Loading...
5/31/2005 - Special Board Meetingf \ / THAMES VALLEY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD SPECIAL BOARD MEETING 2005 MAY 31,7:00 P.M. BOARD ROOM,EDUCATION CENTRE AGENDA V-verbal M -material 1.CALL TO ORDER V 2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA M 3.CONFLICTS OF INTEREST V 4.C.N,WATSON REPORT PUBLIC PRESENTATION V 5.C.N.WATSON REPORT -NEXT STEPS V 6.ADJOURNMENT V Meeting Protocol -Please note that following the presentation in Item 4,trustees' questions of clarification will be invited and are to be directed only to the ON Watson consultant and not to memberis of the Senior Administration. Chair Hart THAMES VALLEY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD SPECIAL MEETING, PUBLIC SESSION 2005 MAY 31 The Board met in special session on 2005 May 31 in the Board Room atthe Education Centre,meeting in pubiic sessionat 7:05 p.m.The foliowing were in attendance: TRUSTEES D.Anstead J.Bennett A.Cartier 8.Doxtator G.iHart,Chair ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS B.Bryce B.Greene P.Gryseeis C.IVIurphy D.Biair K.Daiton Regrets:P.Sattier J.Hunter P.Jaffe D.Mugford 3.Peters K.Preston J.Empringham K.Haveika 8.iHughes M.Sereda B.Tuci^er T.Roberts S.Ross J.Stewart L.Stevenson K.Busheil S.Christie C.Dennett G.Owens J.Roth W.Scott 1.CALL TO ORDER -Chair G. Hart caiied the meeting to order. 2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approvedon motion ofJ. Stewartand D.Anstead. 3.CONFLICTS OF INTEREST - No conflicts of interest were declared. 4.C.N.WATSON REPORT PUBLIC PRESENTATION Chairperson Hart provided opening remarks regarding the C.N.Watson presentation."The report entitled "Focus on Excellence" was prepared In response to the Board's motion to hire the professional services of C.N.Watson and Associates Ltd.to conduct a long-term,accommodation studyofthe Thames Valley District School Board. Chair Hart advised that following the presentation,the Chairs' Committee has prepared a motion outlining thenextsteps in the accommodation planning process.Apress conference was scheduled inthe Atrium following theSpecial Boardmeeting. Headvisedthatthe C.N.Watson presentation will be available in its entirety on the TVDSB website on Wednesday, 2005 June 01 to provide an opportunity for the community to review the report in detail.The communities will be given an opportunity to provide input and comments via the Board's website,a similar process used for budget input. B.Bryce,Director of Education,presented background information related tothe Board decision for a long-term accommodation study. The Director advised that the issue of providing the best possible progamming for students and enhancing their learning opportunities within reasonable funding limitations speaks tothe heart of public education and the reason that school boards were created.Ensuring that the best possible staff,curriculum andthe facilities are available have traditidnally been the key concernsof school boards.Sometimes the decisions surrounding these issues are relatively easy and sometimes involve very complex discussions with difficult choices.The predecessor boards faced these issues with the flexibility and pressure ofthe local mill rate. 2005 May 31 ...2 4.C.N.WATSON REPORT PUBLIC PRESENTATION -cont'd Today,school boards operate under the expectations and constraints of the student focused funding model.Predecessor boards did have to make bricks and mortar decisions -sometimes to build new schools,sometimes to close existing schools.Prior to 1998,the Elgin Board closed 7 schools, London Board 23 (some were reopened as French Immersion Schools)Middlesex 1,and Oxford 14. Thames Valley has closed 6 schools inthe past seven years.Whilethe discussions generate intense emotion,the ultimate decision rests on what is best for all of the students.Mr.Bryce noted that this sentiment was captured at the rededicatlon of Eagle Heights P.S.when a parent who had lead the fight to keep Empress P.S.open went to the Chair of the Accommodation Committee and acknowledged that the change had been for the better. BACKGROUND The Thames Valley Board has engaged In a number of area accommodation studies.At some studies the accuracy of the projected enrolment numbers for the area and the system were challenged by some members of the public. On 2004 February 24, the Board passed a Motiondirecting that a discussion paper be prepared "... on current accommodation Issues and future discussions with all stakeholders..."that would address "...the decisions and choices that the Board and Its communities will face over the next decade,as well as innovative strategies being developed in other jurisdictions." During the