breadcrumb trail link
columnist
The former dean of the University of Saskatchewan's faculty of education links the tension to the 2009 decision to abolish taxing powers.
Published date May 15, 2024 • Last updated 37 minutes ago • Reading time 4 minutes
Register for free here to save this article. Or sign in if you have an account.
Education Minister Jeremy Cockrill speaks at the Saskatchewan Association of School Boards meeting held at the Sheraton Cavalier. Photo taken in Saskatoon, Sask. Thursday, April 11, 2024.Photo: Michelle Berg/Saskatoon StarPhoenix
Article content
Escalating tensions between the Saskatchewan Teachers' Federation and the provincial government over class sizes and composition reveal deeper issues that date back to misguided education policy decisions in 2009.
When the state government seized the power of local school districts to set property tax rates, it severed a 100-year-old foundational connection between local communities and schools, and the role communities hold in shaping education in the state. It curtailed important democratic mechanisms that existed in the country.
Advertisement 2
This ad has not yet loaded, but article continues below.
This content is only for subscribers
Subscribe today to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.
One account gives you unlimited access to articles from across Canada, online. Get exclusive access to the Saskatoon StarPhoenix ePaper, an electronic replica of the print version that you can share, download, and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from award results. -Award-winning journalist. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles such as the New York Times crossword.
Subscribe to unlock more articles
Subscribe today to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.
One account gives you unlimited access to articles from across Canada, online. Get exclusive access to the Saskatoon StarPhoenix ePaper, an electronic replica of the print version that you can share, download, and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from award results. -Award-winning journalist. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles such as the New York Times crossword.
Register/Sign in to unlock more articles
Create an account or sign in to continue your reading experience.
One account gives you access to articles across Canada. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles every month. Receive email updates from your favorite authors.
Sign in or create an account
or
Article content
Article content
This failure threw Saskatchewan's education system into disarray.
It is no surprise that recent editorials and social media commentary have increasingly questioned the role of the Saskatchewan School Board.
The association has traditionally served as a conduit between local school boards and state governments, advocating for funding stability and local education priorities.
However, after 2009, the association's influence and effectiveness declined significantly, and teachers felt the need to address funding stability through contract negotiations.
Given that, and the perception that the Association is making short-term deals and siding with the government on issues of class size and complexity, unfortunately and dangerously, the Association is now recognized as a champion of state government.
Local trustees, once strong and direct representatives of the community in educational governance, have also seen their role significantly diminished.
Although still elected by the community, trustees stripped of some strategic financial decision-making authority now lack a meaningful ability to engage with the community and directly address the educational needs of their sectors. I am.
afternoon headlines
Thank you for registering!
Article content
Advertisement 3
This ad has not yet loaded, but article continues below.
Article content
The state's inadequate response to requests for stable support for class size and complexity indicates a worrying lack of recognition of the roles and responsibilities of different levels of government in education. .
That same government assigns responsibilities to the federal government or intervenes in issues that overlap with state jurisdiction (such as carbon pricing, health care funding, equalization payments, etc.) without the federal government providing sufficient resources. This is particularly surprising given the frequent opposition to
The Education Minister's repeated comments seek to shift the burden onto local boards while denying them a stable means of raising the funding they need. This makes the government's recent billboards about engagement and care in the classroom disingenuous.
It is disconcerting that it has taken so long for the Saskatchewan government to understand that this is a policy problem and that the solution is one within its direct control.
The centuries-old (not to mention ethical) principle of taxing local profits is not being followed. This principle of ensuring that locally raised revenue is spent locally to meet the specific needs of the region has been in gradual decline since 2009.
Advertisement 4
This ad has not yet loaded, but article continues below.
Article content
In fact, since funding policy changes in 2012, all education taxes collected locally are required to be transferred in full to state governments and absorbed into a centralized funding formula.
Furthermore, since these policy changes, Saskatchewan's per-student spending rankings have plummeted, obscured by the province's budgetary arrangements that advocate increased investment in education.
Additionally, local property tax funds currently primarily support local governments rather than local education, helping school boards respond effectively to evolving local demographics, rising costs, and changing student needs. It is impairing the ability of directors.
Ministers got us this far, despite overwhelming messages of dissatisfaction from overworked teachers, rather than repeating what will and will not be discussed at the bargaining table. It would be better to reconsider the failed policies from 2009.
Now is the time to redevelop policy, building hybrid governance and funding models that combine the strengths of centralized control with truly local decision-making.
Advertisement 5
This ad has not yet loaded, but article continues below.
Article content
When properly implemented, centralized control establishes basic educational standards, ensures fair resource allocation, and protects students from disadvantages related to geography and socio-economic status.
At the same time, restoring substantial fiscal autonomy to school sector boards would give them the power to respond to local needs, such as class size and complexity, which should be determined at the local level. The Minister agrees that this is the best option.
Michelle Pritchula is an associate professor and graduate professor at the Johnson Shoyama School of Public Policy at the University of Saskatchewan, and has worked in the education field for nearly 30 years, including as dean of the University of South Carolina's School of Education, school teacher, and teacher. Major.
Recommendations from the editorial department
Phil Tank: Sask.Teachers complained about class size and complexity in 2020
Mandrik: Sask.Government must change tactics in dispute with teachers
share your opinion
StarPhoenix welcomes opinion articles. Click here to find out what you need to know about how to write articles that increase your chances of getting published. Send submissions to letters@thestarphoenix.com or ptank@postmedia.com.
Our website is your go-to place for the latest news in Saskatchewan, so be sure to bookmark TheStarPhoenix.com and LeaderPost.com. Click here for the Regina Leader-Post newsletter. Click here for the Saskatoon StarPhoenix Newsletter.
Article content
Share this article on your social networks
