Feedback Request - Scenario Ideas A - C

“The Working Group decided a few weeks ago to try to first come up with a solution(s) that respects the Board's recommended grade groupings (JK - 6, JK - 8, 7 - 12, 9 - 12).”

-> Throughout this process, from the interim solution until now, we have heard that the teachers do not think 7&8 split work. The parents do not think the 7&8 split work. The kids are open to 6, 7 & 8. Why is the working group siding with the board, when everyone who is directly affected wants to look into 6, 7, & 8?

-> Putting in K-8 at Fisher Park, would only benefit a very small group of students, so all the feeder school kids outside of the new small boundary area would continue to be affected by the 7 & 8 issues at Fisher Park. So the problems would remain.

-> In no scenario of K-8 at Fisher Park has it been made a true K-8, all the feeder schools still remain, which means 2 separate schools in Fisher Park. The K- 6 kids will not benefit from getting to know the 7 & 8 teachers, since they will be isolated from that big group.

Scenario A
- Connaught 7 & 8 class would be extremely small. They would lack the specialized classrooms that the board told us about a few weeks ago. Would they have enough students to participate in team sports and extra-curriculars that the larger Fisher Park group enjoys? What do the parents and students who would be affected by this move think? I don’t think an EFI Devonshire parent can say what a Gr. 8 English student would feel if they were told they are transferring out of their school and going to a K-6 school.
- What are the boundaries? How large is the Fisher Park JK-8 group? Enough for the recommended 2 classes per grade?

Scenario A – variation #1 & #2
- This seems slightly better because the 7 & 8 English program at Connaught would be larger. But same issues as above. Can the school, which was purpose built as a JK- 6 (correct me if I’m wrong), offer the same level of 7 & 8 instruction as Fisher Park? Or are we creating 2 issues, turning a highschool (Fisher Park) into an elementary school, and now turning an elementary school into a middle school?

Scenario B
- I’ve contacted the Dalhousie Rep about this particular scenario. It is incorrect to put E5 with D1 and assume the two areas are linked in anyway. They are completely separate neighbourhoods. There is a large zone of commercial and businesses between the two. Rochester and Booth South of the 417 are car commuter streets and not safe for school children to be walking on. There are not cross-walks or lights. There are a lot of parking garages and parking pads, but no houses. D1 area makes sense, since this is a true neighbourhood with safe, walkable streets linking to Cambridge. Part of section E5 has already been put into a grey zone allowing families to choose Glebe or Devonshire, I would suggest that either all of E5 be greyed out, or continue to keep E5 with Civic Hospital (the neighbourhood streets link between the two sections).
What are the E5 English boundaries in this scenario? Currently they are Elmdale.

I agree with Meg and Jdonin over the concerns about moving 7/8 English to Connaught. Every grade 7 and 8 child (and I think grade 6ers could benefit too!) regardless of whether in EFI or English programs should have the same access to specialized rooms (music, science labs etc) and extracurricular opportunities. The larger the school population the more diverse extracurricular activities they have access to, whether that is sports teams or choirs or Star Trek club (just dated and outed myself). Under the proposed scenarios, would there even be enough 7/8 English kids at Connaught to field a soccer team? Being in grade 7 and 8 is hard enough and to some kids access to music classes or sports teams or the photo club is key to keeping them engaged. To me, this becomes an equity issue.

Further, I would like to see the statistics on how many children leave EFI in grade 7. I know quite a few who have, but I may just know outliers. Making them go to a different school from their friends to me seems like a double blow…

Further, the fiscal conservative in me just rolls her eyes at the expense that would be incurred by the OCDSB to renovate, depending on the scenario, Fisher Park to accommodate JK-6s and/or Connaught to provide the same level of specialized rooms for grade 7 and 8 students that are already in place at Fisher Park. When we are surrounded by schools that are under capacity, I would prefer to see my tax dollars money spent on improving the quality of the education and not infrastructure.

