The Alberta Federation of Labour is pleased to make this submission to the Private Schools Funding Task Force on behalf of its affiliated unions and their members.

The Federation is the oldest and largest central labour organization in Alberta. Founded in 1912 to act as the ‘voice of labour’ in the Province, the AFL currently represents over 40 unions with a combined membership in excess of 115,000. Those members work in the industrial, construction, service and public sectors in towns and cities across Alberta, and are engaged in virtually every occupation open to working people.

Historically, we have represented the interests of union members and their families on public issues that effect their lives at work and in their communities. As well, we have attempted to defend the interests of unorganized workers, because there really is no other collective voice for them.

Public education has always been strongly supported by the labour movement. In fact, the creation of a public school system was one of the key social demands of the entire Canadian trade union movement in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Labour is still a strong supporter of public education today. After all, it is working people and their families who benefit most from public education and who would be most effected by any degradation of the system. Those higher up the socio-economic ladder can afford the added burden of private education — most working people can not.

Consequently, we take the current debate over funding of private schools, and other issues like public accountability, tuition fees and student selection, very seriously.

This submission will roughly follow the outline in the Task Force's questionnaire: dealing first with guiding principles, then funding issues, accountability issues, and, finally, student selection and tuition fee issues.

Part I — Guiding Concepts in Education

The Task Force suggested several important guiding concepts to guide discussion and for comment. Some of them require comment from labour:

Best Interests of the Student

The focus of education is the student. The best interests of the student are paramount.

This seems to be a given. However, it doesn't begin to address the real questions: who decides what are the best interests of the student? What are the criteria used to judge whether or not the best interests of the student are being met?

Broadly speaking, to meet the best interests of the student, education should provide essential skills, like literacy, mathematics, and composition. Equally important is teaching students how to learn and how to reach their full potential to think and act creatively and to critically evaluate information, concepts and arguments. Finally, education has a vital role in preparing students for citizenship in a democratic society. Tolerance of difference, respect for the rights of others, and a commitment to our democratic institutions and social fabric are just as important as addition and subtraction, and should be included in any criteria that tests the efficiency of educational efforts.

Right and Responsibilities of Parents

Parents have a right and responsibility to make decisions respecting the education of their children.

Again, this ‘guiding concept’ leaves many questions unanswered. Which decisions are we discussing here? And through what mechanisms should parents be making them?

For instance, do parents have a right to make decisions that do not make the best interests of the student paramount? For instance, suppose a parent insists their child not be in a class with ethnic minority students, or demands that the holocaust be described as a conspiracy which did not exist?

Do parents without professional educational training and skills have the right to overrule teachers and administrators who do have those qualifications?

In other words, are children simply extensions of their parents desires, or do their rights to an education that makes their best interests paramount exist outside of the parent/child relationship?

The Federation submits that parental rights and responsibilities are not absolute. All parents have the right to participate in the decision-making process in the education system through election of the Provincial Government that sets overall policy and standards, through election of local School Boards that realize policy in the schools, and through participation in their local school council. That is sufficient and appropriate mechanisms through which to exercise parental rights and responsibilities.

Freedom of Choice

Parents are entitled to choice within the public system, including alternate programs and charter schools, the choice of a private school, or the choice of home education.

First, home schooling and private schools are not within the public system, so it is misleading to include them in a broad statement about choice within the public system. The Federation supports parents' rights to choose to take their child out of the public system. However, the choice to forego free public education is one which should and does carry a financial cost. Just as a citizen can choose not to take advantage of other public services and programs, like medicare they should have the right to choose private education. However, just as in the case of someone who chooses a private medical clinic over a public hospital, the costs of choosing private education must be born by the citizen opting out of the public system.

The basic concept of choice within the public system is theoretically attractive in an abstract way. Many people see any increase in individual rights or choices as inherently good and more democratic.

However, there is a basic tension between individual rights and public good that lies at the heart of all democratic systems. Democracy is always a balance between unfettered individual rights and the wishes and well-being of the majority. Consider something as simple as speed limits. Our society has protected the safety of the majority of citizens by truncating individuals' right to drive as fast as they please. In a very real sense, the ultimate extension of individual rights undermines the democratic society that was the basis of those rights in the first place.

