk about them in public – they were held back at Grade 1 level. They were not mature enough to go on. I thank those teachers for doing that. That’s fine. But when my son Jeffrey got to about Grade 4, we had him diagnosed with developmental dyslexia. Did he move on with his peers? He surely did, on a modified program. And I was shocked when I sat in this Legislature when he was in Grade 12 and saw the Minister of Education, Jake Ootes, stand up and say that Jeffrey Groenewegen had won the departmental top mark for the Northwest Territories in Social Studies for the Alberta departmentals. I went, like, wow! That’s the kid that in Grade 9 could barely read but he was on a modified program. He got advanced with his peers, and by the time he hit Grade 12 he was functioning at a normal level. He is a tradesman today, a qualified tradesman.
I don’t know. I think we need some discretionary latitude. I don’t think we can make a policy that just is carte blanche and that’s the way it is. I think parents have a role to play in that. But can I say that although I’m not trying to discredit academic achievement, I think it’s a wonderful thing. I encourage it for anybody that wants to proceed down that path, but everything about a person’s self-worth, their value, I’m sorry, cannot be numbered, and how smart they are cannot be calculated on a bottom line on a report card. There’s a lot more to life than what’s on that report card and somehow we have to look at the whole person and we need to have some discretionary latitude within our education system to make decisions about holding back or passing students to continue on in school with their peers.
Like I say, and if you want to talk about the quality of the outcome at the end of Grade 12, let’s have a serious discussion about what’s going into the curriculum these days and let’s talk about what’s going into the classroom in terms of financial support for inclusive schooling. Because I can tell you of educators that are almost ready to throw in the towel because of the stress that they experience. Inclusive schooling is a wonderful idea. It’s a wonderful concept, but not if it’s underfunded. Not if there’s no classroom assistant there to help. Not if a teacher is being pulled in every direction because we’ve got students with every kind of aptitude from A to Z. You’ve got the gifted in with the kids that need that extra time and attention.
Anyway, we’re all individual. I can’t support the motion because I want to, and I’ve seen some of the value of social passing. That doesn’t mean I think we should compromise on our standard, but I think we need the discretion in the system. That’s my opinion and that’s why I don’t support the motion. Thank you.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Speaking to the motion we have Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I myself will be abstaining from the motion simply because of the fact that I think this motion, we need to have a further study in terms of the analysis so that we have a mainstream academic focus in terms of ensuring that we have one class and not two separate classes. For those reasons, I feel, like my colleagues that previously spoke before me, conflicted on this matter. Therefore, I feel that I will be abstaining from this motion.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Speaking to the motion we have Mr. Bouchard.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Some of my colleagues have indicated that they’re in turmoil with this decision or this motion. I’m at the same point. I understand that we have a lot of issues with the current education system and some of the graduation levels. However, I’m not certain that with the changing of this motion would alleviate all those problems. I think we need to look at what the impacts of this would do. The department’s indicated that they wish to continue to use it, and before we make a rash change, I think we should assess what the values are. I would be agreeable to discussing this more, and more agreeable to this motion at a later date, but currently, the way it stands, I won’t be supporting the motion. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bouchard. Speaking to the motion, Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I will be voting in favour of this motion because I am looking for some change and re-evaluation, and even though the motion seems extreme to some Members, that I believe it’s a statement from Members of this side of this House that we cannot go on with the status quo and it should be at least re-evaluated working with our committee system and have a good look at just how we’re doing business. It is a concern in my communities and in my riding, as well, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Speaking to the motion we have Minister Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, too, have some difficulty with the motion. I think the social passing has a negative connotation when you’re dealing with students, students in the class. I think the phrase is referred to as peer placement. This is the practice of the department to do peer placement. The alternative is to have, as an example, a 10 year old sitting in a class with six year olds in Grade 2 if that’s the level that they’ve achieved. Alternatively, they move with their peers and they’re placed with their peers, and you support that individual and the teachers are essentially teaching multiple grades with the students that are the same age.
