Is Best Start the right answer for our schools?

Recently I attended an educational meeting held in the Rainy High School where representatives of the Ontario government were unveiling their new concept of learning. I left the meeting with a fear that I hadn’t felt since I spent a work week in Quetico Center with the author of the “Living and Learning” open concept, which changed the system in the 1970’s.
That concept heralded such “radical” ideas as; no walls because they confine learning, let students progress in learning at their own pace, no classes as such so that children would not be labeled, no competition because slower students would be shamed, and discipline should be unnecessary.
The author of this plan had his few cheer-leaders, but in general we spent the best part of five days shooting holes in the whole mess. Just before he left, the author said to us that the government had asked for a good system of education. He said that if there was a perfect environment, a perfect teacher and perfect students, this plan would be ideal. He went on to say that at no time did he ever say or write that he thought that the system would work. Anyway, the government bought the plan and we landed up with the present system. Westfort High School was built with the open concept of huge areas where different classes could be taught simultaneously. Almost the first thing that teachers and students wanted were walls erected to stop interference and interruptions from other classes. Many children, when allowed to progress at their own pace, didn’t set much of a goal for themselves. Since numerical grades were abolished, students could not compare themselves with others and as a result on graduation day a hard-working student and a slackard would stand side by side to receive identical diplomas.
The interpretation of the students record was left to other institutes and employers. Most employers naturally did not follow educational trends and could not interpret the vague records. The lack of respect for teachers diminished as discipline was discouraged, and in many classes chaos reigned. This system favoured the lazy and unmotivated because failure was almost impossible. Many brighter students learned not because of the atmosphere but in spite of it.
The government’s new baby as presented last month in the school was labeled “Best Start Plan”. The concept, as I see it, is based on the idea that the school should be in the “hub” of the community where children can learn and be molded from birth until school leaving time. (Yes, I said birth). Newborn and infant services as well as all child-related services could be held in the school if their was room. Child-related services could be held in the school if there was room. Child-care (baby-sitting?), public health and parenting programs could be available. The community could, if it wished, also move in other government subsidized services such as libraries or health care.
The kicker on this, as presented at the meeting was that this program would be fully funded by the provincial government, not like the 80-20 percent split as is now the case with the local area. It was quietly mentioned that the child-care services may be available on a scale matching the parents’ income. It occurred to me that this might be accepted by the community with the notions (1) it’s free and (2) if we don’t take it, some place else will.
At the risk of sounding too negative to this new idea, should we not stop and consider a few things?
Such as:
(1) Since when did you ever get anything “Free” from the government? You paid for everything they give with taxes. All the government does is re-distribute wealth in a socialistic “Robin Hood” manner of taking from the rich (?) and giving to the poor. Does this system really help all, or does it only give the government another complete control of a way of life?
(2) Do you really want children to be under the control of the government from the time they are born? Do we really need parenting classes, and who will take them? As most people know, having children is easy, raising them is hard. If parents do not want to raise children, why have them in the first place? One of the nicer things about parents raising their own children is that each is different from others....not just a cookie-cutter kid educated by civil servants.
(3) Is it feasible to have newborns, infants, children, adolescents, teenagers and young adults in the same environment, let alone along with public health, libraries and why not the OPP?
Most of us are quite willing to help anyone who is in need, but would this system not be just feeding the growing segment of the population who contribute little to society, do not intend to work or help, and are quite content to complain and demand more and more?
These are some of my concerns...thank goodness for retirement.
–Jim Crackel
Rainy River