This is directly applicable to choice of alternate programs and charter schools within the public school system. It is not that such programs are automatically good or bad for the system. However, care must be exercised to ensure that such programs do not contribute to a breakdown of the public purposes of public education. At risk is the loss of diversity within schools. If schools are allowed to fill small niches for special interest groups, then one of the important elements of public education — introducing students to others from diverse cultures and backgrounds, is lost. This balkanization can, in fact, produce an opposite effect wherein students identify themselves only with the particular subgroup that they belong to and exclude those who are not like themselves.

Far preferable is to provide more flexible options within the mainstream public schools, thereby accommodating legitimate need for alternate programming and possibly improving the entire system instead of select parts of it.

Heritage and Diversity

Alberta's education system should reflect the heritage, diversity and values of Alberta society.

This is a difficult concept simply because it does not describe what is intended by the word ‘reflect’. If it means that public schools ought to accommodate and preserve different heritages, and to create a respect for all the diverse cultures, languages, religions and heritages that have always been an important part of Alberta society, then it is an admirable goal.

But, if it means that education should support the creation of schools catering to special interest groups that exclude those not from their particular subset of Alberta society, then it is not admirable nor supportable.

Part II —Funding for Private Schools

The Alberta Federation of Labour is opposed to the provision of public funds for private schools. Nonetheless, it is clear that this government is not prepared to cut funding to private schools. Consequently, the AFL would like to strongly recommend that such funding levels not be increased, and that various changes be made to the regulation of private schools before public funds are accessible.

The Federation believes that the public school system must be seen as the ultimate vehicle for the delivery of education in Alberta. It's legitimate financial needs must be met first. Private schools are a luxury that are being provided to special interest groups — and should not be receiving public funding if the public system's full financial needs are not being met.

This is particularly critical in Alberta today, where the basic financial needs of the public education system are not being met.

Per pupil funding in Alberta has been declining in real dollars for the past decade — from $4,972 per pupil in 1986 to just $4,547 per pupil this year (1986 dollars). Ten years ago, Alberta had the second highest per pupil funding in Canada, well above the national average. Today we are seventh highest, behind Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, B.C. and New Brunswick — and well below the national average.

That under-funding is having serious effects upon the public school system's operations. Classroom sizes are steadily increasing. There are less educational specialists, like educational psychologists, speech therapists, and librarians, working in the system. Teachers' workloads are increasing while their preparation time has virtually disappeared. Schools have been forced to cut back on support staff or contract out to inferior service providers, leaving schools dirtier, less safe, and causing degradation of the learning environment and infrastructure. Cutbacks and continued downward pressure on wages in the education system is producing an unhealthy labour relations climate.

Parents of children in the public system are increasingly burdened with fund-raising activities to provide resources previously paid for by the tax base.

In this context, increased funding for private schools will come directly at the expense of the public system. By catering to the special desires of a tiny fraction of the student population (~4%), the government is compromising the quality of education for the vast majority. This is unsupportable. Worse, the under-funding of public education will eventually create a greater demand for private education — establishing a vicious cycle where declining funds for public schools causes a degradation of those schools which causes more parents to seek other educational vehicles which causes a further drain on public school funding, and so on.

Although outside the purview of this Task Force, it should be noted that Alberta can easily afford to adequately fund public education. The economy is booming, and the government is running multi-billion dollar surpluses. If the education of our children is not the best possible investment of public funds, what is? Perhaps a complete ban on all private education funding until the public systems' full needs are met would create a bit more support for education funding from special interest groups that currently spend their time attacking the public system for their own benefit.

At the very least, no expansion of private funding — either through increased per student instruction grants, or by starting to pay for operating costs like administration, transportation, and maintenance, or capital costs like school construction or renovation — should be allowed while the public system is under-funded.

Finally, there has been some suggestion that private schools should be allowed to access a portion of education property taxes. This is contrary to the entire principle of taxation. Taxes are levied for the public good, and it is generally accepted that the public good created by taxation expenditures should be fully and equally accessible to all. The public school system fully complies with this principle. It is equally and fully accessible to all Albertans.

