1 Standing Committee on Legislation Hearings
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Standing Committee on Legislation ᒪᓕᒐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ Hearings on Bill 25, An Act to Amend the ᑲᑎᒪᓂᖏᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᖁᓪᓗᒍ Education Act and the Inuit Language ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ Protection Act ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓ ᓴᐳᒻᒥᔭᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ Iqaluit, Nunavut ᐃᖃᓗᐃᑦ, ᓄᓇᕗᑦ November 28, 2019 ᓄᕕᐱᕆ 28, 2019 Members Present: ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑏᑦ ᐅᐸᒃᑐᑦ: Tony Akoak ᑑᓂ ᐋᖁᐊᖅ Pat Angnakak ᐹᑦ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ Joelie Kaernerk ᔪᐃᓕ ᖃᐃᕐᓂᖅ Mila Kamingoak ᒦᓚ ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ Pauloosie Keyootak ᐸᐅᓗᓯ ᕿᔪᒃᑖᖅ Adam Lightstone ᐋᑕᒻ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ John Main, Chair ᐋᕐᓗᒃ ᒪᐃᓐ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ Margaret Nakashuk ᓯᒥᐅᓐ ᒥᑭᓐᖑᐊᖅ David Qamaniq ᒫᒡᒍᓚ ᓇᑲᓱᒃ Emiliano Qirngnuq ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ Paul Quassa ᐃᒥᓕᐊᓄ ᕿᓐᖑᖅ Allan Rumbolt ᐹᓪ ᖁᐊᓴ Cathy Towtongie, Co-Chair ᐋᓚᓐ ᕋᒻᐴᑦ ᖄᑕᓂ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᐅᖃᑕᐅᔪᖅ Staff Members: ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ: Michael Chandler ᒪᐃᑯᓪ ᓵᓐᑐᓗ Stephen Innuksuk ᓯᑏᕙᓐ ᐃᓄᒃᓱᒃ Siobhan Moss ᓯᕚᓐ ᒫᔅ Interpreters: ᑐᓵᔩᑦ: Saran Bangoura ᓴᕌᓐ ᐸᖒᕋ Lisa Ipeelee ᓖᓴ ᐊᐃᐱᓕ Andrew Dialla ᐋᓐᑐᓘ ᑎᐊᓚ Attima Hadlari ᐊᑏᒪ ᕼᐊᑦᓚᕆ Allan Maghagak ᐋᓚᓐ ᒪᒃᕼᐊᒐᒃ Philip Paneak ᐱᓕᑉ ᐸᓂᐊᖅ Blandina Tulugarjuk ᐸᓚᓐᑏᓇ ᑐᓗᒑᕐᔪᒃ Witnesses: ᐊᐱᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ: Thomas Ahlfors, Legislative Counsel ᑖᒪᔅ ᐋᓪᕗᐊᔅ, ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᕐᕕᒻᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᕆᔨ Melissa Alexander, Manager of Planning, ᒪᓕᓴ ᐋᓕᒃᓵᓐᑐ, ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨ ᐸᕐᓇᓐᓂᕐᒧᑦ, Reporting and Evaluation, Department of ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐅᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ, Education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ David Joanasie, Minister of Education ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ, ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ Kathy Okpik, Deputy Minister of Education ᑳᑎ ᐅᒃᐱᑦ, ᒥᓂᔅᑕᐅᑉ ᑐᓪᓕᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ >>Committee commenced at 9:01 >>ᑲᑎᒪᓯᒋᐊᖅᑐᑦ 9:01ᒥ 1 Chairman (Mr. Main)(interpretation): Good ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ ᐅᑉᓛᑦᓯᐊᖅ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᖃᑎᒃᑳ. ᒥᔅᑐ morning, colleagues. Mr. Keyootak, can you ᕿᔪᒃᑖᖅ, ᑐᒃᓯᐊᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑎᑦᑑᓪᓗᐊᖅᐱᑎᒍ. ᒪ’ᓇ. say the opening prayer, please. Thank you. >>ᑐᒃᓯᐊᖅᑐᑦ >>Prayer Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒥᔅᑐ ᕿᔪᒃᑖᖅ, ᒪ’ᓇ. ᐅᑉᓛᑦᓯᐊᖅ Keyootak. Good morning, colleagues. Good ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᖃᑎᒃᑲ, ᒥᓂᔅᑐ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ, ᐱᓕᕆᔨᑎᓪᓗ morning, Minister Joanasie and your officials. ᐅᑉᓛᑦᓯᐊᖅ. As we proceed with our hearing as the Standing Committee on Legislation on Bill ᑲᑎᒪᓐᓂᕆᔭᕗᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖑᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ 25, this is our fourth day and we are ᒪᓕᒐᑦᓴᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᑦᓴᖅ 25 scheduled to meet for half the day, up until ᐱᔾᔪᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑕᕝᕙ ᐅᓪᓗᖅ ᓯᑕᒪᒋᓕᖅᑕᖓ ᐅᑉᓘᑉ lunchtime. We have invited the Minister to ᓇᑉᐸᖓᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᖃᕐᓂᐊᖅᖢᑕ ᐸᕐᓇᐃᖅᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ come and review the things that we have ᐅᓪᓗᕈᒥᑕᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᓪᓗᒍ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᐃᖁᓯᒪᑉᓗᑎᒍᓗ heard in the past three days. I am sure we will ᑖᓐᓇ ᒥᓂᔅᑐᒋᔭᐅᔪᖅ. ᑐᓴᖅᓯᒪᔭᑉᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᓪᓗᓂ have some questions to the Minister for ᖄᖏᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᑉᓗᐃᑦ ᐱᖓᓱᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᑉᓗᒋᑦ clarification and the officials are here. ᑕᐅᑐᒃᖢᒋᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᕚᓪᓕᕈᑎᑦᓴᓂᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᑦᓴᖃᖅᑑᓪᓗᐊᕐᓂᐊᕋᑉᑕ ᒥᓂᔅᑐᒧᑦ Before we proceed to questions, the Minister ᐱᓕᕆᔨᖏᓪᓗ ᑕᕝᕙᓃᖦᖢᑎᒃ. has a statement to make. Please introduce ᑕᐃᒪ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᑦᓴᓄᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᒋᐊᖅᑳᖅᑎᓐᓇᑕ your officials first of all and then you can get ᒥᓂᔅᑐ ᐅᖃᐅᑎᒃᓴᖃᕋᒥ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᑦᓴᖃᕐᒪᒎᖅ. started, Minister Joanasie. ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥᒃ ᒥᓂᔅᑐ ᐱᓕᕆᔨᑎᑦ ᑭᒃᑰᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐃᖅᑳᕐᓗᑎᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑑᓪᓗᐊᓕᖅᐳᑎᑦ. ᒥᓂᔅᑐ Hon. David Joanasie (interpretation): Thank ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, Members and Nunavummiut. With me this morning is ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, my Deputy Minister of Education, Kathy ᐃᑦᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᓪᓛᒃᑯᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑏᑦ Okpik, and Manager of Policy and Evaluation ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥᐅᓪᓗ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑕᒫᓃᖃᑎᒋᔭᒃᑲ ᑐᖏᓕᕋ Melissa Alexander, and from the Department ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ, ᑳᑎ ᐅᒃᐱᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ of Justice is our Legal Counsel, Thomas ᐊᑐᐊᒐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦᑕᐅ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᓯᔨᐅᖃᑕᐅᔪᖅ Ahlfors. Those are the witnesses. ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔨᐅᖃᑕᐅᓪᓗᓂ, ᒪᓕᓴ ᐊᓕᒃᓵᓐᑐ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓃᖔᖅᑐᖅ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᕆᔨᒻᒪᕆᐅᔪᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ I have a prepared statement and I would like ᑖᒪᔅ ᐋᓪᕗᐊᑦ. you all to understand that we are glad that we are given an opportunity to appear before the ᑖᒃᑯᐊᖑᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐅᑯᐊ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᑦᓴᒃᑲ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ Standing Committee and we have been ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖁᔨᒐᒪ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᕕᐊᑦᑐᒎᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᑕᒫᓂ working on this topic for a very long time. We ᐱᕕᖃᑦᑎᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᕋᑦᑕ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᓵᖓᓃᑎᓪᓗᑕ are glad that we are able to proceed to our ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑎᒪᐅᑎᒋᔭᓯ ᐊᑯᓂ discussion today and that we were able to hear ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᓯᒪᒐᑦᑎᒍ. ᖁᕕᐊᑦᑐᒍᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ from the witnesses that appeared before you ᐅᖃᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᖅ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓗ this week. ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᐊᖅᑐᖅᓯᒪᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᑦᓯ ᓵᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑐᓴᕐᕕᒋᔪᓐᓇᓚᐅᖅᑐᓯᐅᒃ ᐱᓇᓱᐊᕈᓯᐅᔪᒥ. As a department we, like the Standing Committee, want to ensure we propose the ᐱᓕᕆᕕᒋᔭᕗᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᑦᓴᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᐃᓕᑦᓯᑎᑐᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖑᔪᑎᒍᑦ ᐱᐅᓂᖅᐹᒥᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᑦᓴᒥᒃ 2 best possible amendments to the Education ᐋᖅᑭᑦᓯᔪᒪᒐᑦᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ Act and the Inuit Language Protection Act. ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᑕ ᓴᐳᒻᒥᔭᐅᒍᑎᖓᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᑦᓱᒋᑦ. As the Members know, my department had the pleasure of travelling to all 25 ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒐᑦᓯ ᐱᓕᕆᕕᒋᔭᕋ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓄᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓄᑦ communities and engaging directly with ᐅᐸᒍᑎᒍᓐᓇᓚᐅᕋᑦᑕ ᐅᕐᓂᒍᑎᒍᓐᓇᓚᐅᕋᑦᑕ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ Nunavummiut in every community. Over the ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᑦᓱᒍ ᐱᖁᔮᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ last three days the Standing Committee on ᐅᓪᓗᐃᑦ ᖄᖏᖅᑐᓂ ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᓪᓗᓯ Legislation has had the opportunity to hear ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᓚᐅᖅᑕᒃᑲ ᒥᒃᓵᓄᑦ directly from some of the people we met with ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥᐅᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᖏᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓇᓱᑦᑐᑎᒍ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) as we travelled across the territory. ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᕈᓘᔭᕐᓂᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ (interpretation ends) The diversity of views ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓯᒪᔪᐃᓪᓗ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐅᖃᕆᐊᖅᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂ and opinions expressed by the witnesses past ᐱᓇᓱᐊᕈᓯᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓂ ᑕᒪᔾᕙ ᓴᖅᑮᓯᒪᕗᑦ this week in Iqaluit represent just some of the ᑐᓴᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᑕᓯᓐᓂᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᓯᔾᔩᖁᔭᐅᔪᓂ. feedback we received on the proposed amendments. As a department, our challenge was to propose amendments to the Acts that best ᐱᓕᕆᕕᐅᓪᓗᑕ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᒡᒐᓇᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ balanced the interests of all Nunavummiut. It ᐊᓯᔾᔩᒐᓱᐊᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᓴᖅᑮᒐᓱᓐᓂᖅ ᓇᓕᕇᒃᑎᒐᓱᐊᖅᑐᒋᑦ is a challenge that is now before the Members ᓴᖅᑭᖁᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥᐅᓄᑦ ᐱᒡᒐᓇᖅᑐᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᓵᖓᓃᓕᖅᑐᖅ. of the Standing Committee. ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐱᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᓕᕆᕕᕗᑦ Mr. Chairman, in Bill 25 my department is ᐃᓕᐅᖅᑲᐃᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖃᕈᒪᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ proposing to take a phased implementation ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᑎᑦᑎᓂᐅᔪᖅ approach to the delivery of Inuit Language ᖁᑦᑎᓂᓕᒃ 4−ᒥᒃ ᖁᑦᑎᓐᓂᓕᒃ 12−ᒧᑦ Arts instruction for grades 4 to 12 up to 2039. 2039−ᖑᕋᓱᓐᓂᖓᓂ. ᑖᓐᓇ It is a proposal that has sparked much debate ᐊᐃᕙᐅᑕᐅᕈᓘᔭᕕᐅᑎᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐅᓪᓗᓂ in the House over the past three days and one ᐱᖓᓱᓂ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓱᑦᑎᐊᕈᒪᓂᐊᖅᑕᕋ that I would like to explain more fully to the ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᓄᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒥᐅᓄᓪᓗ. Members and to Nunavummiut. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᐃᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑏᑦ Mr. Chairman, in the context of the document ᓵᖓᓂᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓗᒋᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅ that Members have in front of them, language ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔾᔪᑎᐅᔪᖅ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑎᒡᒍᓯᐅᓲᖑᕗᖅ of instruction is used to identify the ᖃᓯᑦ ᐳᓴᖑᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ percentage of instruction a student may ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᐃᑦ receive in a certain language over the length ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓇᒥ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᒥ. of an academic year. The Education Act’s Language of Instruction ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᐅᑉ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᑦ Regulations outline three models of education ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᓖᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖏᑦ under which a DEA may choose to operate: ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ ᐱᖓᓱᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ The Qulliq Model, intended for ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᒍᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᒍᒪᑉᐸᑕ: communities where Inuktut is the first language; ᖁᓪᓕᖅ ᑖᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᓐᓄᑦ; 3 The Immersion Model, intended for ᐃᓚᓕᐅᔾᔨᓂᖅ ᐃᓗᐊᓅᖅᓯᓂᖅ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᖅ communities that have experienced ᐃᓄᓐᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂᒃ ᐊᓯᐅᔨᓯᒪᕈᔪᑦᑐᓐᓄᑦ; ᐊᒻᒪ language loss; and ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᓄᑦᑐᑦ The Dual Model in communities that have ᓴᓐᖏᔪᓂᑦ ᐅᖃᓲᖁᑎᓕᓐᓂ ᐊᒻᒪ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ both strong Inuktut first-language ᐃᓕᒌᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᑦ. speakers and English first-language speakers. Despite the existence of these three models, as ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᑕᖃᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐱᖓᓱᐃᑦ Members know, many factors have limited the ᐊᔾᔨᒎᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ, ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑏᑦ ability of schools to implement their chosen ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒻᒪᑕ ᐊᒥᓱᑦ ᐊᑦᑐᐃᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᓐᓂ model, and in many schools Inuktut language ᓴᖅᑮᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓴᖅᑮᒍᓐᓇᖏᓐᓂᓄᓘᓐᓃᑦ instruction is well below the required ᓂᕈᐊᖅᓯᒪᔭᖏᓐᓂ ᐊᒥᓱᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕖᑦ ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ percentage. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᐅᕗᑦ. Mr. Chairman, my department is committed ᐱᓕᕆᕕᕗᑦ ᐊᖏᖅᒪᓂᖃᖅᑐᖅ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᑎᔾᔪᑎᖃᒪᔪᓂᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒥᐅᓕᒫᓂ to delivering bilingual education for all ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᓕᐅᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᑎᓪᓗ Nunavummiut and has developed plans for ᐃᓕᔭᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕆᒐᔭᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25−ᒥ. Inuktut language instruction implementation that align with the timelines set out in Bill 25. ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᖅᑳᕈᒪᔪᖓ ᐊᕕᑦᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᖏᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ First, I would like to clarify the categories of ᐋᖅᑭᓱᖅᑕᐅᔪᓂ ᖃᓄᕐᓗ ᒪᓕᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ curriculum that the department is developing ᐱᖓᓱᓂᑦ ᓇᓖᕌᖅᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ. as well as how they align with the three language of instruction models. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᑦ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᖅᓴᕈᓐᓇᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᕐᒥᓪᓗ The Uqausiliriniq Strand focuses on language ᐃᓗᓕᖃᖅᑐᖅ: development, expression, and critical thinking and consists of: - ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓ ᐃᓕᓴᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᒋᐊᓐᖓᖅᑕᒥᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᖁᓪᓕᒃᑯᑎᒍᑦ - Inuit Language Arts 1 as a first language ᐊᒻᒪ; for the Qulliq Model; - ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕆᐊᓐᖓᓂᖏᑦᑐᓄᑦ - Inuit Language Immersion for language ᐊᓯᐅᔨᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓄᑦ ᐆᒻᒪᐃᕙᓪᓕᐊᒍᑎᐅᒐᓱᑦᑐᖅ revitalization in the Immersion Model; ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂ ᐊᒻᒪ; - Inuktut as a Second Language for students - ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᑳᕐᓂᖏᑦᑐᓄᑦ in the non-Inuktut stream of the Dual ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑑᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ Model; ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᒍᒪᓯᒪᔪᓄᑦ; - English Language Arts 1 for students - ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᓂᖅ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᓂᒃ strong in English and in the non-Inuktut ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᓄᑦ stream of the Dual Model; ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑑᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ - English Language Arts 2 for students ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᒍᒪᓯᒪᔪᓄᑦ; learning English as a second language - ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ ᓈᓴᐅᑎᓕᒃ 2, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓄᑦ found in all four streams; and finally ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕆᐊᓐᖓᕐᓂᕋᓂᐅᒃ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ - A Fine Arts course is also unified in the ᑎᓴᒪᓃᑦᑐᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕋᔅᓴᐅᔪᓂ Uqausiliriniq Strand. - ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᓪᓚᕆᔅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᖅ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥ. ᐃᓗᓕᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᑎᑦᑎᓂᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᖅ. 4 Three more core curriculum strands also exist, ᐱᖓᓱᓂᑦ ᐃᓗᓕᖃᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᒥᔪᐃᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ with core course curriculum for all three ᐱᖓᓲᒐᓗᐊᕐᒥᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓇᓖᕌᕋᔅᓴᐃᑦ: models. They include: - ᓄᓇᕗᑦᓯᐅᑎᓄᑦ ᑐᕌᒑᖓᔪᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᖅᑐᖅ; - Nunavusiutit Strand, focusing on social - ᐊᐅᓚᔮᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐋᓐᓂᐊᖃᕐᓇᖏᑦᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥᒃ studies; ᑎᒥᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓐᖏᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᑎᑦᑎᓂᐅᒐᓱᑦᑐᖅ; - Aulajaaqtut Strand, focusing on health and ᐊᒻᒪ physical education; and - ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒃᑲᕆᓐᓂᖅ ᓈᓴᐅᓯᕆᓂᕐᒥ - Iqqaqqaukkaringniq Strand, focusing on ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᐅᔪᖅ.