Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Does this adopted focus of excellence as a fundamental principle mean that we

are looking at changing the focus in the communities from general education to academic education?

Thank you, Mr. Gargan. Mr. Ballantyne, would you provide clarification for Mr. Gargan?

The philosophy being expressed here, I am not sure it can be expressed in those specifics. Basically, what we are saying is that, throughout the whole education system, whether it is the bureaucrats, the teachers, the politicians, the families or the students; one, students are aware of the choices that are available to them; and, two, they are given the tools necessary to pursue those choices. If it is the case that a student knows that they have an opportunity, they would like to be a doctor, then they have to know that the school system will give them the tools so that when they get into university, they will be able to go through successfully. If they decide they want to be a carpenter, the school system will also provide them that background. Whatever the students want, they have to have the full support of the system. We are not asking for anything inferior here. If they are going to be a carpenter, they are going to be one of the best carpenters in the country. If they are going to be a lawyer, they are going to be one of the best lawyers in the country. If they decide to work in Japan, they are not blocked because of something we didn't give them.

Thank you, Mr. Ballantyne. The honourable Member for Deh Cho.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In order for us to do that, then, we have to be able to say we are going to create the best lawyers and the best educated carpenters, then we have to adopt a principle or focus of principle of excellence based on academic education as opposed to general education. In other words, Mr. Chairman, it is fine and dandy to say the things that we want to say, but when we have communities like Fort Providence implementing general education and Yellowknife having academic education, that gives the wide variety of choice and in Fort Providence it limits their choice, I don't see that as a basis for this focus. It is either academic education across the north, in order to achieve that, or none. I say right now that the focus should be that we have to change the schools. I have a son who is in general education in Fort Providence. I don't know what they call it over here. I also have students who are going to Fort Simpson and to Yellowknife for education in grade 10. But what makes them any different than my son in Fort Providence? I say that the only difference is in Fort Providence they are giving general education which really limits their options. Other students are given the opportunities. Maybe it is because he is not as bright, or maybe it is because he is the MLA's son, that he has been given no preference, but I say there is a double standard.

If we are going to change anything, we have to change it so teachers know what they are expected to achieve at the end of each school year. So they can say all of these students are advancing to the next grade level in the academic education area, not grade 10 education, or whatever it means. I really don't know what it means when you say you adopt and focus on excellence as a fundamental principle of the education system. Should we focus a lot on the gifted students to do their part and try to advance them as much as possible so they could go to Japan and the rest stay home? I don't really know what it means. I think that should be clarified.

Thank you. The honourable Member for Yellowknife North, Mr. Ballantyne.

The Member raises good points. I think it is important that out of recommendations like this, comes a full debate. The Member is totally right. The concept of excellence may differ from person to person. What the committee was saying was that no individual in the Northwest Territories should be held back because of deficiencies in the school system. If a student, anywhere, wants the opportunity for an academic education, they should have that opportunity, exactly. In all parts of the system, we don't want it any longer said that it is just enough to pass. It has to be good education and it means that each student has the potential to live up to their capabilities. The concern expressed by Mr. Gargan is sometimes that doesn't happen now because some kids are streamed in a system which dead ends them, which causes frustration.

We are saying re-evaluate the whole system to make sure that no student is left behind because of problems in the system, that everyone can achieve their potential. We are trying to educate the kids in the Northwest Territories to an equal level to anywhere else in the world. We can ask nothing less than that. If you don't shoot for that, we will end up with a workforce which won't be able to compete with the rest of the world and that is going to be a big problem in the future.

Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Gargan.

Yes, again, reference has been made that we shouldn't hold students back who are gifted in certain areas. But my point is the achievement is so average or low, we don't expect more of those kids. Those who go beyond that average, whether it is 60 per cent or 70 per cent, then they are considered gifted.

I am suggesting the kind of education that is given in the communities is not 100 per cent in the first place. So how do you expect a child who has an IQ of 150...It would be obvious even for a child who has an IQ of 90, that the level of education we have doesn't achieve what it should. We shouldn't hold back the students. But I think we have to expect a higher degree of education. It is not happening. If we keep it at the same level now, then we still don't achieve anything for bringing up the standards. Mr. Ballantyne already said we were one of the lowest. It has been said in the papers that the Northwest Territories is one of the lowest and out of 15 students, only two of the students of the 15 brightest students, actually make the national tests they are given.

It is not only trying to advance people who are highly intellectual to move forward, but all of the students could be highly intellectual if we design the programs for them to achieve that. That is not the way things are right now. I don't know if I can support a motion that suggests that only the bright students advance and the rest...

Thank you, Mr. Gargan. The honourable Member for Yellowknife North, Mr. Ballantyne.

