Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Issue: In reviewing the proposed provisions for the suspension of teachers where there is misconduct or incompetence, it was not clear to the committee whether such a suspension was with pay or without pay. In the interest of clarity, the committee felt that the act should specify whether a suspension is with pay or without pay.
Response: The department has agreed to reword the section that refers to the suspension of a teacher for misconduct or incompetence, to clarify that it is without pay.
Issue: The committee also noted that another section dealing with alleged misconduct or incompetence was worded awkwardly and should be made more clear.
Response: The department will undertake to reword the section that refers to the suspension of a teacher for alleged misconduct or incompetence to eliminate any confusion.
Issue: Committee Members expressed a concern from a community perspective that teachers must be familiar with, and sensitive to, the cultural environment in which they are teaching. It was suggested that teachers' performance evaluations, conducted every year, should include a cultural component to gauge each teachers' sensitivity and adaptability to their cultural environment.
There was also some discussion pertaining to the fact that, in the draft act, principals are responsible for evaluating teachers, giving the appearance at least of "peer evaluation." The committee was not entirely comfortable with the provision.
Response: Department officials explained that, under the new terms of the draft act, district authorities are considered the board of education management and the principal serves as a manager, taking direction from the local authority. Therefore, it would be the local authority that directs the evaluations conducted by the principal and sets the guidelines and standards for these evaluations. In order to address the cultural sensitivity requirements, these guidelines and standards could include knowledge and understanding of the culture of a community, as directed by the district education authority or divisional education council.
Part III: Communities - Cultural Diversity
Language Of Instruction/Program Language
Issue: The wording of a particular section on determining the language of instruction in a district caused the committee some concern. It was interpreted by Members to say that a district authority could choose a language of instruction only if approval of the Minister was secured. This seemed to contradict a basic objective of the draft legislation, which is to move more decision-making authority for education to the community level.
Response: The department agreed with the committee's assessment and responded by committing to create a new section: "which will state that the Minister will, by directive, give guidelines for the implementation of language of instruction programs to ensure that high standards of education are maintained." In addition, the present wording will be changed to eliminate "ministerial determination" as a prerequisite for the district authority's choice of language. These changes will ensure that the decision is in the hands of the local authority, but within prescribed guidelines to maintain standards of education.
Issue: Additional sections caught the attention of the committee with respect to their wording which seemed to give priority to the English language in Northwest Territories schools. The committee requested that changes be made to ensure that there was more of a balance between English and aboriginal languages.
Response: The department made the commitment that the section referred to: "will be reworded so that English and the official languages other than English are referred to in a more parallel manner."
Mr. Speaker, I will now ask the Member for Natilikmiot, Mr. Ningark, to continue the report. Qujannamiik.