Could you explain what these scores are measuring – I understand averages and standard deviations but am missing what these scores are. Was that explained in a previous post?

mark – i’ve added a note above re: scores.

I just don’t see the point of this comparison. From what I can gather, individuals who advocate abolishing Seperate schools do not claim that these schools are under-performing or of inferior quality. It’s almost without exception on fairness grounds or in furtherance of seperation of church and state. The idea that it is unfair to extend public funding to only one religious denomination denominations schools isn’t exactly out of the mainstream. The UN Human Rights Committee issued its ruling in 1999 criticizing the system as an example of religious discrimination. If it weren’t written into our own Constitution it’s difficult to see how it would conform to our own Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

thanks, that makes sense now!

Hey there Greg. I’m a long time reader of your blog and your statistical analyses, having been a viewer of your site since the period of time extending back two federal elections.

I don’t particularly have a strong opinion one way or the other regarding this issue, but it seems to me that Tim is correct when he says that the criticism of the TCSB is more of an ideological issue than it is one of performance.

Also, there’s something I noticed about your analysis of this particular situation. I haven’t had the time to read your other stuff on this, so if you’ve already addressed it I apologize in advance.

In any case, I would make the argument that your analysis is a bit disingenuous because of the source it relies on. The Report Card is heavily influenced by the results of standardized testing; in particular the EQAO tests in Grade 9 Math and Grade 10 English.

As a person who graduated from high school one year after the double cohort, I was actually part of the first year where these tests were taken seriously. I have big problems with the way in which these tests are administered and in fact can point to many anecdotal cases of people that performed dismally on these tests, but were fantastic students otherwise.

Also, high schools that are not strong in math/english studies, but are in other areas (case in point Wexford CI, which did not perform well on this report card according to the information you posted), are obviously going to be penalized as being such.

Finally, another point I would like to bring up is that in no place on this report card are extra-curricular activities referred to. There are numerous papers around that discuss the positive correlation between activities such as music and academic progress; not to mention clubs like Reach for the Top that are very much related to the academics that students are taught in school.

With all of these points, I find it a bit difficult to believe that the source you use actually tells the story that you are trying to say it tells.

What the report card actually says is that “the average student at a separate school does better on standardized tests than the average student at a public school.”

While that’s certainly interesting, to then take that further and suggest that it means that separate schools a) have a higher quality of education and b) perform better than public schools is something that I think is a bit of a stretch to make.

In any case, keep up the great work Greg! I really enjoy reading your blog and following your election coverage.

Assuming the figures are reported correctly, you can see that the variation among schools is sufficiently large that there is no statistically significant difference between separate schools and public schools revealed by these data. (In every case, within the groups you’ve lumped, the averages are within less than one standard deviation of the other.)

There are problems with the data in the PDF file, itself. Firstly, the standard deviation reported is the standard deviation of the averages for individual schools and they are not weighted, as far as I can see, for school size nor for the spread within the school.

To illustrate the trouble I’m alluding to, consider two hypothetical schools in that database. School 1 has a mean score of 3.0, a (within-school) standard deviation of 2.4, and 100 students. School 2 has a mean of 3.0, a (within school) standard deviation of 1.2. and 1000 students. Now, clearly, these schools are very different even though their mean score is the same. When rolled up in the reported statistics, though, they both contribute identical information and are treated as though they were identical.

Let me be clear that I’m not saying one system does or does not have better results than the other. I’m merely saying that, if they are different, it’s not shown by any statistics reported here or in the PDF.

Greg, I should be clear that I am not (nor do I think others are either) advocating rescinding public funding for separate schools. What I am advocating is FORCED AMALGAMATION with the public boards (planned, over time), and phase out of “Religion” classes and any other differences in a Catholic school. Catholic schools are still public schools, they just operate a little differently.

Where I see the political fallout is:
1. Catholics who feel they have a constitutional right to Catholic education (and despite Canada being secular, there are a lot of nominal Catholics).

2. Teachers who don’t want to lose seniority or share funding with the public board.

Catholics who want to have private education can then setup a school if they so choose, much like Muslims or evangelical Christian groups now.

I really don’t think it would be that difficult to merge the boards. It would require planning and a political will. We would need to look at all the collective agreements and negotiate how seniority and job security translate (and perhaps wait for the agreement to expire to do this.) Again, the problem is one of power/political struggles with the most powerful unions in Canada.

At one time these statistics would have meant that the Separate Schools were accepting fewer special ed students, resulting in the lower standard deviation and the higher average scores. This made sense because the separate schools were often smaller, and had less money, so they could not provide as well for special needs students as the public boards could.

I thought this had changed. But has it?

Can someone please explain the relationship between the existence of the seperate school system and English-French relations in Canada. It seems to me that the seperate school system is a legacy of the duality that lies at the foundation of Canada, and as such should be considered as more than an issue of “church and state being mutually exclusive.” The salient arguement here may have more to do with our history than anything else.

I think you make a great point. I think we need to study “why” students score higher at separate schools, transfer that knowledge to the system in general. I don’t care what name we give the school system. I just don’t believe we need two or more systems or that they should be funded according to someones religion. That is something that has hung on now for from the days when Canada was made up of mostly French/English and Catholic/Protestants. I would have to say times have changed and we need a system that serves all Ontarioans. (sp)

First let me comment on the statement that the separate school boards must be doing something right since their achievement levels are consistently higher. Having worked in public education for thirty years, over half of them as a secondary administrator, I believe that you and many others make a great error in assuming that we are comparing apples and apples. It has been my experience that students who are not achieving, are behavioural problems, and have significant learning disabilities, are regularly directed to the “public” schools where we have no choice but to accept anyone who comes through our doors. If the separate schools felt the same obligation to accept all students and to work long and hard with those students, I would argue that their results would be on par with the true “public” schools.
Whenever you set a school apart, whether it is the catholic, protestant, or any other type of private school, schools feel they have the right to screen the students and accept only those who meet their requirements. Clearly they are not looking for those students who will negatively affect their test results and reputation. What irritates those of us working for ALL students no matter their ability level, religious or cultural background etc. is the arrogance of those who claim to be better but refuse to accept all learners and work with them to the best of their ability.
To start to divide students into various religious groupings would be to undo all that is good about the benefits of allowing diverse groups get to know one another within one roof. You would see to a much greater extent what we already see, these schools being gatekeepers, keeping out all those that don’t fit their mold. It would serve only to divide people and bring up the walls of misunderstanding and mistrust.
Ideally, we should have only one public funded education system. We are still reeling from the affects of school board amalgamations, I’m not sure that we are ready to completely dismantle the separate schools. However, if we were to move in that direction, there certainly is no reason why further religious education programs could not be incorporated into the program offerings of the high schools. Currently most high schools do have a religion course. This could be expanded.
Thanks for the opportunity to speak out!