I don't quite understand how Connaught dual track is not part of these scenerios? Is it just a numbers thing and the idea of splitting off the 6s to Fisher? Because everything I've seen so far, that is option most people from Devonshire (that are commenting) seem to favour. And all the parents I meet in the park, on the street who aren't necessarily on this forum say the same thing.
I feel like we're twisting ourselves in knots trying to squeeze a square peg in a round hole with Fisher Park. Not just all the concerns over readiness in 2014 or the top heaviness of it but also it is so close to Elmdale that it messes with boundaries in a nonsensical way. So if Lil or Christopher could explain more why a dual tracked Connaught JK-5 or JK-6 option appears to be on the backburner, that would be greatly appreciated.

What happened with Elmdale keeping portables? I know that was their own proposal at one point.

To me, it appears the push for Fisher Park is because of Elmdale's strong support and not because of Devonshire's support. So Elmdale/Board once again get their preference? I hope that Devonshire's extreme leaning towards Connaught dual-track over Fisher park is being represented at the table. We need voices as strong as Elmdale's to show Devonshire family support. If you need more feedback from Devonshire, then it is crucial to get it right away and not let things sit any longer as you start making decisions.

Hi Lil,

Here are my comments on the solutions A, B and D as those are the only ones being seriously considered. (It's difficult to find the explanation for E.) My question for the group: Has the committee considered the implications of FDK and extended day?

A is short-sighted, over costly and puts Hintonburg families at a disadvantage

* Fisher Park is a former high school; it was not built for little bodies. Much expense will have to be poured into the building to make it Full-Day JK and SK-friendly AND have a fully running full day and extended day care program for grades 1 to 6.

* Fisher Park is an awesome middle school with much great playing grounds. A JK to 8 school would eat up soccer fields and softball fields and remove them from the neighbourhood.

* Fisher Park is not a walkable solution for Hintonburg families. Not only do they have to cross two busy streets, one of them is a busy highway on-ramp (the only eastound 417 on-ramp for several kilometres). This is unfair for Hintonburg (read: Devonshire) families.

* Where are all our children currently taking up four grade one classes going to go to middle school in five to six years? Fisher Park. Will there be room if there's also a JK to 8 school housed within the middle school? Not likely. This is a short-sighted solution.


Option B doesn't address the real problem and is counter-intuitive:

* Connaught is at 40 % capacity and Devonshire and Elmdale are overcapacity. Most of Devonshire's cachement comes 4 (185) and CO1 (127). D1 and E5, the areas proposed to be diverted to Cambridge, when combined number 91. This does not address the serious under-capacity of Connaught, nor the truly populous areas where children are living.
* According to the City of Ottawa, the neighbourhoods on either side of the O-Train are an integrated community and much will be invested in the next few years to bring these neighbourhoods further together as the Bayview-Carling corridor. To this end, community plans have been created. Separating these areas, some which may actually become connected in the future with pedestrian bridges, seems counter-intuitive. ( Source: ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/public-consultations/carling-bayview-light-rail-transit-corridor-community-design-plan; multiple pages)

Option D addresses the real problem:
* Connaught is the most under-used, working OCDSB property in the area. It is at 40% capacity.
* Connaught is designed for little bodies. It should not be used as a middle school.
* Connaught is a neighbourhood-friendly walkable solution for Hintonburg/Devonshire families. Now, arguably, it does put Wellington West/Elmdale families at a disadvantage. This is why diverting some of Elmdale's western cachement to Hilson would be a friendlier neighbourhood solution for those families.
* This solution (with variables to make the numbers work) is the best as it keeps families in their neighbourhoods and within age-appropriate schools and buildings.
* As for the debates over dual stream vs. single track EFI, in fact, dual track EFI schools are part of the OCDSB's vision as captured in their 2010 21st century learner report: "At the elementary level, we believe that every child should have access to the following programs within the geographic area/superintendency in which they reside:
 English
 Early French Immersion
 Middle French Immersion
At the elementary level, wherever possible these programs will be offered in dual track schools working on a balanced school day. A dual track program model ensures that our schools are community based and more inclusive of the learning needs of all of our students."
Source: www.ocdsb.ca/Background%20Data%20Docs/Background%20Data%20Home%20Docs/Schools%20for%20the%20Future%20Article%20October2010.pdf

Let's keep in mind that Ottawa is a francophone-friendly city with four times the francophone population of Toronto. EFI in Ottawa is very different from EFI in Alberta or EFI South-Western Ontario (where francophones make up 1% of the population as opposed to Ottawa's 15 to 17%). Let's compare oranges with oranges.