| Author | Message | ||
     strength Member Username: strength Post Number: 78 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 69.156.2.152 |
To follow-up on the issue of third-party / outside evaluation of private schools: I heard back from Jim Christopher who is the Director of the Canadian Association of Independent Schools (CAIS). The tone of his letter was very kind and concerned. He expressed his hope that the investigation of events at GCC would bring closure for all. As to the issue of evaluation / assessment of CAIS member schools, he states; "in actual fact, the Canadian Association of Independent Schools moved on this very issue over a year ago. We now require all members to be independently inspected and accredited by an outside third party. In the case of most of our schools, this work is done by the Canadian Educational Standards Institute (www.cesi.edu). Almost all of our Ontario member schools are currently accredited in this fashion. Unfortunately, Grenville Christian College was one of the few that had not been accredited. Those schools were given until November 2010 to complete the process or lose their memberships in our association." Anderson also stated that CAIS had not received any complaints (and no concerns were raised) about GCC, which became a member school in 2003. | ||
| strength Member Username: strength Post Number: 79 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 69.156.2.152 |
The Canadian Educational Standards Institute (CESI) is the organization that does the outside monitoring of most member schools of the Canadian Association of Independent Schools. Here is the Value Statement of the CESI and the "indicators of effective practice (as stated on the CESI website: "The school helps students recognize and act upon their academic, emotional, physical and social potentials, within an ethical community." Indicators of Effective Practice 2.1 The school operates in a way that promotes student freedom of inquiry, diversity of viewpoints, and independent critical thinking. 2.2 The school promotes understanding and respect for the differences and diversities of others. 2.3 The school demonstrates its commitment to service to the broader local, national and international communities. 2.4 The school advocates and demonstrates positive practices with respect to environmental issues. 2.5 The school fosters cultural development through musical, dramatic and artistic expression, appreciation, and study. 2.6 The school fosters fitness through opportunities to participate in sports and physical activities. 2.7 The school encourages the involvement of every student in its program of extra-curricular activities. 2.8 The school maintains a positive, safe and secure learning environment for all students. 2.9 The school includes in its reports to parents, information on the student's emotional, social and physical development. | ||
| strength Member Username: strength Post Number: 81 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 69.156.2.152 |
The CESI has also just revised its accreditation standards, including information on "The Visiting Committee", (the group of evaluators who would travel to each school). Here's the document: http://www.cesi.edu/uploads/147/Accreditation_Guidelines_DRAFT_8.pdf | ||
| poormanspudding New member Username: poormanspudding Post Number: 25 Registered: 9-2007 Posted From: 64.40.180.98 |
I am not sure how inspections would have uncovered the alleged wrong doing of the nature that was happening at GCC. The school was adept at putting on a good show. Ministry of Education inspectors were always impressed with the education standards. The fact that the school was able to attract people of the caliber of Trevor Eyton, Lincoln Alexander, Pauline McGibbon, the Jackmans, and Jean Cassleman Wadds attests to the administration's ability to show the best face possible and hide the behind the scenes operations. If an inspector from the CAIS was around, I can't imagine that FF would allow them to sit in on a light session or shadow someone on disapline. Perhaps CAS would have some ideas on how to do an inspection that would uncover these sorts of things. | ||
| poormanspudding Junior Member Username: poormanspudding Post Number: 26 Registered: 9-2007 Posted From: 64.40.180.98 |
If you remember, when people of importance were visiting the school, students were hand-picked to spend time with the visitor and almost always under the supervision of a teacher or administrator. Never would a "troubled" or "in trouble" student have any contact with these visitors. | ||
| gcc_1981_grad Member Username: gcc_1981_grad Post Number: 68 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 70.51.137.96 |
I was an "in trouble" student who did have contact with a visitor from CAS. There should be a record of that incident somewhere. Fall 1979 | ||
| strength Member Username: strength Post Number: 82 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 69.156.2.152 |
poormanspudding, you are exactly right. Unfortunately, the CAS has much less authority to monitor private schools that does the CESI. After reading your post, and combing through those accreditation guidelines, there are some areas of concern for me. Firstly it seems that the Guidelines require the CESI Visiting Committee to meet with various school representatives (i.e. staff, faculty, Board and "student leaders"). The question is whether those representatives are going to be able to freely communicate concerns in a group environment. The second concern is that there may need to be avenues for individual students to confidentially and anonymously share concerns. Admittedly, it would not be possible to interview a large number of students on an individual basis. But perhaps there are ways in which the evaluators could contact a sub-group or selection of individual students. For example, it would be possible to communicate with a certain percentage of students who have been disciplined. | ||