Private schools have the right to exclude students whom they do not want for any reason — including incompatible values, inability to pay tuition, and behavioural or learning problems. To suggest that a public tax levy be expended upon a private service that meets only an exclusive and closed special interest group's needs is just plain wrong.

Part III — Accountability Issues

The Task Force background discussion paper was unclear about some specifics relating to private schools. For instance, it suggests that "most [private schools] follow Alberta Education's ‘Programs of Study’." How many do not? Are the provincial achievement tests that private school students are required to write the same ones that public school student's write? How do the results compare? Public school students must write diploma examinations. Private school students do not have to write diploma examinations. How many private school students write them and how many do not? How do their results compare with public school students' results? Why do they not have to write diploma examinations? What is the utility of a high school education that provides no diploma?

It seems that private schools, despite accessing public money, are not as accountable for results as the public school system. Why shouldn't private school students have to perform to the same level of student accomplishment as public school students? Are the academic achievement levels of private schools made available to parents considering enrolling their children in such schools? To the public? If they are not, they should be.

There are many other areas where accountability requirements are substantially less in private schools than in public schools. This seems wrong for several reasons. First, since public funds are supporting private education in Alberta, it seems only prudent that there be an equal level of accountability and reporting between the public and private systems. Secondly, given that all of the regulations in the public school system are there to protect the interests of the student, isn't it providing less protection to private school students to allow less accountability and regulation of private schools?

A few of the more noticeable inequities between the private and public systems simply do not make sense.

Public schools have to have school councils — private schools do not. If institutionalized parental involvement is good for educational quality why isn't it required in both systems?

Public schools have conflict-of-interest regulations, private schools do not. Conflict-of-interest is universally seen as undesirable — why is it not prohibited in private schools?

The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act will apply to public schools, but not to private schools. Again, why should private schools be exempt from basic citizen rights protection?

Public school parents have the right to exclude their children from specific religious or patriotic instruction — private school parents do not. This seems particularly unreasonable — unless you assume that there will never be the slightest difference in belief between parents in the same denomination or sect.

Expulsion of students in the public system requires strict timelines to protect students and parents. Also, parents must be informed of their right to appeal expulsions to the Minister. Neither of these hold true in private schools. How can the government possibly consider it appropriate to deny parents and students in the private system such basic protections against injustice?

All of the above issues produce a serious lack of accountability of private schools to parents when compared to public school requirements. The right and ability of parents to be involved in the public education system has been expanded. It seems a contradiction of policy that the same is not true in the private school system.

Finally, a brief note about teachers. Private school teachers do not have the right to an impartial third party in disputes over termination or suspension, nor are they required to be members of the Alberta Teachers Association. Both of these would tend to depress wages and benefits in the private schools. Such a low-wage policy ultimately means that teachers will be subsidizing the costs of private education through wages and benefits that do not meet provincial norms. That is not a just nor desirable situation.

Part IV — Student Selection and Tuition Fees

The most undesirable aspect of private schools is their right to exclude any student for any reason without any means of appeal. The idea of putting public funds into an institution that can and does bar members of the public from participating on arbitrary and unappealable grounds is repugnant.

Further, that such institutions can take public money while at the same time levying uncontrolled tuition fees that can effectively exclude large portions of the population on financial grounds is completely at odds with the accepted values of our society.

Conclusion

The Alberta Federation of Labour is opposed to the provision of public funds for private schools.

At the very least, the Alberta Federation of Labour is opposed to any increase in funding to private schools in Alberta. The AFL recommends that funding of maintenance and capital costs not be provided to private schools, and that they not be allowed access to educational property taxes.

Further, funding to private schools should be reduced or eliminated, at least until such time as public school funding is restored to a level where all of the public education system's needs are being adequately met. Public schools are the essential component of the education system. Private schools are a luxury for specific special interest groups and the costs for such special treatment should not come out of the public purse.

Private schools, whether or not they access public funds, should have to meet all public and parental accountability standards and regulations required in the public system — including a process which arbitrates any refusal to accept particular students and a publicly accepted set of criteria that must be met before any student can be turned away.

There should be an upper limit on tuition fees which cannot be exceeded if public funds are to be accessed.

Teachers in private schools should not be treated any differently than teachers in the public system.

Respectfully submitted,

The Alberta Federation of Labour