development process for the 2004 -2005 budget,the Board directed the administration to find a way or ways to utilize existing funds from the Supervisory Officer line of the Student Focused Funding Model to address concerns expressed about the workload of Superintendents. The Director/System Review Committee,at several meetings,considered a way in which the expectations of the 2004 February 24 Board motion and the direction provided by the Board during the 2004/05 budget development process could be simultaneously addressed.On 2004 September 21,the Director/System Review Committee recommended to the Board,and on 2004 September 25 the Board approved that Administration negotiate a contract with C.N.Watson and Associates Limited In accordance with the following five parameters. a.Assess the impact that demographic trends will have on future accommodation needs; b.Recommend program and facility structures that would enhance the educational and economic strengths of the local communities; c.Demonstrate,under the Ministry's Accountability Framework "efficient and effective"use of the Board's capital resources; d.Include in any cost analysis the impact on total Board costs/savings of all factors such as,but not limitedto,transportation,facility maintenance,facility operations (heat and utilities)and staffing; and e.That the production of any report or recommendation be delayed until such time as the Minister of Education provides the promised guidelines on school closures (school facilities review). On 2004 November 23,the Board approved entering into a contract with C.N.Watson and Associates to provide a LongTerm Accommodation Plan to the Board. It was anticipated that this Report would come to the Board by the end of 2005 May. C.N.Watson was selected because Itis the recognized leader Inthis field having already done studies for 32 of 72 boards inthe province as well as a large number of municipalities. 2Q05 May 31-3 4. C.N. WATSON REPORT PUBLIC PRESENTATION -cont'd The Director advised that the Interim Report to be presented by Cynthia Clarke,Associate Director ofC.N.Watson Ltd.,is based on their studies and are of necessity "interim"because parameter five, of the five established by the Board,has yet to occur. On2005February19,the Premierof Ontario andthe Minister of Education made a significant policy statement entitled"Good Schools Open"but as yetno definitive legislative,regulation,policy/program memoranda or technicalpapers have been issued bythe IVlinlstry.Itis understood thatthe Ministry is w/orking verydiligently on producing thenecessary documentsbuttheyhavenotyetbeen released. On 2005 May30, the Minister indicated that additional information would be available on Good Schools Open bythe end of2005 June and that they expect to have a distinctruralschool funding formulaentitledRuralSchool Vltalltyby2005 October.Therefore,the C.N.Watson interimreport will only be able to clearly address the first two parameters established by the Board:demographic trends, and program and facility structures to be considered. It will touch on the "efficient and effective"use ofthe Board's capital resources but definitive costing cannot be provided until boards are advised of revised financial regulations. DirectorBryceadvised that despite the fact that there has been much speculation inthe media about the number of schools and even specific schools that would be recommended for closure,no reference would be made regarding numbers or names as one ofthe key parameters established by the Board has not been met and is beyond the Board's control.Therefore,Itwould be premature to produce any numbers or any names.It was noted that this may prove to be frustrating to those communities whose accommodation studies have been put on hold but all boards In the province have been asked bythe Ministerof Educationto voluntarily puta moratoriumonschool closures until new school closure parameters are released and Thames Valley has respected and honoured that request. The issues confronting the Thames ValleyBoard are serious.The Board is required to produce a five-year Capital Plan by 2005 October 31 and the information received from C.N. Watson is an essential Ingredient of that plan. Even more important are the questions that will be raised about school organization models,enhanced secondary learning centres,the equitable deliveryof programs to all students as well as fiscal responsibility to all Thames Valley stakeholders.These are critical questions that continue to focus on excellence for all of our students in all of our schools across Thames Valley. Mr.Bryce emphasized that the.discussions generated fromthe presentation are unavoidable and one that