My online storage system has recently allowed for the sharing of files publicly, so I’m testing it out with an electronic copy of the CD that was handed out at the KWCHEA conference earlier this year. You can now download one big zip file at the following link:
Download of KWCHEA CD package

The file will have to be unzipped or decompressed using any standard program. Then you should see 6 folders which all contain a bunch of pdf files:

- Articles Written by Sarah
- Ontario Ministry of Education High School Resources
- Ontario University Admission Policies 2010 (all were updated as of spring 2010 for admission in fall 2010)
- Open Universities (information about Canada’s open universities available to Ontario Students)
- OUAC e-info information on all universities and programs (Ontario institutions)
- Standardized Tests for University Admission (including SAT, AP, CLEP and ACT)

Let me reiterate: this is not leisure reading. It’s boring. It’s not particularly pretty. But, if you are applying to university in Ontario as a homeschooler without a traditional high school diploma, I can’t think of any information you need (before you get to the point of speaking with individual universities) that’s not included here.

I also want to be perfectly clear: everything except the articles written by me is freely available online. I’m not claiming to have authored this material; I only compiled it because frankly, some of it is pretty darn difficult to find on your own. You’d be amazed at some of the navigation paths, file names and various educational jargon that industry professionals think makes sense. There’s some information here that even I had to pull my hair out to find online, so my goal was simply to put it all in one place for those who have neither the time nor the inclination to track down the information for themselves.

As this information is available freely online, there is no copyright infringement by providing it to you. Some of what’s included are simply screen shots from websites, and in that case, it’s enough to provide you the basics of what you need to know, but also provides you with the website address and how to get there yourself to get more information if you need more than the basics. And, since this information is freely available online, I have not sold nor are you allowed to sell the contents of this file. I was not financially compensated from KWCHEA in any way for this project. (They offered to reimburse me for my time, but I insisted that any money they had should go towards creating as many CDs as possible for free distribution.)

By downloading this file, you acknowledge that this file may not be sold and agree not to sell this file. It simply hasn’t been created in such a way to make that legal, as it was never my intent to receive compensation for this work. But, I hope you’ll share it freely.

I believe the contents are extremely accurate, but of course, mistakes happen. Please do let me know either by email or in a comment below if you find an error. Also feel free to let me know how you’re using the information, or if there’s anything I haven’t included that you think would be helpful, and I can consider that for version 2.0.

Depending on your browser, the link above may initiate a download automatically, so be prepared for that. The file is safe to download, but if you experience any problems please do let me know and I’ll take immediate action.

You can view and/or join the discussion here:

 http://messageboard.rainsberger.ca/topic/162696/

Diploma:
1. an official or state document
2. a writing usually under seal conferring some honor or privilege
3. a document bearing record of graduation from or of a degree conferred by an educational institution

It’s not exactly clear-cut, but the implication behind the word diploma is that it has been awarded to the recipient by someone with the explicit power to do so.

WHY I TAKE ISSUE WITH THE PHRASE “HOMESCHOOL DIPLOMA”

Here’s why I don’t like the phrase “homeschool diploma” (and I know many people find my site by searching that phrase, so I’m not just making this up!):

The family unit does have the power to confer some honor or privilege upon a child who has, in the family’s mind, successfully completed high school.

But, the family unit does not have the power to confer upon said child an award that others outside the family are forced to acknowledge.

It is misleading, I believe, to represent yourself as having earned a “high school diploma” because that phrase carries with it the understanding that a government-approved organization assessed and granted diploma status. In other words, if it came off your own printer, how “official” can it really be?

HOW DO HOMESCHOOLERS GET A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA?

When I speak on the topic of university admissions, I’m often asked how homeschoolers “get a high school diploma.” The reality is, many homeschoolers do not get a high school diploma. And in fact, by definition (according to the universities), if you have a high school diploma, you are not a homeschooler!

If you go through the homeschool admission policies of the Ontario universities, you’ll notice that while you may be asked to provide a transcript, or portfolio, you will not be asked to submit a “diploma.” That’s because universities do not recognize diplomas unless they come from a government-accredited source.

And most importantly, a homeschooled applicant is one who by definition does not possess a government diploma. So, the university is not expecting you to present any diploma whatsoever. This is why you’re considered a homeschooler, and this is why you’re presenting a portfolio, or standardized test results or some other requirement that is not required of traditionally-schooled applicants.

