Review on Educational Governance School Community Council Forum Jan 17, 2017

Transformational Change Announced Last Year Response to challenging budget Never clearly defined Apparent that it is targeted toward Boards and Administration Health and Public Boards of Education the focus

Transformational Change Process Minister Announced in the fall that there would be a panel Cabinet decided they would have Dan Perrins write an options report on Governance for Education Cabinet received this paper before Christmas Perrins report was released December 21, 2016 Advisory Panel was created to listen to public reaction to the Perrins report Panel is to present summary of feedback to Minister/Cabinet by early February Cabinet to make decision We expect to hear of decision prior to or on Budget day in March, 2017

Previous Amalgamation January 1, 2006 Board selected summer of 2005 99 Boards to 28 North East created from 4 Boards Systemic Shock Schools operate All work goes toward operations 3-5 years before true educational agenda is addressed Challenges Local Voice Distance Equity (local and provincial)

Shifts in Governance with Transformational Change Strategic Direction and Accountability to Government Effectiveness Efficiency Consistency/Standardization Sector Wide Efficiency unit similar to 3S Health Prov Advisory Committee to the Minister – Public, Catholic, Francophone and FNM & North Education Quality Council – focus on student achievement

Shifts in Governance with Transformational Change Public School Board Options Options Provincial – 1 public school board Regional – 4 public school boards Division – Option A 8-14 school Boards Option B – Small realignment of existing boundaries Participation and communication traded off against standardization and future efficiencies Shifts require amendments to legislation, regulations, ministry policy

Benefits and Challenges More accountable to government Greater opportunity for sharing Over time larger systems will improve efficiency, although extent of efficiencies and effectiveness is difficult to pre-judge Governance and administration cost decrease Challenges Reduced local accountability Engaging 606 school community councils Time and energy required to accomplish changes will impact effectiveness in short term Hard to maximize efficiencies while working through governance and administrative changes

Benefits and Challenges Public will seek redress from MLAs rather and government A plan will be needed for First Nations representation The board will be significantly removed from the community and school Implementation costs will be significant, particularly in combining local agreements It will take significant time and energy Benefits Board knowledge and expertise will need to reflect urban, northern and rural needs and interests Greater consistency and standardization of policies and procedures Funding distribution will be equitable across the public system Once it is operational the “one school board” is less costly and complex than current state

Opportunities to Influence Locally Elected Boards Allow communities a voice Ensure key decision about public education are made in communities Recognize that not every student/community is the same and creates policy responsive to this local context

Opportunities to Influence SSBA Saskatchewan School Boards Association Letter to school prior to Christmas Engage in the “Education Belongs to the Community’ campaign Panel Presentation by invitation only NESD Board presented on January 11, 2017 Online submission due by January 23, 2017 MLA’s Very important Amount of contacts is important Encourage MLAs to talk with their colleagues including the Education Minister Hon. Don Morgan

Local democratically elected school Boards are the best choice for my community. Local accountability comes from locally elected boards making decisions for local communities. School boards make planning, staffing and budget decisions close to communities with the resources made available. It also encourages civic engagement in education. Based on past experience, amalgamation will put the focus on governance, administration and change management. Students will become secondary focus setting back the advancements that have been made in literacy and improved graduation rates. The previous NDP amalgamation caused disruptions for at least 5 years and education spending continues to rise. Economies of scale have been realized. This would be the second time that forced amalgamation excluded Separate (minority faith) School Boards, firstly in the NDP action and now in the Sask Party proposal.

It took at least 5 years for the Boards, formed only 10 years ago, to become accepted as our community's school system. Significant improvement in learning is just beginning to be achieved in the last couple of years. A large percentage of the funding for education still comes from local property taxes. While the Province sets the taxation rate, the local taxpayers still pay the toll. Taxpayers deserve local representation for education. This is different from Health where all funding except portions of capital come from the general revenue fund of the Provincial budget. Locally elected boards are responsible for placing student needs first when making decisions, and are accountable to their electorate. They are responsible for ensuring all students within their jurisdiction have equal opportunities to reach their maximum potential. This may be lost with larger elected boards or appointed boards who may be more influenced by politics because they are responsible to the government who appointed them.

Opportunities to Influence Form letters Talking Points Contact information NESD website link (on-line submission due January 23) Send and e-mail response to: K12govconsultation@gov.sk.ca