involveeveryone including the Ministry of Education,the communities being served and each of the 184 secondary and elementary schools.Thames Valley has an obligation and a serious responsibility to worktogether inthe comingmonths to examine allofthe options availableand to marrythose options with Ministry direction so thata decisioncan be reached onthe pathorpathsthat best meet the needs of Thames Valley students today as well as those who will enter the system in thenext 10 to 15 years. The importantdecisionsmade today will helptoprepare students for careers that will take them to the midpoint of the twenty first century and beyond. C.N.WATSON REPORT -FOCUS ON EXCELLENCE Cynthia Clarke,Associate Director of C.N.Watson and Associates Ltd.,presented the Interim,long- term accommodation report entitled, "The Thames Valley District School Board Focus on Excellence". GOOD PLACES TO LEARN -2005 FEBRUARY Ms.Clarke reviewed the Ministry of Education's Good Places to Learn initiative announced in2005 February.The key findings indicated that Capital costandneedsare driving program decisions and that Ontario has an opportunity to improve educationprogramsat relatively little cost owing tothe availability ofa significant amount of space. 2005 May 31 ...4 4.C.N.WATSON REPORT -cont'd GOOD PLACES TO LEARN -2005 FEBRUARY -cont'd Itis apparent that many schools inOntario are inpoor repair and cannot be fixed under the current funding formula and most capital dollars in Ontario are presently being spent on serving the needs of a small number of students while others remain in portable classrooms.The current funding formula (Student Focus Model)has significant inefficiencies that include paying for space that is not yet built.Itwas noted that there have been a record number of closures over the past several years One ofthe key components of the proposed capital funding process is that "student program needs to drive facilities planning." Ontario school boards will be asked to revise their building,expansion, repair and replacement plans to Incorporatetheir own program requirements,as well as implement several new provincial program Improvements.Boards will be required to file comprehensive capital plans to support program objectives by2005 October that includethe following components: Best Start plan; Primary Classroom Reduction (PCR); - New programs for 16 and 17 year olds (whoare no longer dropping out); Expansion of education-related not-for-profit prograhis; Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act plans; School safety audit Implications; The abilityof schools to meet physical education,arts and technology program objectives; Supplement measures for declining enrolment; Other program/funding Initiatives announced by the government prior to Fall 2005. LONG TERM CAPITAL PLANS UNDER STUDENT FOCUS FUNDING MODEL (SFFM) The key components of the long term capital plan under the Student Focus Funding Model is to include the projected enrolment for the next 15 to 20 years.Boards were asked to identify accommodation strategies related tonew construction (e.g., new schools,additions,etc.)whilegiving consideration to the Pupil Teacher Ratio (PTR) of 20 to 1 Primary Class Size Reduction (PCR). Facility renewal and repair,program enhancements as well as the rationalization of space and attendance boundary adjustments must be Identified. The coterminous capital planning process identifies partnerships,transfer of surplus properties,etc.Boards are required to submit a longterm financing strategy. LONG TERM CAPITAL PLANS UNDER GOOD PLACES TO LEARN The same key components as under the Student Focus Funding Modelapply withthe exception that more emphasis Is placed on accommodation strategy in the context of program needs (additional programs re Best Start,secondary retention programs, etc.).It was noted that Capital financing scheme and funding sources for new construction due to new development are unclear at the moment.There is to be more emphasis on education and economic case to funding (e.g., old CEF process)with Ministry review/approval of capital plans.The school closure process will have guidelines and be more scripted and may result Inthe appointment of an Independent facilitator by the Province.There will be more emphasis placed on boundary changes and alternative program scheduling as an accommodation solution,as well as community use of schools,partnerships and property exchanges.The Good Places to Leam Initiative appears to be moving toward a 'one stop shopping'model (daycare,early learning, etc. all in one location). STUDY STATUS:A PROGRESS REPORT Ms. Clarke reported that during the study discussions were held with area