BUT MY CHILD IS ENROLLED IN AN OUTSIDE PROGRAM LEADING TO A DIPLOMA. AM I STILL CONSIDERED A HOMESCHOOLER?

Now, I have had this discussion with others re: “diplomas” that come at the end of comprehensive curriculum programs, mostly those available out of the U.S. and completed through distance studies.

One mother was adamant that her child’s university “accepted” this diploma. The reality is, and it’s a fine distinction so bear with me, the university accepted the child, who happened to have this diploma when he applied.

While the university took this diploma into consideration, and subsequently decided to admit the student, this does not mean that this program’s diploma is “recognized” or “accepted.” The university is not allowed to recognize a non-government-accredited diploma as fulfilling the “does this kid have a high school diploma?” requirement. Note that a government approved diploma can be from *any* government, not just a Canadian province. But, it does have to be awarded by ultimately an organization that is under the jurisdiction of a country’s own education system, not a private curriculum company.

That being said, there are some correspondence diplomas from the U.S. that are government accredited. In fact, the very first time I spoke at the KW conference, we discovered that two members of the audience were following a program that led to an official state diploma from the U.S. This meant that, in the eyes of the universities, these students were not homeschoolers because they had a government diploma to present. So, the specific program you’re following makes a huge difference. (More about these U.S. programs later.)

WHAT YOU DON’T KNOW ABOUT DIPLOMAS, AND WHY YOU’RE OFTEN ASKING THE WRONG QUESTIONS AND THEREFORE GETTING THE WRONG ANSWERS

Here are some of the misconceptions I’ve encountered over the years:

FACT: A diploma is ultimately just a piece of paper signifying an academic honor or achievement. The diploma is not the high school education itself. If you homeschool, you may not receive a diploma for your work. To put it bluntly, get over it! What I mean is, separate the diploma from the education in your mind, and focus not on achieving the diploma at all costs, but rather achieving your life goals (e.g. university admission), then decide whether the diploma is absolutely necessary. Recognize that not every life goal requires a high school diploma, and in fact, some goals are more easily attained without said diploma. When you’re on my website, remember that my primary concern isn’t earning you a diploma — it’s getting you into university, and all advice is given within that context.

FACT: A diploma carries with it the underlying assumption that whoever issued the diploma has been approved by the government to hold the power to certify and acknowledge academic achievement, and this is what allows diplomas to carry universal recognition. This is why not everyone can have a diploma for doing just anything, no matter how worthy it is. Again, get over it! You are not entitled to a government’s seal of approval if you did not do what they specifically require for a high school diploma. The good news is, people like me have been working for years so that this lack of a diploma isn’t an obstacle when applying to university.

FICTION: You need a high school diploma before entering post-secondary studies, so even if you’re 23 with a lot of life experience, you should be figuring out how to go back and get those high school credits that you’re missing so that you can apply to university.
FACT: Apply as a mature student, or to an open university. Don’t waste your time with high school credits unless you really feel you are lacking the academic knowledge/confidence and specifically want to study at the high school level.

FACT: When universities use the phrase “high school diploma” they mean only diplomas issued by government accredited organizations. It’s important to realize that, in Ontario as in many other government jurisdictions, there is only one recognized high school diploma – the government one. All accredited schools (public, private, independent, correspondence) issue this same diploma, not an “equivalent” diploma, but the exact, same one. That’s what being accredited means — given the authority to issue the government diploma.

FACT: People will prey on your innocence/ignorance surrounding diplomas. A few years ago, I overheard one vendor at a large homeschooling conference in Ontario describing his program’s “diploma” to a parent. Words and phrases like “equivalent” and “our kids get into university just like everyone else” are misleading when the audience doesn’t realize two key points. First, there is no such official thing as an “equivalent” diploma. That’s not an official term and no one regulates what is “equivalent” to ensure that it really is like the original. In other words, having an equivalent diploma still means that you don’t have the traditional, government high school diploma. Second, while students with these equivalent diplomas may “similarly get into university” they certainly do not “get into university in a similar way” to kids with the government diploma. While there’s nothing necessarily wrong with using an unaccredited program for your high school years, there *is* something very wrong with using verbal sleight of hand to make people think that your diploma “counts” as what we have come to know as a “high school diploma.” And, this is a huge difference. It’s the difference between applying as a homeschooler and applying with the traditional high school diploma (which, if you had, would make you not a homeschooler in the eyes of the universities).