Mr. Gargan's points are good. I think somewhere along the line we are going to have a full debate on education, in this House. This recommendation is an attempt to deal, specifically, with what Mr. Gargan is saying. It is to raise the whole level overall. We are not just talking about a few people at the top. So then every student has an opportunity for an excellent education. I am sorry if my words lead Mr. Gargan to believe I was talking about a few gifted students, we are not talking about that. We are talking about raising the overall level of the whole education system. Excellence has to be the underlying force behind raising it higher, where everybody sees that the whole system has to improve to a higher level. I hope that helps clarify. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Ballantyne. The honourable Member for Deh Cho, Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me see if this is the way this motion reads. It says, "...Adopt a focus of excellence as a fundamental principle of the educational system, and implement a plan by the 1994-95 school year to monitor the achievement of northern students and to continually strive to help northern students achieve excellence in their studies." Isn't it premature to make that kind of a statement? The level right now is so low that it still targets certain groups to go beyond that level, anyway. Should we actually be making a motion to say that we need to bring up the level so we don't have this double standard? I have already used my own constituency as an example. We have kids going to high school in Fort Simpson, kids going to high school here and kids going to high school in Fort Providence. Why are we sending them to these different places and for what reason? To achieve excellence, or is it done on the basis of merit, or the basis of who you know in the educational system or is it based on favouritism by students and teachers? That doesn't address the issue itself. I like students striving towards excellence, but if it is at the detriment of other students, which I think it suggests here, I can't, in all honesty, support something like this. The way I read it might be interpreted differently by Mr. Ballantyne, but that is the way I am reading it, and I might need some help here from someone. A legal person might be able to explain it a lot better. I am hearing something here and I am getting other messages.

Thank you. I guess the definition of the term "northern student" implies all students in the NWT. Mr. Dent.

Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Antoine.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This motion is not to focus on one specific area or one community or one specific group. It is to focus on the whole north. In the Standing Committee on Finance, we look at the total budget, including this department, with that in mind.

Over the years, we hear the different problems that Members have in the communities, such as what Mr. Gargan has brought forward, specifically, and the idea is to try and address those kinds of problems. We know that there is a strategic plan in the works at the department.

We, as a committee, wanted to focus on philosophy for the education in our schools in the whole north. We are making this motion, or recommendation of motion, saying that there has to be excellence in the whole educational system. Let's all in the north here, with the Legislative Assembly, give direction to the Department of Education to emphasize the philosophy of excellence in our schools, for our children. That is what we are basically saying. It is not focused on one area or another.

I want to add further that this year, this Department is asking for $212.547 million. A major part of it is going to the schools, to the education of our children. Whenever a person goes and spends that kind of money, you want to see a return. You want to see what you are buying or what you are paying for. This is the biggest budget of any department of the government, I think, and we want to know, what is the return? We put that much money into this whole department. The results should be graduates. Of all students entering school, graduates should be the final results, and we are not getting them. Why are we not getting these results? This motion is an attempt to try to address it.

We are saying that we have to focus on a philosophy of excellence in the school. Perhaps if we do that, it might help in trying to achieve our goals of providing good education to everybody in the north, all the students who are in the schools. For me, as a Member of the Standing Committee on Finance, during our discussions, that is what the intent of the motion is. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Antoine. To the motion. The honourable Member for Deh Cho, Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I understand the intent of the motion is to focus on the principle of excellence within the educational system and to monitor the achievements of northern students, to continually strive to ensure northern students achieve excellence in their studies. I have no problem with that philosophy but I have real problems with the level of that philosophy, if that is what you are going to call it, because, Mr. Chairman, perhaps in a community the size of Fort Providence, that level of excellence is not at the same kind of level that you will see in Yellowknife.

So we can talk about philosophy all we want, but if we don't change that level of excellence, then all the philosophies in the world won't achieve that. I think that my whole point is that I know the intent of the motion. In Fort Providence, that level of excellence is okay for Fort Providence. In Yellowknife, it is okay for that level to be achieved by the students in Yellowknife. In Fort Simpson, it is different. In Inuvik, perhaps it is different. In the High Arctic, maybe a whole different level is expected over there. It's a good message, but I think what we have to look at is right now there's a message that, as far as northern students go, they are not the best in Canada. At the same time, we are paying the best salaries of anywhere in Canada for teachers. For that kind of money, we should be getting our money's worth, but we're not. Even though there's a high level being spent, very little is being allocated to programs. A major portion of that goes towards teachers' salaries, their two paid trips and everything else.

I know what the intent of the motion is. But the same thing happens every year. After students achieve a certain amount of excellence, we send them to Fort Simpson or Yellowknife. Or, maybe they stay in the community. What I'm saying, Mr. Chairman, is if we're going to focus on anything, we should be focusing on bringing the level of education standards up so our students can do a bit better when we have another national test.

They chose some of the top students to take the tests. Perhaps we should be sending other messages out, asking that they do tests, maybe in Fort Simpson, Fort Providence and Hall Beach of the same level to find out if the level would go even further down.

Thank you, Mr. Gargan. To the principle of the motion, Mr. Pudluk.

Question.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion is carried.

---Carried

The honourable Member for Yellowknife North, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think the discussion was very useful to everybody.

I move that the committee recommends that the Department of Education, Culture and Employment make a commitment to undertake the following:

-To continue to participate in standardized testing and examine the results of the tests;

-To objectively compare northern students to the national average and determine the reason for any significant differences; and,

-To develop strategies to help students achieve at levels comparable to other students in Canada.

Further, the committee recommends that the department respond to the Standing Committee on Finance with an analysis and initial strategy by January 1, 1995.