municipal planners regarding the 15-year growth potential. Elementary and secondary enrolment projections were finalized.The Primary Class Size Reduction(PCR)(based on hard cap 20 to 1)was assessed.The program upgrade requirements and facility renewal refinements as well as construction costs were identified in consultation with the Facility Services staff.Research Input on Emerging Employment Markets was provided to assist ininternal discussions on program enhancements.Itwas not possible to incorporate Good Places to Learn program initiatives or potential revenue sources until further- details are released by the Ministry. r ^ 2005 May 31-5 4.C.N.WATSON REPORT -cont'd STUDY STATUS:A PROGRESS REPORT -cont'd An assessment of the Impact of program and funding announcements will need to occur as Ministry details are released. SENIOR ELEMENTARY/SECONDARY SPECIALTY PROGRAMS Ms. Clarke explained that the following five groups identified in the study support the concept of Enhanced Learning Centres as well as the three Pathways to Success initiativeswithinthe context of Grade 7-12 program opportunities: First group:Computers,Health Sciences,Biotechnology,Business and Design Technology - Science Technology &International Baccalaureate (London&St.Thomas areas); Second group:Business,Entrepreneurship, GlobalStudies,Languages,Public Policy,Marketing and Media, Law,etc.&International Baccalaureate (London and St.Thomas areas); - Third group:Computers,Design Technology -Science Technology,Environmental Studies, Advanced Manufacturing Technology and Business (Strathroy,Ingersoll/Woodstock areas); Fourth group: Arts,Computers - Media Design, Information and Communication Science, Performing and Visual Arts (London); Fifthgroup:Business,Technology and Agriculture (Strathroy,IngersollAWoodstock,St.Thomas areas). ENROLMENT PROJECTIONS AND MIGRATION ASSUMPTIONS The dwelling unit forecasts used for enrolment projections are based on the most recent Municipal/County approved forecasts. Contact with Municipalities/Counties was made throughthe planning departments ortheir respective planningadvisors whohave the responsibilityfor preparing longterm populationand household projections. Atotalof50,941 dwelling units are projected to be builtwithin the Thames Valley Board's jurisdiction over the next 15 years,an average of about 3,400 units per year.These forecasts assume fairly high levels of migration based on the recent historical trends up to 2001. DWELLING UNIT FORECAST SOURCES Citv of London The unit forecast is based on'the City'of London's 2004 Municipal Development Charge Forecast prepared by Clayton Research.The forecast was allocated into 12 elementary review areas with assistance provided bythe Cityof London Planning Department.Further information with respect to types and densities ofunitswas also providedbythe LondonPlanning Department as wellas utilizing City of London neighborhood planning demographics and profiles. Countv of Middlesex The unit forecast projection for Middlesex County is based on the County's 2003 Population and Household projections prepared forthe County's Official Plan.Further information with respect tothe dwelling unitprojections for Municipalities within the Countywas based on Middlesex Centre's and Thames Centre's Development Charge Studies prepared by C.N Watson and Associates Ltd. (CNWA).Allocation ofunitswithin Middlesex County was based on available Municipal forecasts(as stated above) or historical building permit issuance.Conversations were held with planning department staffto ensure allocation and forecasts of units were inline with what planners were expecting and were reasonable with respect to known servicing capacities. 2005 May 31 ...6 4.C.N.WATSON REPORT -cont'd DWELLING UNIT FORECAST SOURCES -cont'd County of Elgin The dwelling unit projections for Elgin County were based on various Municipal forecasts.St. Thomas was based on the 2004 Development Charge forecast prepared by CNWA.The Dutton/Dunwich forecast was based on 2001 Official Plan projections,Bayham on the 2001 Official Plan projections and West Elgin on the 2003 study of populationand households for Official Plan. Information for Municipalities without current forecasts was based on historical building permit issuance and Statistics Canada dwelling data.All municipalities in Elgin were contacted for forecast, future development and servicing information. Countv of Oxford The dwelling unit forecast was based on the County of Oxford's 2004 Development Charge Study prepared by Hemson Consulting. Allocation of growth was based on various Municipal studies, conversations with planning departments and historical buildingpermit issuance. ENROLMENT