FICTION: All Ontario high schools offer the government diploma, in other words, the one that is recognized.
FACT: In Ontario, all schools that have chosen to “register” with the government will be listed in database which can be searched here. But, not every school listed is permitted to issue high school diplomas. In other words, not every “registered” school (here’s my application fee) is an “accredited” school (permitted to grant the government high school diploma). Look for the indication “Offers credits towards the Ontario Secondary School Diploma” in their listing.

FICTION: Any correspondence diploma from the U.S. is one way to “get around” not having an Ontario high school diploma.
FACT: In the US, there is an extra layer involved in government accreditation. There are about half a dozen “accrediting organizations” that have government approval to accredit individual schools and school boards. So, when using a curriculum from the United States, it’s important to first find out which organization issues the school’s accreditation, and then determine whether this organization is one of the government ones. There are accrediting bodies in the United States who have not received government approval to accredit schools for the government diploma, meaning that the individual school or program can claim “certification” for its diploma, but just not government certification, which is what Ontario universities will demand. Be careful, there are some well-known names out there whose diplomas are not recognized by universities. This doesn’t mean that the universities won’t consider the academic achievement involved in obtaining them, but these diplomas are not stand ins for a government diploma.

FICTION: You need a high school diploma to put on your resume after graduating from college, university or other post-secondary education/training.
FACT: If you are continuing on to post-secondary education/training, that is the education that should be represented on your resume. Not having a high school diploma when you already have a university degree or college diploma should not ordinarily present any problems to you in the job market.

While the university system isn’t perfect, it needs to be protected from the influence of the secondary school system, if only because the secondary school’s concerns are not the university’s concerns.

University students, for the most part, have reached the age of majority. Even those that have not have at least surpassed the requirements for compulsory attendance in school. As different as a Gr. 12 math class is from a Gr.9 math class, where students are still compelled to attend, the difference between a Gr. 12 math class and a university math class is greater still. The classes are held with different expectations: nothing short of an A is acceptable to a university applicant, but once in university, Bs and even Cs can look pretty good.

The primary career activity of most professors is research, not teaching. The landscape is changing somewhat with the increase in part-time or contract faculty who must sometimes scramble to pick up classes to earn a living, but for the most part, past achievement and future innovation in one’s field are characteristics of university professors, not high school teachers.

Elementary and secondary school attendance are locally based whereas one has their choice of any university. This may sound like a trivial distinction, but I know a thing or two about lazy computer programmers. Tell me that your local high school does NOT auto-fill the province field with “Ontario” in their database of student addresses. I don’t want to think about the added cost to update student records with a country field.

OK, so I’ve given some sound and one “I just plain don’t trust them” reasons for keeping the two entities separate. But, in all seriousness, the goals of the institutions are just too different to be effectively melded together. One hinges on tight provincial control of curriculum, attendance and pedagogy, attempting to provide (whether they want it or not) the same thing to students who are in no position to refuse. The other prides itself (at least historically) on academic freedom and discovery while offering a variety of paths (some would claim too many paths) ranging from academic to professional, general to hyperspecialized.

I just can’t see much common ground between the two sets of teachers, and yet, the Ontario Secondary School Teacher’s Federation (union) has been finding its way into the university system.

Now, those much more cynical than I would argue that all unions do today anyway is demand salary increases. So, why wouldn’t university staff want to hitch its wagon to a large, provincial union?

But, if we go with the assumption that being part of a union means having the same interests at heart, then why on earth would university staff want to join a high school union? So they can be forced to strike when the next provincial government makes radical changes to the high school education system again? So that they can get caught up in issues that don’t concern them, forced to feign interest in topics surrounding P.D. (or P.A.) days, teacher licensing, and the Gr. 10 literacy test?

That’s why I was shocked to read a short blurb stating that the University of Waterloo had voted at the end of the month on this very issue. As far as I can tell, the results are not yet in. Apparently, there are disputes over whether the OSSTF had enough consent of the membership to even hold the vote. Furthermore, several votes were “segregated” at the polling station because there was a question as to whether certain voters fell into the appropriate job categories to vote.