| strength Member Username: strength Post Number: 83 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 69.156.2.152 |
Here are the Accreditation Guidelines covering areas such as discipline, sexuality, etc.: Effective Practice 2.9 The school has policies, procedures and a plan of implementation to maintain a positive, safe and secure learning environment. 2.9a Does the school have a written policy regarding an ethical code and is the policy aligned with the school’s mission? 2.9b Does the policy clearly set out school expectations for student behaviour and conduct, including, but not restricted to, harassment, respect for property, prohibitions on use, possession, and distribution of alcohol and drugs, academic honesty, attendance. 2.9c Does the policy clearly set out the consequences? Are procedures clear and fair? 2.9d How, and how well, are the school's expectations of conduct communicated to faculty, parents, and students? 2.9e How does the school promote an ethical community? 2.9f How is the ethical code policy communicated and lived? Where is it part of the curriculum? 2.9g Describe the school's approach to conduct and discipline. 2.9h How does the policy provide for reasonable care and protection of the student’s wellbeing during all steps in the investigation and adjudication of alleged infractions? 2.9i Does the policy provide for and does the school adhere to protocols for maintaining written records of the investigation and decision and for maintaining appropriate communication, correspondence, and decisions in the student file? 2.9j How many students were expelled, suspended, or required/strongly encouraged to withdraw in each of the last three years? Provide analysis for this data. What other indicators do you use to measure your discipline policies and procedures? 2.9k Do school governance policies define and restrict the Boards’ responsibility with respect to discipline policies? 2.9l How does the school foster and promote the principles of academic integrity for all students? 2.9m Are there policies and practices in place to deal with issues of isolation and bulllying? 2.9n How have teachers developed safe, functioning and inviting classroom environments? Effective Practice 2.10 The school has appropriate and effective procedures for adult supervision and counselling of students in its program. 2.10a Describe the goals and staff organization of each advising and counseling program. 2.10b Describe how your school provides for students’ psycho-social needs. 2.10c Describe your arrangements for adult supervision and for counseling. 2.10d What programs and strategies are in place to reduce personal stress and help students cope with academic stress in a highly competitive environment? 2.10e To what extent are faculty and staff aware of the research on single-gender/coeducation, and how does it impact supervision and counseling in the school? 2.10f Describe the working relationship of each advisory and counseling program with the faculty of the school. 2.10g How does the school support students as they address issues of personal development? Of sexuality? Of substance abuse? | ||
| strength Member Username: strength Post Number: 85 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 69.156.2.152 |
Copy of letter sent to (execdir@cesi.edu) Anne-Marie Kee, the Executive Director of the Canadian Educational Standards Institute, (the professional body that sends in evaluators to many of the schools belonging to the Canadian Association of Independent Schools) Dear Ms. Kee; I am an alumnus of Grenville Christian College, which as you may know, has been the subject of much scrutiny over abuse allegations. It has been a very difficult time for all those connected with the school. I can't speak for others, but it seems to me that many Alumni are grappling with the question of how the pain that everyone is experiencing might have been prevented in some way. I wrote a letter to Dr. James R. Christopher, the Executive Director of the Canadian Association of Independent Schools, recommending that required monitoring and abuse prevention strategies be put in place at Ontario private schools. Mr. Christopher wrote me back saying that CESI is providing this type of monitoring for the majority of CAIS member schools. I then looked on your website and reviewed the revisions for the accreditation guidelines. I am now writing to you to ask whether there is any thought given to soliciting feedback, in a truly confidential and anonymous manner, from individual students. In my personal experience, I seem to recall times when visitors or authority figures would come to Grenville Christian College, but I also recall being on good behavior so that the best face could be put forward on behalf of the school. In that situation, I wouldn't have dreamed of stepping forward to say anything that was bothering me. I was far away from home, and often quite frightened by the power structure of the school. Notably, your Visiting Committees hold such events as lunches with student leaders. This seems very useful to gain an overall perspective of group dynamics. On the other hand, I was very much a student leader (a prefect) at GCC, but I often felt that the peer pressure veered in the direction of protecting the school. The question is whether earlier and more transparent intervention could have prevented harm to students and to the school itself. As a science professor, I have gained a modicum of learning and perspective as to how student experiences can be uncovered by professional evaluators. It also may be possible to consider further feedback and insights from other GCC alumni. Would you be interested in discussing this issue? Thank-you so much for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, |