PROJECTIONS AND MIGRATION ASSUMPTIONS The recent migration data posted in2001 indicated that levels ofmigration into Ontario a's well as th6 TVDSB jurisdiction are decreasing.Since 2001 the net International Migration into Ontario has decreased by over 5% and over that same time period net inter-provincial Migration has decreased from a +7,266 into the province in 2001 to a negative migration of -8,793 in 2003.The Board's consultant-prepared enrolment projections reflect more recent migration trends.Overall migration expectations were downgraded.Changes were made to migration age distributiontoreflectthe aging population. Household occupancy rates were decreased to reflect trends toward smaller average household sizes (adult lifestyle/retirement residences,smaller families etc.). DEMOGRAPHIC/ENROLMENT OVERVIEW Ms.Clarke reviewed tables of demographic trends that included the total elementary and secondary enrolment for the entire jurisdiction as well as a comparison of the elementary and secondary apportionment forthe Thames Valley District School Board and the London DistrictCatholicSchool Board. The Grade Structure Ratio (Junior Kindergarten to Grade 1 versus Grade 6 to 8)has increased from 1.54 in 1998/99 to 1.88 in 2004/05 which indicates that there are fewer pupils entering than leaving the elementary system and that this gap isgrowing.Secondary retention from Grade 8 to 9 has been decreasing over the last five years (1.05 in 1999/2000 to .95 in 2004/05).Several graphs/charts were provided showingthe historical and projectedelementaryand secondary enrolment and the existing On-The-Ground (OTG)capacity for the years 1999 to 2016.Elementary and Secondary enrolment figures for Private Schools withinthe TVDSBjurisdiction were also provided. SURPLUS CLASSROOM SPACE IN ONTARIO The following chart that determines the surplus classroom spaces in Ontario by board and by panel was presented: Board Name Elementary Panel %Secondary Panel %Total Both Panels % 1 Toronto DSB 45,715.26 18.22%23,289.80 17.96%69,005.06 18.13% 2 Thames Valley DSB 7,124.30 2.84%8,407.14 6.48%15,531.44 4.08% 2005 May 31 ...7 4. C.N.WATSON REPORT -cont'd DWELLING UNIT FORECAST SOURCES -cont'd Board Name Elementary Panel %Secondary Panel %Total Both Panels % 3 Toronto CDSB 11,938.75 4.76%3,051.85 2.35%14,990.60 3.94% 4 York DSB 11,131.07 4.44%2 234.48 1.72%13,365.55 3.51% 5 Ottawa-Carleton DSB 7,719.00 3.08%5,572.68 4.30%13,291.68 3.49% Number of Surpius Classroom Spaces 2003/04 250.847.19 100.00%129,704.43 100.00%380,551.62 100.00% Total Inventory of Classroom Spaces 2003/04 1,429,331.00 712,927.50 2,142,258.50 Percentage of Total Surplus to Existing Needs 17.5%18.2%17.8% On a school by school basis in 2003/04 therewere more than 380,000 surpius classroom spaces in the Province of Ontario. As shown in the above chart the Thames Vaiiey DSB ranl^ed as #2 In Ontario,behind the Toronto DSB,with more than 15,500 surplus spaces. The surplus is primarily due to two factors: 64% of the Board's schools constructed (1950 - 1969) to serve the 'Baby boom' population that has long since passed through the system and the decline of the school age population.There isan opportunity to significantly improve programs and facility environments for the Board's student population,through rationalization of this surplus space and redirecting cost savings tothese program/facility improvements.Ms.Clarke emphasized that It isthe Firms opinion thatthe Board primary assets arethe land and facilities that cover anareaof25to30 hectares.The challenge remains as how to articulate range of programs and variables of programs utilizing these assets. PROGRAM STRUCTURE The following three ProgramStructure options were presented: -Junior Kindergarten toGrade 8;Grades9 to12 (traditional TVDSB model) Junior Kindergarten to Grade 6,Grades 7 to 12 Junior Kindergarten to Grade 6, Grades 7/8,Grades 9 to 12. PROGRAM STRUCTURE/SCHOOL ORGANIZATION MODELS The Consultant's report proposed the Junior Kindergarten to Grade 6 and Grade 7to12 "Campus" program structures.This model would create a Grade 7/8 facility in close proximity to secondary facilities and therefore would provide the flexibility to address program initiatives and broaden opportunities forstudents as follows: -Centres of Excellence focussed on Pathways to Success; -Program opportunities in conjunction with employers,skilled trades training providers,community colleges,universities, etc.; 2005 May 31 ...8 ' 4.C.N.WATSON REPORT -cont'd PROGRAM STRUCTURE/SCHOOL ORGANIZATION MODELS -cont'd PROGRAM STRUCTURE/SCHOOL ORGANIZATION MODELS -cont'd Bridging to mainstream and specialty secondary programs; -Sufficient numbers of pupils for single gender