I know that when I was in the school system, the kids that were held back didn’t finish school. In a small community, when somebody fails, the whole town knew about it. And that somebody was in Grade 2 for a second and third time, they never finished Grade 2. And kids that achieved Grade 5 by the time they hit puberty, didn’t continue on in school. This is what this motion is saying they want to go back to.
This motion doesn’t fix the problem of students not achieving Grade 12 and not being at a Grade 12 level when they achieve Grade 12. This motion doesn’t achieve students that will be at the Alberta curriculum level when they graduate. What this motion does is it holds back students. Older students will be mixed in with young kids. That’s what will happen with this motion. If we don’t peer place students, then you’re going to have to deal with the parents. The parents who are sending their kids to Grade 5 who are 10 years old, want to know why there’s a 15 or 16-year-old student in that class as well. Those are the things that we have to contemplate when we’re doing something like this.
There are systems built in where you have education assistance designed to address this specific issue, designed to address that the students that are operating at a lower grade function but they are all the same age. These education assistants are supporting and are able to help these students to try to achieve that level without sticking out like a sore thumb. There are only two options with this: If we don’t have peer placement, then we hold the student back. It’s not a third option here. There are two options. Either he remains in Grade 2 or he advances to Grade 3 with the rest of the students and he continues doing Grade 2 work in Grade 3 so that student doesn’t stick out like a sore thumb.
We have to watch out. We have to care for our students. We have to make sure that we’re protecting the students as well. And the parents. The parents that want to send their children to school and expect that if they have a 10-year-old going to Grade 5 that they’re going to be in school with others in the classroom that are 10 years old also, not students that are 16.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Speaking to the motion we have Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chairman. I’ve already committed to some of the Members that we are reviewing the inclusive schooling program dollars that are going to the school boards. This is an area that needs more detailed discussion, as Mr. Beaulieu alluded to. Those are areas that we need to have with the school boards, the parents, the teachers, the leaders, our department and various NGO departments as well.
It’s not an easy said and done. This involves a lot of discussion that needs to take place.
I’m also in agreement with Mrs. Groenewegen about what she has stated where individuals being left behind not successfully achieving things in life. Mr. Beaulieu did address that as well. We’ve all experienced that. Not all students are the same. Very true. There are different needs for each student. We have to take all those into perspective on individual needs. Mrs. Groenewegen did talk about that need to assess what the values are in the school system and assist those individuals. That’s what I’ve committed to already, that we need to review the inclusive schooling, the programming that’s out there, and if it needs to be a comprehensive, overall review, that may be the topic of discussion that we need to have.
I did commit that we’re going to review this inclusive schooling. We did address it at the Cabinet level and now we’re here. My department’s willing to pursue that as well, to review the inclusive schooling. I just wanted to relay that message that I did commit in this House.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. I will give opportunity to the mover of the motion for wrap-up. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll just be really quick. I want to thank the Members who are voting in favour of it. I want to thank those just a little bit less who will be abstaining, and certainly those – darn it – I wish we could have persuaded those who are voting against it. But in all seriousness, this is a very important subject and I want to say that I do recognize and respect those that feel strongly that they have to vote against it. Of course, in this business you can’t hold those as grudges. You have to realize that’s how they feel and you have to respect it. I recognize and respect those who aren’t voting in favour.
The ASA Committee recognizes that social passing is an issue in our education system and I think it’s important. The frustrating part, of course, is everyone here is… I shouldn’t say everyone. It’s not meant to be a broad stroke. The examples that we heard here about the 15-year-old still being in Grade 5, that’s an absolute extreme example. That’s why we would have an Inclusive Schooling Policy, to find some way to get them going along. We’re talking about social passing and that’s really where we’re at.
At this time I’ll ask for a recorded vote and, of course, I will plead to our Cabinet friends that now is your chance for a free vote without the Premier here. The Premier’s not here tonight, nor the stalwart…is anyone else. No one will tell, of course. That’s all I have to say on this particular subject.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. To the motion.