As shocked as I was to discover that this vote had been held, when I dug around for more information, I was even more surprised to learn that “upwards of 1,400 or 2.3 per cent of their total membership belongs to the university community with members from the universities of Brock, Ottawa and Algoma.”

I just don’t get it. I’m thinking that my first rule of thumb would likely be, “If the organization name doesn’t represent me, maybe the organization is not for me.”

But then again, for how many years was I a member of the “Ontario Federation of Teaching Parents” when, as I’ve made very clear in the past, I’m not a parent? But in that case, I had a specific goal in mind that only the homeschooling community was actively working towards: breaking down the barriers of university entrance for students without a high school diploma.

At the time, every seedy tutoring company located over a bakery in a strip mall was applying for government accreditation so they could issue high school credits and cash in on the “credit shopping” craze. I wanted to go in the other direction. If students didn’t need a high school diploma for university entrance, then they didn’t have to fall victim to the whims of educational and pedagogical fads nor get sucked into the grade inflation race caused by easy access of marks for sale. They could “radically” choose a their own path (which ironically, was often more traditional than the school system itself!) and prepare themselves for university however they saw fit. This was my vision, and if I had to align myself with “strange bedfellows” to realize it, then so be it!

So, if we go with the assumption that the university staff is getting something out of the deal, or that some goal is being achieved . . . what is it? Are the universities concerned about the underprepared first year class and want to become more involved in what goes on at the secondary level? Do the universities want to show support for their secondary school counterparts, whom they think have a “tougher” job than they do? Do university profs want easier access to high school teaching jobs as an option, and think this might be a way around teacher certification?

I honestly don’t know what the arguments in favour of this alliance are. (In a cursory reading of a few websites, I’ve heard only the opposition speak.) If people vote in favour of it, there must be something in it for them. I’m all for people improving their own situation, I just hope this isn’t the beginning of the end of the separation of secondary and post-secondary.

I was a graduating senior during the York strike of ’97 where classes were pretty much canceled in February and never resumed. I was sympathetic to my professors, who could clearly articulate and stood behind the reasons for the strike. Fortunately I didn’t lose any credits, nor was I asked to “come back next year” to write any final exams (on my own dime) as happened to several others.

If my graduating year had been disrupted because my prof’s hands were forced by a striking OSSTF, I’m not sure I would have been so sympathetic.

McGuinty says studies show that 4-year-olds in full-time learning programs consistently score higher in math and language skills than other students.

If you measure it, they will come

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Yes, we can demonstrate that starting school earlier leads to measurably better performance in school, which may or may not have anything to do with actual academic achievement. The longer you play a game, the better you become at that game. I played a lot of “Frogger” as a kid, but any one who knows me personally can attest to the fact that I have an unexplained fear of crossing streets. Obviously, my skills at maneuvering a pixelated frog through traffic did nothing to bolster my own confidence in crossing the road.

The same can be said about starting kids in school earlier. Yes, they’ll get the hang of spelling tests earlier, perhaps. But, will they become better spellers, or just better at predicting which 10 words the teacher will use in Friday’s dictation? Will they become better readers, or will they learn to choose shorter books so that their list of books read becomes longer more quickly? Some kids easily learn these coping mechanisms, or “rules of the game” which can overshadow or even replace real learning.

More school hurting those who need it most?

Check out the latest offering by Kate Tennier and Helen Ward: More school isn’t always better – “The drive for full-time kindergarten is based on the idea that it’s better for children and necessary for parents — wrong on both counts.” This latest educational scam (which unfortunately was overshadowed in the last provincial election by the Conservative private school funding platform) is still years away from being a done deal.

More school isn’t better. And, that’s not just me talking. With a few hours to kill at the airport last night, I finally got around to reading, in its entirety, Homeschooling: From Extreme to the Mainstream. Contrary to the idea that public schools help level the playing field for the disadvantaged,

Surprisingly, several studies have found that home education may help eliminate the potential negative effects of certain socio-economic factors. . . Home education appears to mitigate the harmful effect of low parental education levels. That is, public schools seem to educate children of poorly educated parents worse than do the poorly educated parents themselves. One study found that students taught at home by mothers who had never finished high school scored a full 55 percentile points higher than public school students from families with comparable education levels.