subject areas; Access to secondary labs,technology centers,gyms,sports fields,etc. An Introduction to the high school environment; More opportunities for intemships; Enhanced opportunities for service to the school,service to the community,mentorships,etc. OPTIMUM SCHOOL SIZE While the existing funding model sets benchmarl<s to fund administrative resources,academic opinion variesonthe optimum sizefor Elementary/Secondary schoolsto deliver best programs.Ms. Clarke emphasized that one size does not fit all and that other factors such as school program initiatives,teaching and leadership abilitiescome Into play. However,most boards Indicate that a 400+pupil places for elementary anda 1,000+pupils places for secondary facilities provide optimum opportunities for breadth of program,"single genderclasses,specialty programs (e.g..Centresof Excellence). POTENTIAL ACCOMMODATION STRATEGIES FOR THE LONG TERM Thestudyconcludedthatprogramand building flexibility Isthe keywhenconsideringaccommodation strategies forthe longterm. The following potential strategies were suggested forconsideration: Enhancing Senior Elementary/Secondary programs through liaisons with employers,post secondary institutions, skilled trades providers, etc.; - The retention of secondary properties over elementary in order to provide flexibility and address programs and changing populations over time; -The creation of Grade 7 and 8 facilities adjacent or in close proximity to secondary facilities; - Creating JK-6 facilities,rather than JK-8 facilities will reduce the number ofsplit grades resulting from the introduction of PCR; In London,the creation offour French Immersion JK-6 Centres and one French Immersion 7-12 program centre; - Opportunities to partner with post-secondary Institutions re Primary Classroom Teaching certificate; Enhancement offacilities (gyms,resource centres,labs, etc.). FRENCH IMMERSION The study identified the following French Immersion programs forthe City of London and Counties of Middlesex,Elgin and Oxford: French Immersion in Citv of London Four JK-6 single track French Immersion centres;one for each quadrant A 7-12 French immersion centre in London French Immersion in Middlesex Centennial Public (Arva)- dual track Colbome St. (Strathroy) - dual track French Immersion in Elgin Homedale (St.Thomas)- dual track Wellington (SL Thomas)- single track French Immersion in Oxford Tollgate (Woodstock) - dual track i; 2005 May 31...9 ^/4.C.N.WATSON REPORT -cont'd NEXT STEPS A tong term capital plan under Good Places to Learn cannot be finalized until more information becomes availableregardingCapitalfunding sources and financing strategies, the scope ofthe2005 October capital plan and Ministry program initiatives.It was noted that boards are holdingback finalizing capital plans until the Fall 2005 Priorto release ofa long temi capital plan, the Board needs to ensure that the following steps are in place; - A public consultation strategy and timeline; - Additional research in support of program initiatives; -A capital funding structure in place; A school closure policythat is consistent withnew school closure guidelines,when available; - Anapproved school valuation process (requires a publiccommittee) and the appointment ofa school closure task force;. Discussion with local municipalities re community use of schools and the Ministry's program initiatives. Chairperson Hart extended congratulations to Ms.Clarke and the C.N.Watson Ltd.staff for a comprehensive report. Ms. Clarke responded to questions for clarification posed by Trustees. 5,C.N.WATSON REPORT -NEXT STEPS. The following motion from the Chairs' Committee was moved by J. Hunter and seconded by T. Roberts: Whereas the C.N.Watson Reporthas raiseda numberof issues pertainingtotheThames Valley District School Board's desire to "Focus on Excellence"for Its students;and, Whereas the Board and its students will benefit greatly from informed public input on the issues raised in the C.N.Watson Report, BE ITRESOLVED that an ad hoc committee of the Board be struck to develop a plan that will solicit public input on the following issues arising from the report,"Focus on Excellence" presented by C. N.Watson and Associates to the Thames Valley District School Board on 2005 May 31,with an Initial interim report to be presented to the Board by 2005 June 14. 