I think this is one of the most powerful messages of the report because homeschooling is often regarded as an option for the advantaged – either financially or academically. Much of the support for the public system rallies around the necessity to care for the disadvantaged. To be “the great equalizer.” But, it’s never been clearer that our schools are not doing that. And, more time in those schools is not going to do that, either.

As always, we are indebted to Kate, Helen and others who refuse to let us forget that politicians and bureaucrats continue to move forward with bad ideas unless they are stopped, and that we must remain vigilant in keeping the conversations alive. Thanks to them for keeping a very important issue in the public eye.

• The combination of the new courses, MHF 4U – Advanced. Functions and MCV 4U – new Calculus is being treated as the rough equivalent of MCB 4U – old Calculus.

• If MCB 4U – old Calculus is used, then neither MHF 4U- Advanced Functions nor MCV 4U- new Calculus can be included in the six Grade 12 courses required to calculate an admission average.

• Conversely, if either MHF 4U – Advanced Functions or MCV 4U- new Calculus is used, then MCB 4U- old Calculus cannot be included in the six Grade 12 courses required to calculate an admission average.

In a nutshell, it now takes two courses (Functions/Calculus) to equate to the old calculus course, and you may either use the first pair of courses or the second course in your admission requirements/averages (Top Six).

Read the fine print – one course or two?
Even though a program requiring a Calculus prerequisite now means that you have to take two math courses, it doesn’t necessarily mean both will be included in your Top Six. When a program requirement includes MCV4U, it is assumed that you already took MHF4U, because your high school would have required that you take the latter as a pre- (or co-) requisite.

Some university programs will only require the Calculus course. This tends to be true for programs in the Business fields where they need you to have a foundation in Calculus, but not in the more abstract realm of functions.  As in the Queen’s chart, this is often indicated by an asterisk following the Calculus course, with a note at the bottom reminding you that your high school will require you to take the Advanced Functions course, even though Queen’s does not need this mark for university admission. In this case, you still must take MHF4U, but it does not need to be included in your Top Six.  In this case, the functions course will be treated like an elective, and included if the grade is high enough to be to your advantage in the Top Six calculation.

Other programs, however, do explicitly state both math courses as a requirement.  You’ll find this in math-intense subjects such as computer programming or engineering.  In this case, you will be required to include both math courses in your Top Six.

I won’t go into too much detail describing Joe’s ideas on planning; he does planning for a living, so suffice it to say that he’s very good at it, and his methods probably deserve coverage that is beyond the scope of this little introduction. But in short, Joe’s planning is intertwined throughout his daily activities. Joe doesn’t try to make an ideal plan for the day, or even a full plan for the day. Instead, whatever comes next is dependent upon what’s already happened, relying on past feedback to predict future outcomes. Joe would feel constrained by a plan that’s already proven to be ineffective, off course or impossible by 10:00 a.m., given what has happened since 9:00 a.m.

What does all this have to do with university admissions? Well, no matter what kind of home schooling family you are, if you think your children might be bound for university, you need a plan. No one can wake up one morning and decide that today’s the day you try to get into university. You can be unstructured about schooling but you cannot face the bureaucratic beast that is Ontario’s post-secondary education system unprepared. Certainly our planning is made easier with the freely-available home school admission policies available on the web. But, have these plans freed home schoolers to go about their home-school-through-high-school without fear of the unknown, or have they now constrained our home-school-through-high-school options because we will now have them in the back (or front!) of our minds throughout a home-based high school experience?

Home-Schooled Students Rise in Supply and Demand By PAULA WASLEY describes this trend in university admissions in the US, where from 2000 to 2004, the percentage of colleges and universities with an official homeschooling policy rose from about 50% to about 85%. (emphasis added by me to illustrate the key points)

Without traditional points of comparison, like class ranking and grade-point averages, colleges tend to fall back on standardized-test scores. Many require that home-schoolers take two or more SAT 2 subject tests in addition to an SAT or ACT.

As the number of home-schoolers applying to college continues to grow, admissions offices have attempted to streamline the process. The University of Richmond, for example, has one admissions officer assigned to read all applications from home-schoolers. This year the Common Application, a format used by more than 300 colleges, added a supplement for home-schoolers, which both pleases and unsettles some home-school advocates.

“We’re not fighting to even be considered anymore,” says Howard Richman, executive director of the Pennsylvania Homeschoolers Accreditation Agency, one of seven organizations in the state that provides accredited diplomas to home-schooled graduates. On the other hand, he says, such standardization may cost home-schoolers some of the individuality that has set them apart.

Bringing home schoolers out into the open and requesting policies from universities has had its pros and cons. From the standpoint of a worried, nervous family, nothing is more assuring than seeing in black and white exactly which steps are needed to fulfill admission requirements. A clear, well-defined home schooling policy is sometimes the most guidance a home-school-through-high-school family has ever seen before!

On the other hand, are home schoolers now finding themselves “boxed in” by the increase in official policies, especially those that are increasingly relying on standardized tests? When there was no policy, there was no black and white. Now that these policies exist, it really means we have to conform to them.

Personally, I think the policies have done more good than harm. Trying to enter university without pre-defined conditions and expectations is a little like avoiding a question that you don’t really want answered. Sure, you can say, “You never told me what you wanted,” but they have every right to respond, “You never asked.”

I recognize that some may view the convergence of admission policies as contributing to the homogenization of an otherwise very diverse group of individuals. Some may see it as unfair that home schooled applicants may be increasingly encouraged to take standardized tests whereas their traditionally-schooled counterparts (here in Ontario) are generally exempt from high-stakes testing, and certainly are at the university entrance level. Of course, we can’t forget that home-school-through-high-school kids have been allowed to ignore provincial curriculum, mandated teaching methods and other such undesirable attributes of a traditionally-schooled education. I’d say it at worst evens out, but more often than not favours the home schooled.

If it wouldn’t normally be your inclination to do so, I’m going to suggest that you try thinking of these policies as I do — as freeing. Free from the worry about what the universities expect from you. Free from the hours spent figuring out how to document your child’s education. Free from the worry that your family’s choice has limited your children’s options. You know what’s expected of you — just plan for it as part of your long-term homeschooling strategy.

This morning, I read through comment after comment posted to the Toronto Star’s website indicating that Tory’s platform was a “deal breaker” and that it alone will cause several voters to vote Liberal. I wish that before they did, they’d read Kate’s latest article published in at least two local papers, then decide for themselves which is the lesser of two evils. One will erode the public pocketbook and stands to reduce educational choice by injecting the state into religious education; the other will rob children of meaningful social interaction at a time of key cognitive development.

Please read Kate’s article here and encourage informed debate on these parties’ educational platforms. (And don’t forget there are several other Ontario parties to consider, too!)

With the upcoming Ontario election, the Conservative provincial leader John Tory has decided to make parity of religious funding at the top of his campaign agenda. I only take this issue half-seriously since within his own party he doesn’t even seem to have a lot of support for the idea. So, I don’t expect this to come to fruition, but being kind of a “big deal” I thought it would be interesting to consider the unintended consequences of such a funding policy.

Again, since i don’t even think of it as a serious possibility, I don’t really feel like it’s worth the mental effort to take a vested interest one way or the other. So, I haven’t seriously considered the issue the way most are discussing it. I don’t see public schools as models of unity and tolerance, so I don’t much cling to the idea that our public schools are somehow sacred institutions; I don’t see them as something worthy of funding while private institutions are eroding our social fabric. I also don’t totally buy the “fund one, fund them all” issue because equality isn’t as simple as “treating everyone the same.” And, for a third time, I really don’t think this idea will take off, so I don’t care about debating the two “sides” as we’ve seen them presented in the media.

So, if I’m so uninterested in this issue, why write about it? Because what is terribly fun, interesting and exciting about the thought of this policy actually finding its way into our government is picturing how this would completely shake the foundation of the system we have now.

Thought #1. Why has no one (or have I just not read/listened carefully enough) brought up the fact that religious schools, by very definition according to our current model of education, are private schools. I could almost care less about whether or not a school is deemed religious. What I do care about is putting public money in private pockets. If religious schools want funding, I’d be happy to give it to them through a Board of Education that works the same way our public and Catholic boards work. (Note: Of course, I’m not suggesting that I like boards of education. But, if government money is going to flow, it should flow consistently.) I actually have no problems with a Jewish Board of Ed. (One of my former-students-turned-good-friends informs me that there already is such a thing, but it’s just not public. Looking at the Jewish schools in Toronto, I can believe they’ve got such an infrastructure already in place.) Bottom line is, I’m intimately familiar with private schools. There is absolutely no way I could sleep at night knowing the government was giving money to them.

Could you imagine the outrage if some private schools received student funding and others didn’t? And, it’s the secular private schools, who perhaps more closely resemble the public schools (at least in their secularness and separation of church and state) who would not receive the funding. This just doesn’t seem right.

Thought #2: What’s the criteria for designating a school as “religious?” A couple of religious instruction courses? Religious ceremonies on school property? A letter from a religious official? Imagine your typical small Toronto private school who’s competing for students. The religious school down the street can offer significantly reduced, if not free, tuition. What’s to stop any school from holding a religious class or two and then calling themselves a religious school to get the funding? (Joe asks what’s necessarily wrong with that, but I’ve gotta think there are people who might find that offensive. I do, in principle, and I’m not even religious.) Take it one step further, what’s to stop a school from finding an “easy” religion (by this I mean an obscure believe system from Wikipedia that has few, if any, “rules” or “practices” so that it would be easy to say you’re following that religion) and claiming funding? What’s to stop someone from establishing their own religion then creating a school to “worship” those beliefs?

Thought #3: I actually support the existence of religious schools in the sense that I support everyone’s right to choose the education they want for their children. Perhaps because so many of my personal beliefs are rooted in personal freedoms, I want to believe there will be schools that will refuse funding, and the strings attached, in the event that it’s offered. In fact, I might even go so far as to say that I’m suspicious of the schools who want the funding. When a school, founded on particular beliefs that require it to differentiate itself from a public school, willingly conforms to the same regulations as public schools in exchange for money, it sends the message that the money is more important than the beliefs. This is perhaps another example of me holding people to unreasonable high standards of behaviour. And, I’m sure there are some religious schools out there that are really not that much different from their local public school in their main aspects. So, it’s perhaps not a huge philosophical change to conform to the strings attached to the government funding. I just have a difficult time envisioning how schools that are currently free in many respects would willingly enslave themselves to more restrictions, if they really valued themselves as something different from the public system.

Thought #4: Obviously, the schools with funding will be in a better financial position than the school without. Will this increase conformity? Will more schools feel the pressure to more closely align with the public system in order to receive public money? It would stand to reason that the schools who choose to remain independent are in danger of losing students to cheaper or free alternatives. Will it become more difficult to run or establish a non-religious private school? Will we be left with fewer educational choices?

A few students have checked in with me about how their school years have started. It’s stories like these that make me grateful that I no longer have a vested interest in how teachers are teaching (or not teaching, as the case may be) my students:

Sarah, would you like to know how to mke the inverse of a parabola?? We take our paper, flip it over, turn it around and trace it! I turned to my friend and was like is this a sick joke? (Actual MSN transcript, edited only to make it a single paragraph.)

Now, some of you will have a mini-heart attack, although likely only if you’re a math tutor. The rest of you probably won’t get what’s going on here, so let me attempt to summarize in a non-mathy way. (You’re lucky, my first instinct was to explain the math. You can thank me later.)

Non-math summary: This student is in Gr. 12. This student is learning one of those things that most people only use when “building bridges.” This student is learning barebones tricks based on pattern recognition for putting something on the page that a teacher can mark as being correct without needing to understand any of the math behind it. And we’re wondering why bridges are collapsing all over the place?

To compare, I can teach you “calculus” in the same way right now, in about 12 seconds. Ready?

The derivative of 8x is 8. The derivative of 24x is 24. The derivative of -123x is -123. The derivative of 67x is 67. So, what’s the derivative of 17x? Not a trick question. It is in fact 17. Congratulations. I just taught you calculus. I can give you a test right now to prove that you know calculus and to prove to the Ministry of Education that I’ve taught calculus. You may think I’m kidding, but this is what passes for teaching in more classrooms than anyone wants to admit.

This is just another reason why we live here now.