1.The preferred school organization model -K-8 and 9-12,or an alternative; 2. The optimum pupil numbers for both an elementary and a secondary school being mindful of the value of a school to a single-school community; 3.The merits of implementing speciality programs in the form of Enhanced Leaming centres in specific high schools to address the provincial government's expectations regarding the creation of Pathway for Success for all students; 4. How to balance the desire for local community schools while simultaneously equitably meeting the program and learning needsofthe 21^century for ail students;and, 5. How to balance the Board's requirement to be fiscally responsible and accountable to all of . its ratepayers while at the same time delivering programs focussed on excellence for all of its students. The final report to be presented to the Board by the end of 2005 November. 2005 May 31 ...10 5.C.N.WATSON REPORT -NEXT STEPS.-cont'd Afriendly amendment to add to item #1 the words "Kindergarten to Grade-6,Grade 7 to 8,9 to 12, or Grades 7 -12 or an alternative,"was supported. The motion-was approved as-amended: Whereas the C.N.Watson Report has raised a number of issues pertaining to the Thames Valley Distnct School Board's desire to "Focus on Excellence"for Its students;and, Whereas the Board and Its students will benefit greatly from Informed public input on the issues raised In the C.N.Watson Report, BE IT RESOLVED that an ad hoc committee of the Board be struck to develop a plan that will solicit public Input on the following issues arising from the report,"Focus on Excellence" presented by C.N.Watson and Associates to the Thames Valley District School Board on 2005 May 31,with an initialInterim report to be presented to the Board by 2005 June 14. 1.The preferred school organization model -Kindergarten to Grade-6,Grade 7 to 8/9 to 12, Grades 7 -12,or an alternative; 2.The optimum pupil numbers for both an elementary and a secondary school being mindful of the value of a school to a single-school community; 3j The merits of Implementing speciality programs in the form of Enhanced Learning centres in specific high schools to address the provincial government's expectations regarding the creation of Pathway for Success for all students; 4. How to balance the desire for local community schools while simultaneously equitably meeting the program and learning needs of the 21 century for all students;and, 5. How to balance the Board's requirement to be fiscally responsible and accountable to all of Its ratepayers while at the same time delivering programs focussed on excellence for all of its students. The final report to be presented to the Board by the end of 2005 November. The following motion was moved by P.Jaffe and L.Stevenson and carried: That Trustees J.Hunter,T.Roberts,J.Bennett,D.Anstead,S.Peters,L.Stevenson and a Student Trustee be appointed to the Focus on Excellence Plan Ad Hoc Committee. 6.ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.on motion of J.Stewart and S.Peters. CONFIRMED: Chairperson I ; r I 2005 May 31...11 ELECTRONIC VOTE OF MAY 31.2005 Motion:That Trustees Anstead and Hart be appointed the trustees to serve on the upcoming Supervisory Officer interview Committee. Carried SUMMARY OF APPROVED RECOMMENDATIONS OF 2005 MAY 31 Whereas the C.N.Watson Report has raised a number of issues pertaining to the Thames Vaiiey District Schooi Board's desire to "Focus on Exceiience"for its students,and, Whereas the Board and its students wiil benefit greatly from informed pubiic input on the issues raised in the C.N.Watson Report, BE ITRESOLVED that an ad hoc committee of the Board be strucl^to develop a plan that wiil solicit publicinputon the following issues arising from the report, "Focus on Excellence"presented byC. N.Watson and Associates to the Thames Valley District School Board on 2005 May 31,with an initial interim report to be presented to the Board by 2005 June 14. 1. The preferred school organization model of Kindergarten to Grade-6,Grade 7 to 8/9 to 12, Grades 7 -12,or an alternative; 2.The optimum pupil numbers forboth an elementary and a secondary school being mindfulofthe value of a school to a single-school community; 3.The merits of implementing speciality programs In the form of Enhanced Learning centres in specific high schools to address the provincial government's expectations regarding the creation of Pathway for Success for all students; 4. How to balance the desire for local community schools while simultaneously equitably meeting the program and learning needs ofthe 21^'centuryforallstudents; and 5. How to balance the Board's requirement to be fiscally responsible and accountable to all of its ratepayers while at the same time delivering programs focussed on excellence for all of its students. The final report to be presented to the Board by the end of 2005 November. That Trustees J.Hunter,T.Roberts,J.Bennett,D.Anstead,S.Peters,L.Stevenson and a Student Trustee be appointed to the Focus on Excellence Plan Ad Hoc Committee.