Stories of Secession: Choosing Non-State Schools in Ontario

STORIES OF SECESSION: CHOOSING NON-STATE SCHOOLS IN ONTARIO

(Spine title: Choosing non-state schools in Ontario)

(Thesis format: Monograph)

Deani A. Neven Van Pelt

Graduate Program in Education

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies The University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, Canada

395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Canada Canada

Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-50401-7 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-50401-7

NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives and Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, prefer, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans loan, distribute and sell theses le monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non sur support microforme, papier, electronique commercial purposes, in microform, et/ou autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.

The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. this thesis. Neither the thesis Ni la these ni des extraits substantiels de nor substantial extracts from it celle-ci ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement may be printed or otherwise reproduits sans son autorisation. reproduced without the author's permission.

In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne Privacy Act some supporting sur la protection de la vie privee, forms may have been removed quelques formulaires secondaires from this thesis. ont ete enleves de cette these.

While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires in the document page count, aient inclus dans la pagination, their removal does not represent il n'y aura aucun contenu manquant. any loss of content from the thesis. •*• Canada THE UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies

CERTIFICATE OF EXAMINATION

Supervisor Examiners

Dr. Derek J. Allison Dr. Marshall Mangan

Supervisory Committee Dr. Jerald Paquette

Dr. Fredrick Ellett Dr. Paul Barker

Dr. Robert Macmillan Dr. Lynn Bosetti

The thesis by

Deani Anne Neven Van Pelt

entitled:

Stories of secession: Choosing non-state schools in Ontario

is accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Date Chair of the Thesis Examination Board

ii ABSTRACT

The provision for provincial systems of education with their respective measures for protecting the instruction of the religious minority has been called the "great compromise" upon which the Canadian confederation rests. The enduring legacy of this compromise for the province of Ontario, one of the four founding provinces, includes the presence of two thriving systems of publicly-funded education, public secular and public separate (Roman Catholic), schools. While almost 94 percent of Ontario K-12 students attend such schools, six percent do not. Although this minority represents less than

150,000 students (see Niebert, 2006, and Ontario Federation of Teaching Parents, 2006), the growth over the last four decades in rate of enrolment and in numbers of new schools in the non-state school sector has been much higher than that of the funded sector.

This inquiry sought to investigate reasons and stories parents give for choosing non-state schools in Ontario. The inquiry begins with an analysis of Canadian schooling arrangements and Ontario's unique provisions for non-state schools. Organizational features of schools were analyzed using Russell's (1929), Kandel's (1933) and Allison's

(1991) model of interna and externa of schools through a typology of schools developed for this inquiry. Quantitative and qualitative data are then analyzed to investigate reasons contemporary non-state school selectors gave for seceding from state schooling options.

The study concludes by drawing on the major findings to reflect on policy options for new schooling arrangements that could better meet twenty-first century opportunities and values.

The data, parental reasons and stories, were collected through an eight-page, 46- question, questionnaire sent to 53 schools (whose heads agreed that their schools would

iii participate). A total of 112 schools, randomly selected from a stratified sample of

Ontario's 885 (in 2006-2007) non-state schools were initially approached to participate.

Ultimately, 1801 parents from 920 households that had children enrolled in 38 schools participated. Demographic data were collected using items from Statistics Canada questionnaires to facilitate comparisons with Ontario parents with children aged 6-16.

Respondents were invited to share a story about their experiences in choosing a non-state school. The 223 stories provided where analyzed in detail to probe parents' experiences and reasons for choosing non-state schools.

The stories were analyzed using NVivo 7 and other recognized methods of qualitative analysis. Interpretation of results was facilitated by triangulating the findings with those generated from quantitative analyses of respondent responses to questionnaire items. A range of thematic reasons for secession from state schools emerged, the most dominant being that of finding a caring, engaging community for children. The significance of this concern for parents seeking alternative educational settings for their children is supported by and, in the findings emerging from this study, further extends those reported in Bosetti's (2000) research into charter schools and Davies and Quirke's

(2005) study of third sector schools in Toronto. Implications for the provision of state

sector education are explored.

iv DEDICATION

To my family

with love

and

with thanks for your love

Michael, my dear husband,

Andrea, Meghan, and Kenton, our precious children

Joanne and Andrew Neven, my gracious parents

v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study simply would not have been possible without the 223 Ontario parents who valued the importance of this work enough to respond to our invitation to share a story with us. The personal comments directed to us at the end of a number of the stories served as a constant reminder of the trust participants placed in this work. To the anonymous parents who said "thanks" "thank-you" or "thanks for asking!" (and to all respondents) I say my own sincere "thank-you for sharing". To those who wished us good luck with the study, who commented on how interesting this study was and who wondered if this would give us something to work with, I respond with my own sincere comment that it most certainly did help, and that perhaps even more than luck was on our side. I am indebted to these unnamed parents whose words have contributed to our understanding of contemporary schooling. It is my deepest wish that those who steward the education of children in our times will hear your voice of care and insight.

As I reflect on the years of my adult life, one of the greatest gifts I've received is that of the mentorship and friendship offered by Dr. Derek Allison and Professor Patricia

Allison. Your patient enthusiasm for my ideas, your carefully chosen words—"rubbish!" being one of them—and your unending wisdom, insight and foresight will be cherished throughout the remaining days of my scholarship and beyond. Thank you for the banquet, for the nourishment of food and conversation shared at your table, for your commitment to excellence, and for your care for future generations.

To the many others who played important roles in the unfolding of this inquiry and the emergence of this text, my sincerest gratitude. Dr. Fred Ellett and Dr. Robert

Macmillan your provision of timely critiques, probing questions, and kind

vi encouragements are sincerely appreciated. Thank you to the examining committee, Dr.

Lynn Bosetti, Dr. Paul Barker, Dr. Marshall Mangan and Dr. Jerald Paquette for your thoughtful questions and helpful insights.

Thank you to Malkin Dare and Doretta Wilson of the Society for Quality Education without whose support these data would not have been collected.

Thank you to my colleagues at Redeemer University College who offered kind

support even, and especially, when it was inconvenient: Dr. Mary Ashun, Prof. Christina

Belcher, Dr. Steve Sider, Dr. Dirk Windhorst, Dr. Jane Sinden, Prof. Brenda Stephenson,

Catherine Byl, Denita Dyck, Dr. Wayne Norman, Dr. Jacob Ellens, and Dr. Justin

Cooper.

Thank you to all dear friends and family who cared and supported along the way,

especially Alice and Arend Van Pelt, Sandy Rusby-Bell, Jennifer Talsma, Laurel

Aldridge, Sandra Zuidema, Dr. Carroll Smith, Dr. Jack Beckman, Angela Strauss, Gideon

Strauss, Carolyn Naves, Lucy Van Pelt, Brenda Neven, Barb Van Pelt, Ray Pennings,

Marj Miller, Dallas Miller, Petra Zantingh, Stacey Larin, Shannon Nusko, Geraldine

Flootman and, my brothers, Gary, Drew and Jeff.

Solo deo gloria.

vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Certificate of examination ii Abstract iii Dedication v Acknowledgements vi Table of Contents viii List of Tables x List of Figures xii List of Appendices xiii

CHAPTER ONE: BACKGROUND, RESEARCH QUESTION, SIGNIFICANCE AND APPROACH TO INQUIRY 1 Background 1 Research questions 17 Significance 19 Approach to inquiry 20 School selection and data collection 22 Questionnaire design 28 Approach to data analysis 30 Summary 33

CHAPTER TWO: CONCEPTUALIZING NON-STATE SCHOOLS AND THEIR FEATURES 34 Epistemological and ontological orientation 35 Conceptualizing schooling arrangements 40 Conceptualizing schooling features - interna and externa 53 Conceptualizing school types 58

CHAPTER THREE: LITERATURE REVIEW OF NON-STATE SCHOOL SUPPORTERS AND THEIR REASONS FOR CHOOSING 65 Demographics of parents who choose non-state schools 65 Reasons parents choose non-state schools 67

CHAPTER FOUR: ONTARIO NON-STATE SCHOOL SELECTORS: DEMOGRAPHICS AND REASONS 77 Demographics of parents 77 Attracting features of non-state schools in Ontario 92

CHAPTER FIVE: STORIES OF SECESSION 105 Content analysis 107 Community 113 Teachers 113 Students 123 Staff 126

viii Principal, vice-principal, headmaster 129 Curricula 131 Atmosphere and orientation 132 Curricular program of studies 142 Programs variety 145 Size 149 Culture 151 Religion 152 Cultural literacy or heritage 157 Climate and change 159 Traumatic life circumstances 159 Improvement experienced 162 Safety 167 Concerns 173 Finances 174 Concerns about private schools 182 Withdrawal from publicly-funded schools 189 Summary 198

CHAPTER SIX: BEYOND RELIGION AND ACADEMICS: NEW EXPECTATIONS FOR TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY EDUCATION 201 Summary 201 Conclusions 204 Synthesis 212 Implications 215

REFERENCES 224

APPENDICES 235

VITA 261

ix LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 Ontario Private Schools as at December 2005 16

Table 2.1 Selectivity in client-organization relationship in service

organizations 42

Table 2.2 Categories of school funding and operation 44

Table 2.3 Funding and regulation of privately provided schools by province (adapted from CACE, 2004) 50 Table 2.4 Initial detailed typology of schools based on 2006-07 Ministry of Education data 62

Table 3.1 Summary of themes found in the literature on reasons parents choose schools 73

Table 3.2 Stems developed from literature review on reasons parents 74

give for selecting schools

Table 4.1 Top ten very important reasons by type of private school 94

Table 4.2 Condensed Analysis of Statements: Most important reason for

choosing a private school 103

Table 5.1 Details on schools submitting questionnaires containing stories 107

Table 5.2 Story themes 112

Table 5.3 Stories about teachers 122

Table 5.4 Stories about students 126

Table 5.5 Stories about staff 128

Table 5.6 Stories about atmosphere and orientation 141

Table 5.7 Stories including curricular program of studies 144

Table 5.8 Stories mentioning program variety 148

Table 5.9 Stories mentioning size 150

x Table 5.10 Stories about religion 154

Table 5.11 Stories about traumatic life circumstances stories 162

Table 5.12 Stories about improvements and changes stories 167

Table 5.13 Stories about safe environment 172

Table 5.14 Stories including financial aspects of choice 181

Table 5.15 Stories including concerns about private schools 188

Table 5.16 Stories of withdrawal from publicly-funded schools 196

Table 6.1 Top ten very important reasons by type of private school 207

Table 6.2 Condensed analysis of statements 208

Table 6.3 Top ten very important reasons for ADS respondents 209

Table 6.4 Top ten very important reasons for RDS respondents 210

xi LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Enrolment in Public and Private Schools in Ontario, 1960 - 2003 15

Figure 2.1 An adaptation of Paquette's (1991) model for conceptualizing schooling arrangements 45

Figure 2.2 Private provision schooling plotted according to degree of regulation and funding by Canadian province 47

Figure 4.1 Comparison of family size, study families and population at

large 79

Figure 4.2 Patterns of school attendance, all children in sample families.... 80

Figure 4.3 Importance of religion and religious attendance 82

Figure 4.4 Comparison of political involvement 83

Figure 4.5 Comparison of parental education levels 85

Figure 4.6 Comparison of parental employment percentages 86

Figure 4.7 Comparison of family income levels 89

Figure 4.8 Comparisons of aspects of culture 91

Figure 6.1 Interna (inner circle) and Externa (outer circle) 213

xii LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Ethics Approval Notice 236

Appendix B Letter of Information for Principals 237 Letter of Information for Governing Units 238 Letter Accompanying Questionnaire Bundle 239 Consent Form for Principal Signature 240

Appendix C Questionnaire and Letter of Information to Respondents 241

Appendix D Table D.l Types of statements included in categories for statement analysis 253

Appendix E Table E. 1 Types and numbers of statements from stories in each category 256

xiii 1 CHAPTER ONE

BACKGROUND, RESEARCH QUESTION, SIGNIFICANCE AND APPROACH TO INQUIRY

As two public school educators we feel that the current public school system is successful in all important areas but one. The spiritual growth of the students is neglected. We choose to send our children to a private Lutheran school so that they have the opportunity to grow in this area as well. The religious aspect of the school is the one and only reason we sent them there. In our opinion, public schools in our area are just as successful in all the other areas. (167)

Throughout most of recorded history, education has been characterized by its voluntary nature. It was voluntarily provided by those so inclined or so commissioned, whether for a fee or not, and it was voluntarily pursued by those students or their parents who were so inclined to participate in the offerings, sometimes paying a fee for the service. The claim has been made that the loss of this educational voluntarism is one of the great triumphs of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries in the west2. Compulsory education, both its compulsory provision by the state and its compulsory consumption by its young citizens, distinguishes our times from all others.

Compulsory participation in education for children in most, if not all, democratic jurisdictions, and also beyond, is a recent phenomenon. For example, the first compulsory attendance requirement in England came via the Education Act of 1870

(Kandel, 1933, p. 95) which required attendance by students aged 5 to 13 and, to consider another example, in Ontario via the Education Act of 1871, which compelled students aged 7 to 12 to attend school for "at least four months of any given school year"

(Prentice, 2004, p. 17). Furthermore, compulsory provision of education by the state

1 This epigraph and those that follow are taken from stories parents provided. 2 Allison, D.J (2004 September). In conversation. 2 made education "free" for all participants. In the case of England, the Education Act of

1870 provided that non-denominational schools would supplement the voluntarily provided denominational schools. In the case of Ontario, as legislated by the Education

Act of 1871, "the provision of free common schools by each municipality became mandatory" (p. 16). Both public and separate (Roman Catholic) schools (established by the School Act of 1841) were supported by a share of provincial grants and "local taxes"

(p. 17).

Yet despite these participation and provision requirements there are some who have always declined to partake in the state provided options and have instead voluntarily selected to participate in the education provided by non-state agencies. Traditionally these providers have been denominationally rooted, usually church maintained.

Nevertheless a variety of secular providers also continued or emerged through time.

Some children and their families, especially in the early days after the newly legislated compulsory attendance laws, selected truancy as an option. Non-attendance at the early state-provided schools can be explained by poverty or privilege. Poverty was usually the reason for truancy. In the case of The Toronto School Board Census of 1863, the 17.2 percent of non-attending students were reported, among several other things, as employed, wanted at home, sick, too far from school, recently immigrated, or had a "want of clothes" (Prentice, 2004, p. 158).

Other mid-nineteenth century parents found that the conditions, resources and goals of the increasingly state-aided schools did not meet the "religious idealism, sentimental attachment to old English institutions, patriotic and imperialistic notions,

[and] the desire to create a leadership class imbued with the ideas of Christian service" 3 (Commission on Private Schools in Ontario, 1985, p. 197). In response, during the

second half of the nineteenth century, denominational private schools of privilege were

established and sought by some parents for their children. Poverty or privilege could

explain why students avoided the state-provided educational options in the nineteenth

century. What is less clear is why students and their parents in our current times continue

to select non-state educational options.

If state systems of schooling represent one of the outstanding achievements of our times and continue to be supported by vast amounts of state monies in nearly all

economically advanced countries, why do some parents persist, not in avoiding

compliance with compulsory education laws, but in avoiding the state-provided option

for the education of their children?

Ontario, as suggested above, is a promising jurisdiction for examining this

question. Not only is the history of state schooling in this province marked with

compelling twists, there is some evidence that the provision of non-state schooling may

also be at a crossroads.

Background

From its very beginnings, Canada as a country has wrestled with the issue of

education and its provision. The records of the debates in the House of Commons for

March 3, 1896 contain the words of Charles Tupper as he reflected on the great

compromise contained in Section 93 of the British North America Act, 1867, the

document which brought about the confederation of the Dominion of Canada. This

compromise granted "exclusive legislative authority to the provinces (as we now know 4 them) to make laws in relation to education" (Crook & Truscott, 2007, p. 18) and was designed to protect "both the Roman Catholic minorities in Upper Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, and the Protestant minority in Quebec" (p. 19). About this, Tupper said

That but for the consent to the proposal of the Hon. Sir Alexander Gait.. .that in the Confederation Act should be embodied a clause which would protect the rights of minorities, whether Catholic or Protestant, in this country, there would have been no Confederation. (Tupper, 1896, col. 2719, at 2724 in Crook & Truscott, 2007, p. 19)

Not only did the possibility of confederation rest on such a unique accommodation, it also set Canada apart from other western countries in the manner of how education would be structured; it would be characterized by a lack of national educational governance and by respect for two minority religions in the four founding provinces. For a while, the separate school protections in Ontario included provision for the education of one other minority, "Coloureds". At its maximum, there were three such schools in 1875, and by 1891 the last coloured separate school "ceased to exist" (Report of the Royal Commission on Education in Ontario, 1950, p. 535). Yet the tone of respect for minority instruction was established. This aspect of the historical origin of Canada's various educational systems shaped Ontario's almost entirely anomalous position in

North American education with its continued compulsory provision of minority Roman

Catholic education.

At the time of confederation the most vocal and powerful school promoters, such as Egerton Ryerson—whose goal was to create one common school system for all- found the compromise rather distasteful, but nevertheless accepted it and moved forward with efforts to secure compulsory attendance for all students, a goal soon achieved, as 5 mentioned, in 1871. He also proposed and embraced a common Christianity in all curricula and this, too, was a continuing distinctive feature of early state education in

Ontario.

While state schooling, both public and separate, continued to mature in the province, a number of landmark documents, reports and decisions shaped the unfolding of non-state schooling. A fruitful exploration of contemporary parental selection of non- state schools would not be complete without considering a number of these landmarks.

Especially important are the several milestones on the road of religious education, which affected both public and separate schooling and, in some cases, may have added impetus to the non-state schooling sector.

A decades old constant in the story, although not legally binding on Canada, is that of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations (1948) which states "parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children" (s. 26(3)). Decades later the concluding observations of The United

Nations Human Rights Committee (2006) built upon that and stated that "the state party should adopt steps in order to eliminate discrimination on the basis of religion in the funding of schools in Ontario" (s. 21). In one sense, this illustrates how the anomalous approach to education design in Ontario continues to be an international oddity, suggesting that Ontario is indeed a unique place for studying non-state schooling, and that the sector will continue to attract attention both nationally and internationally.

The 1950 Report of the Royal Commission on Education in Ontario, commonly called the Hope Report, the first Royal Commission on education in the province, had 6 much to say about separate schooling (since it found such information to be rather absent elsewhere): it also articulated many aims for public education the first of which was

to develop the capacity to apprehend and practice basic virtues...the importance of the individual and the significance of his obligations, which form part of our spiritual heritage, are the foundations of our democratic society. The meaning of life is made manifest in adherence and obedience to ideals that lie outside oneself and that transcend one's personal interest. Inspiration and aspiration are never self-centred. Without proclaiming any creed or doctrine we know that in our democracy the Christian ideals as personified and exemplified by Jesus have an appeal to all persons of good will, and are the surest common ground for an educational program related to the pupil as a person, (p. 36, 37)

Although there was a provision for exemption from religious exercises, the authors of the

Hope Report captured the prevailing sense that a common Christianity continued to be endorsed for public education, a full century after Ryerson had proposed and established the same.

Yet less than two tumultuous decades later calls for the separation of religion from character education were heard. A major report on religion and moral education was commissioned and the resulting (oft-called) McKay Report on Religious Information and Moral Development (Ontario, 1969) recommended "the separation of moral and religious education programs" (Sussel, 1995, p. 137). And despite

opposition from conservative Christian groups across Canada, provincial ministries of education gradually moved toward an increasingly secular public school curriculum during the 1970s and into the early 1980s. Notwithstanding this trend...many provincial education statutes still prescribed mandatory religious exercises. (Sussel, p. 138)

This was encouraged by Ontario Regulation 262 (1980) which followed the McKay

Report. 7 In its reflection on this period in Ontario's educational history, the Report of the

Commission on Private Schools (1985) states "toleration for experimentation and diversity within the public school system implied a greater range of choice in the private sector... 'There is probably no place in the world,' declared the Free School Handbook,

1972, 'where the government provides fewer obstacles to the legal establishment of privately run schools than in Ontario'" (p. 204).

The next twists in the road came with the signing of the Charter of Rights and

Freedoms (1982) which specified and reinforced the protection of freedom of conscience and religion, especially that of the minority. The Canadian Multiculturalism Act (1985) implicitly called for the preservation and promotion of religious identity when it affirmed the "freedom of all members of Canadian society to preserve, enhance and share their cultural heritage" (s. 3(1 )(a)).

The Charter served as the impetus for Zylberberg v. Sudbury Board of Education

(1988) in which the Ontario Superior Court ruled that an exclusively Christian approach to religious exercises in state schools was discriminatory to minority religions.

Subsequently, religious exercises in public schools changed or were eliminated altogether. In the Canadian Civil Liberties Assn. v. Ontario (Minister of Education)

(1990), the Christian character of public education was ruled as offensive to freedom of religion and further changes were ordered in state schools particularly in curriculum, texts and communal exercises. This pronouncement was pivotal in that it banned religious exercises and instruction in all Ontario public schools. This resulting "benign neutrality" of the public schools towards religion, as Dolmage and Dickinson (1996) perhaps 8 disingenuously labeled it, marked a significant shift in the nature of public education in the province.

State funding for Roman Catholic separate schools and various proposals for the funding of non-state schools in Ontario have passed through some important phases in the last twenty-five years, and the near future will likely bring further discussion and possible changes. The decision of Premier William Davis in the mid-1980s to provide full equivalent funding to Roman Catholic separate schools, and the commission he established to investigate the parallel issue of funding private schools in the province are major milestones in this story. The introduction of full funding for elementary and secondary separate (Roman Catholic) schools announced in 1984 by the Progressive

Conservative government and enacted in 1985 resulted in the growth of that system. The publication of the Report of the Commission on Private Schools in Ontario (1985), commonly called the Shapiro Report and quoted earlier in this chapter, resulted, on the other hand, in little conversation and even less action. Yet the report of the Shapiro

Commission, despite the general disregard of its recommendations, provided an extensive snapshot of private schooling at the time and offered a proposal for the public funding of what he suggested would be Associated Schools. Thus a proposal, as disregarded as it was, had been made for the partial funding of some non-state schools.

Several years later a claim of discrimination against parents who chose non-state religious schools was made (Adler vs. Ontario, 1996). The court challenge resulted in the judgment that no parent is compelled to send his or her child to a non-state-funded school as all have equal access to the funded schools, and thus the claim of discrimination did 9 not hold, and parents did not have a right to funding for education provided in private religious schools.

With that issue settled in the courts, the action was then taken up in the legislature to determine if there was political and popular will to fund non-state schools or the parents who support them. And thus the saga of the Equity in Education tax credit began with an initial announcement in the Conservative government's budget speech of May

2001 to establish a tax credit provision which could be claimed by parents who paid private school tuition. A parent would receive up to a maximum of $3500 annually in the form of a tax credit, implemented incrementally over a five year period.

When a Liberal government was elected in the autumn of 2003, one of its first

acts was to retroactively revoke the then half year old tax credit. Four months later, only

six months after becoming Ontario's premier, Dalton McGuinty, declared that the public

system of education had lost its way. The media release from the Office of the Premier that day said: "It's time to stop the slide in public education that has been marked by [the]

disturbing trend [that] the number of children attending private schools has increased by

40 percent over the last eight years" (Ontario Office of the Premier, 22 April 2004, par.

3). During a speech the same day, the Premier stated:

Too many of our generation have taken public education for granted. We've lost our edge, our ferocity as jealous guardians of our children's right to the best public education. I think it's time to admit it. We've let it slide. We've let a good system slide. We've let it slide to the point where many families are choosing private schools over public education...Two hundred new private schools have opened. Four hundred public schools have closed. (McGuinty, 22 April 2004, par. 21-29)

These statements marked a new disposition towards the presence of non-state schools in

the province insofar as the Premier, in his declared concern for public schooling, linked 10 his apprehensions directly to the presence and growth of private schools. The

Premier's suggestion that the decline in the state sector was reciprocated by growth in the non-state sector could be viewed as a proactive attempt to arouse suspicion that non-state education may well influence, or be a cause of, the apparent decline in state education.

Does the alleged private school growth indeed provide a serious, threatening presence to public schools? One important route to answering that question is to establish just why today's parents choose non-state education for their children.

While the Premier in his 2004 comments rather proactively expressed regrets for the weakening of the public schools which were, he claimed, being drained by private schools, in the Ontario provincial election of 2007 he was compelled to re-engage in the debate about funding non-state education in the province. The opposition conservative party's platform declared a commitment to partly funding private religious schools in the province. If elected premier, John Tory, the Progressive Conservative Party leader, declared he would establish a commission to look into how this should be accomplished.

Ironically, he promised that Ontario's former premier, William Davis, would head up the proposed "public-education-fairness implementation commission". Perhaps it shall never be known whether the funding of non-state religious schools represented some unfinished business previous-Premier Davis had when, to the surprise of almost all of his caucus, he had announced on the morning of June 12, 1984 that separate schools would be fully funded. The election proposal of Tory was presented as a means of "integrating" the other (than Roman Catholic) private religious schools into the public system (CanWest

News Service, The Ottawa Citizen, July 24, 2007). Although the majority of voting

Ontarians in the 2007 election indicated their continued disengagement from the notion 11 of expanding funding to either tuition-paying parents or to faith-based schools, the topic generated widespread discussion throughout the summer and fall of 2007.

Many contend that private schools not only weaken public schools but that they undermine the common good, and regressively perpetuate segregation. This was the claim of Premier McGuinty in the debate during the fall election of 2007. When he addressed cabinet on August 24,2007 he said, "If you want the kind of Ontario where we invite children of different faiths to leave the publicly funded system and become sequestered and segregated in their own private schools, then they should vote

[conservative]" (Greenberg, 2007, par.4). By making such claims he aligned himself with the likes of Michael Apple (2000) and other critical theorists who claim that non- state schools are supported by anti-social, non-conformist sorts of parents, parents who do not recognize the "social glue" (p. 262) of public schooling which strengthens local communities. Some, such as Apple, explain that through their "politics of recognition"

(that is, demands for political recognition) private school parents endorse the exploitation, economic marginalization, and deprivation latently embedded in the "politics of redistribution" (that is, any state support of non-state institutions) (p. 266-67). Others have suggested that it is not selfishness as implied above, or an aloofness from society,

that keeps some school parents away from state schools, but rather it is wealth. The rich

will always be inclined to buy something different for their children whether it includes high priced toys, exotic travel, or designer clothing. They want to spend money on the education of their children and private schooling fits that consumer need. Thus, while the

story of education in Ontario suggests that the theme of religion in education may explain

3 Allison (2007). In conversation. 12 much of the predilection towards non-state schools, others claim it is riches or selfishness.

One other small but relevant milestone along the road of non-state education in

Ontario was Policy / Program Memorandum 131 (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2002).

PPM 131, as it is commonly called, was issued to public and separate school boards by the Ministry of Education on June 17, 2002 to clarify how boards are to deal with students who were being home schooled. PPM 131 represented a significant policy change in that it restructured the manner in which home educated students and their families were to be regarded and treated. Home schooling was deemed to meet the

"satisfactory instruction" requirement of the Education Act s. 21(l)(a), unless evidence to the contrary was produced. Home schooled students across the province would be

expected to register with their local board but inspections would no longer be

sporadically conducted as had been the previous practice. Home schooling was to be treated like a private school in the province, and thus accepted, without inspection, as

offering satisfactory instruction.

It is within this historical and legislative context that we return to our original

question, why do parents choose non-state schools in our times? What exactly are the attractions? Given the role of religion in the history of education since Canada's

founding; given particularly the space created in Ontario for minority religious education

in the separate schools; given all the subsequent debate in the courts and on the floor of

the legislature; and given changing views of the place of Christianity and other religions

in state schools, one might initially assume religion to be almost the defining reason for 13 selecting a non-state school in our times. Certainly the parent quoted in the epigraph held that view. But is this accurate? Is it complete?

Moreover, before broad theoretical discourse can be had on the threat non-state educational choices may pose to state-provided options, or on society as a whole, and before immersion in discussions of the justice or injustice embedded in public recognition of one form of schooling over another, there is surely a need for a focused inquiry into contemporary reasons for selecting non-state schools. This is the focus of this dissertation.

If the Premier's numbers are correct, and two hundred new private schools have indeed opened recently in the province and there was a forty percent growth rate in the number of student attendees in these schools during the eight years leading up to 2004, does this translate into meaningful growth in the sector? If so, then it must be asked why is this growth occurring? Or, more specifically (and this approaches McGuinty's central concern), why do parents appear to be increasingly choosing non-state schooling for their children when, for most, the state-provided options are available, accessible and ostensibly free? More specifically, what are the reasons contemporary parents give for seceding from state-provided educational options in the province of Ontario? What can the designers and guardians of state schools learn from the stories of some who have seceded?4

4 The choice to use the word 'secede' here and in the text that follows to describe the action of parents in Ontario who chose non-state schools came as a result of an initial intuition, later confirmed by the inquiry. Given the widespread attendance of K-12 students in state schools, most Ontario parents must give some consideration to that option for their children, either through actual experience and then withdrawal or by considering the option from afar and making a conscious decision against it. In either case, it appeared that they were 'seceding'. To secede, the New Webster dictionary (1991) states, is "to withdraw formally from membership in some body, especially from a state, federation, etc" (p. 901). 14 Some contend that the flight of the middle-class from public to private education is pure myth (Goddard, 2000). Even if it is an overstatement to claim that there is a flight to non-state options, there is solid evidence of an increase in non-state choices.

Private school attendance in Ontario is indeed growing. Figure 1.1 below demonstrates student enrolment numbers as provided by Neibert (2006, p. 4-5). Only 1.9 percent of the student population in 1960 attended private schools (that is 26,175 students); by 2003 this had risen to 123,000 (5.7 % of the student population). Combined with evidence that an additional one percent of students may be home-educated in Ontario (Ontario Federation of Teaching Parents, 2006), there is sufficient justification to claim that the non-state educational sector has quadrupled in the last four and a half decades, while the public system has not so much as doubled from 1.39 million students to 2.1 million (Neibert,

2006, p. 4-5) during the same period. Even if we agree with Goddard (2000) that this does not represent a mass exodus from state to non-state options, it nevertheless suggests strong and sustained momentum. Moreover, the number of students attending non-state schools is by no means trivial. The population of students in Ontario non-state educational settings is larger than all students attending publicly-funded boards in each of the Canadian territories and a number of provinces (for example, Newfoundland had

79,439 students in K-12 during the 2004/2005 academic year [Newfoundland Department of Education, 2007]). Thus by some measures this sector is large. Yet regardless of the absolute size it is an education sector which has continued to grow over the last half century. Hence the enduring relevance of this central concern: why do parents in our times continue to choose, sometimes at great personal expense, non-state schooling for 15 their child(ren), while state-provided options are accessible, populated by the vast majority of students, publicly celebrated and embraced, and formally free?

^4UUUUUn 240000

1800000- Ay 180000 o o o°° ^§1200000- o 120000 < Q. A CD CD

600000- 60000

0- 1 1 1950 1970 1990 2010 Year

Figure 1 Enrolment in Public and Private Schools in Ontario, 1960 - 2003

Used with permission of P. Allison (2007) based on numerical data fromNeiber t (2006, p. 5).

Notes: 1. The private school scale on the right vertical axis is one-tenth of the public school (left axis) scale so as to highlight differences in trends rather than absolute numbers. 2. The marked drop in private school enrolments in the mid-1980s shows the extension of'full funding' to senior grades in Roman Catholic schools, moving them to public sector.

In broader context, over the last two and half decades "school choice" in other

North American jurisdictions, as well as in New Zealand, Australia, and elsewhere, has

also been gaining momentum. Goodwin and Kemerer (2002) review the school choice

continuum. Choice of residence in the neighbourhood of a preferred public school is 16 situated on one end. Magnet or thematic public schools are next followed by "state wide open enrollment" (p. 6). The veritable cornucopia of innovations that have emerged in terms of funding structures for non-state schools or the parents that choose them would be situated further along the continuum. Charter schools (where privately established schools receive state funding under an individual contract) and various voucher programs

(where the parents receive funding in some manner to support their preferred school) are two of the major mechanisms by which active school choice has been encouraged.

Merrifield (2001) and others have analyzed some of the more prominent innovations such as the Milwaukee and the Cleveland voucher programs. Moreover, the literature of the school choice movement is alive with economic analysis and terminology and can be characterized by its purported concern with two primary goals, academic achievement of students, and efficient design and delivery of schooling. One Cato Institute analyst has labeled the ratio of achievement to spending as "the productivity of schools" (Walberg,

2007, p. 3) and decried its decline as achievement in American state schools has not increased in spite of continued increases in spending.

As has been alluded to above, the mechanisms of school choice have been debated in Ontario, one even temporarily legislated in 2003 (then retroactively revoked), but generally the province has remained aloof from the school choice movement. Yet, the rate of growth in enrolment in non-state schools has far exceeded that of state school enrolment over the last fifty years. During the same period growth in numbers of private schools went from 228 in 1960 to 815 in 2002 (Neibert, 2006, p. 4).

Thus, although the number of students remains relatively small compared to the numbers in state schools, the story of non-state schools in Ontario is marked by growth in 17 the last half century This growth has occurred within a storied context of continued protection of parental rights to choose an education for children outside of the state provided system, the increasing secularization of the state schools, and a context of recognizing and providing for the education of one minority religion (Roman Catholic) since the country's confederation, a system which now educates approximately one third of all Ontario elementary and secondary school students. This growth has also occurred within the larger context of the school choice movement. Yet the usual legislative mechanisms of school choice have not been adopted in Ontario. This makes Ontario an excellent site for investigating the reasons contemporary parents would select non-state

schools for their children. Unfettered by financial incentives—some might claim hindered by the financial burden of paying entirely for their selection—increasing numbers of parents in Ontario have been choosing non-state schools, and every year more non-state schools open their doors.

Research questions

This inquiry, then, focuses on why parents in our times choose non-state schools

for their child(ren). What reasons do contemporary parents in Ontario give for choosing

non-state schools for their children? What are the attracting features of these schools?

Can any implications can be drawn from the reasons parents give about whether non-state

schooling is, as Ontario's current Premier has implied, a "disturbance"—or even a threat—to the established system of state education? Or do the reasons, when analyzed,

suggest that non-state school selection may be instructive about alternative designs for

public education in our times. 18 While these questions are situated in the enduring and broad discourse on (a) the social and economic—both public and private—purposes of education and (b) of the rights and responsibilities of parents to direct the education of children through public and/or private means, it was not the intention of this inquiry to address these issues. It is accepted that education, however attained, has both private benefits to an individual and public benefits to the society in which the individual lives, works, plays, consumes and contributes. For the purposes of this inquiry, the important role in the education of their children that parents play—whether a right or a responsibility or both—is accepted, and hence parental views are accepted to be valuable in their own right. So, while my central question—why some Ontario parents choose non-state schools for their children—is theoretically situated in the context of education's essential problems, and finds its heritage and its future in profoundly moral and political territory, it is uniquely grounded in the lived lives of everyday citizens making ordinary decisions about their children.

And it is the nature and substance of these decisions that were the main concern of this inquiry. This does not hinder me from taking some liberties in suggesting implications for educational design in our times and I offer them as a logical conclusion of the analysis in this dissertation.

The guiding research questions for this inquiry were:

1. What reasons did a sample of contemporary Ontario parents give for

choosing non-state schools for their children?

2. What accounts did some of these parents give of their experiences with

non-state schools in Ontario? What stories did they tell? What might

these stories mean and imply for educational design? 19 The responses were considered within the larger conceptual orientation of schooling arrangements in Ontario and elsewhere and within a conceptual framework for mapping the features of schools. Thus, this inquiry sought not only to identify and categorize parentally prized features and facets, but attempted to make theoretical sense of such preferences. As has already been alluded to, and as we shall see in the following chapter, the arrangements for private schooling in Ontario are unique when compared to other Canadian provinces and thus, not only does this inquiry address questions of a more immediate political nature of relevance in the province, it also proposes a theoretically grounded analytic framework of the attracting features of non-state schools in general.

This is accomplished by eliciting distinctions between parental preferences, by carefully categorizing those distinctions, and by probing whether these preferred distinctions might ultimately suggest altering the schooling arrangements in the province.

Significance

Momentum in the non-state sector is not only reflected in increasing numbers of schools and enrolments, but also in the policy and regulatory debates, proposals, and changes that have occurred in recent years regarding state funding of non-state schools or the parents who support them. Most recently in Ontario, the tax credit for tuition-paying parents proposed in May of 2001, enacted in June of 2003, and revoked in December of

2003 (Ontario Ministry of Finance, 2001; Ontario, 2003; Sorbara, 2003) was followed by the emergence of private school funding as a central policy issue of the October 2007 provincial election in Ontario. 20 Thus the matter of private education and why it holds increasing appeal to some

parents despite its failure in capturing the approval of a majority of voting Ontarians is a

salient and timely issue. With on-going political attention to the issue of the possible

relationship between public and private systems of education and with on-going attention

to the issue of the possible impact of the growing private system on the public system, the

identification and analysis of the reasons parents give for their attraction to private

schools in the continued absence of official state support and embrace of such systems promises a relevant and timely contribution. The implications for the design of school

arrangements in Ontario and elsewhere that might emerge from such an inquiry could

also be of some significance.

Approach to inquiry

This dissertation builds on and extends a series of inquiries into the phenomenon

of non-state education in which I have been involved. Recent study includes a master's

thesis on the philosophy of education of Charlotte Mason (Van Pelt, 2002), a late

nineteenth-century British educationalist whose ideas are receiving attention in various

international private educational settings. Further inquiry in this area is on-going (Van

Pelt, Beckman, & Smith, 2008; Van Pelt, Smith, Beckman, Thorley, Cadora, & Coombs,

2009). Other recent inquiry into non-state education includes a national study on home

education in Canada (Van Pelt, 2004) and a current longitudinal inquiry into adult

characteristics and attitudes towards home education of Canadians formerly home

educated (Van Pelt & P. Allison, 2008). 21 This present inquiry is part of an ongoing project investigating education choice in Ontario, with a focus on understanding non-state schools in Ontario, their supporters, and their supporters' reasons for seceding from state schools. Funding for questionnaire production and distribution was received by the Society for Quality Education. As discussed in much greater detail in this chapter and several that follow, a data set was compiled from a survey of overl800 parents (representing 920 households) who had one or more children in one of 38 randomly selected private schools in Ontario in 2006.

Parents completed an eight-page pen-and-paper booklet-style questionnaire designed to collect demographic data on the households, parents, and children, including a history of the child's mobility between school systems.

Survey sample procedures, data collection methods including questionnaire design, and approach to data analysis are discussed at length below, with further details of data analysis reported in chapters four and five. Inquiries of this kind bring with them a bundle of epistemological concerns. For clarity, I have decided to defer discussion of these until the opening of the following chapter.

Ethical approval for this study was received from The University of Western

Ontario on January 5, 2006; ethics review documentation is in Appendix A. Other preliminary reports based on this on-going inquiry into aspects of Ontario non-state schools have been made. They include an introduction to the study (Allison, D., Van

Pelt, & Allison, P., 2007a), aspects of non-state schools such as student enrolment, founding date, number of teachers and certification status (Allison, P., Allison, D. & Van

Pelt, 2007); the demographics of parents who choose non-state schools (Allison, D., Van

Pelt & Allison, P., 2007), and two of three approaches to understanding parental reasons 22 for choosing a private school (Van Pelt, Allison, P., & Allison, D., 2007a). A

monograph incorporating and building on the three papers above was published (Van

Pelt, Allison, P., & Allison, D., 2007b). The analysis in this work centres on a set of

previously unanalyzed data with a view to understanding it within the context of the other

data collected and analyzed and to probing its potential to amplify those earlier

preliminary analyses and findings.

School selection and data collection

This study of non-state schools began with a decision on what would be considered as a non-state school. The Education Act of Ontario defines a "private

school" as "an institution at which instruction is provided at any time between the hours

of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. on any school day for five or more pupils who are of or over

compulsory school age in any of the subjects of the elementary or secondary school

courses of study and that is not a school as defined in this section" {Education Act,

s.l(l)). A "school" is defined as "(a) the body of elementary school pupils or secondary

school pupils that is organized as a unit for educational purposes under the jurisdiction of

the appropriate board, or (b) the body of pupils enrolled in any of the elementary or

secondary school courses of study in an educational institution operated by the

Government of Ontario, and includes the teachers and other staff members associated

with the unit or institution and the lands and premises used in connection with the unit or

institution" {Education Act, s. 1(1)). A "district school board" is defined as "(a) an

English-language public district school board, (b) an English-language separate district

school board, (c) a French-language public district school board, or (d) a French-language

separate district school board" {Education Act, s.l(l)). 23 Private schools in Ontario, as defined by the Education Act, became the population for this study. Private schools in Ontario must submit a "notice of intention to operate" (Education Act, s.l6(2)) by the first of September of each academic school year.

On the basis of these notices the Ministry maintains a current list of operating private schools. Schools listed on the Ministry of Education website were thus the working population for this inquiry. This ministry list of registered private schools provided some classification of the schools and reported self-identified affiliations of each school, where these were reported by the schools. Although the list was initially helpful, it became clear that the classifications were incomplete and inconsistent. For example, all Jewish schools were classified in one category whereas Christian schools were identified by multiple affiliations.

Working from the list of schools, the classifications and the affiliation provided, five types of schools were initially identified: first nations, international, religious,

Conference of Independent Schools, and a fifth residual category for all others. The CIS schools were identified as a distinct category by following Davies and Quirke (2005) who recognized three types of private schools in Ontario: first sector, traditional academic

"elite" which they equated with all those on the CIS list; second sector, religious; and third sector, all others.

Those listed as First Nations Schools ^=34) and those listed as International schools (n=44) were removed from the sampling frame. First Nations Schools were excluded because they are funded by federal transfers and are thus not comparable to non-state fee-charging schools. International schools were excluded because, by definition, they enrol children of off-shore rather than Ontario-resident families, and 24 therefore are not in competition with state schools. Three categories of schools remained: religious, CIS, and other. Working from the enrolment numbers in the ministry list and assuming an average of 1.2 children per family, it was assumed that there were approximately 30,000 families with children attending schools in each of these three categories.

A sample size of 588 is required to achieve a 4 percent confidence interval for a population of 30,000. Assuming a response rate of 33 percent, this dictated a target sample of 1800 families in each of the three school categories. Schools in each of the three categories were drawn at random (using an online program called 'The Hat' [2006]) until sufficient schools had been drawn to include 1800 families in each school category.

This procedure resulted in a contact list of 65 schools. The governing agents (boards, partners, principals, or other operators) of these randomly selected schools were invited to participate in the study. If the governing agent agreed, then a package of questionnaires was sent to the school. A cap of 120 questionnaires was imposed to ensure that schools with a large enrolment would not unnecessarily bias responses. Principals at each participating school were instructed to distribute questionnaires to families as appeared appropriate to them. Each of the questionnaires to be distributed to families contained a letter of information explaining the study to parents and a return envelope. Participating parents were asked to complete the questionnaire and return it in the sealed envelope to the school office for subsequent collection. The Letter of Information for Principals,

Letter of Information for Governing Units, Letter Accompanying Questionnaire Bundle to each participating school and Consent Form for Principals are included in Appendix B. 25 It proved far more difficult to recruit schools than initially anticipated. While the initial contact list identified 65 schools, a total of 112 schools were eventually contacted. Every time a school declined to participate sufficient replacement schools were added to make or exceed the estimated number of families in the school that had declined. A total of 4,400 questionnaires were eventually distributed to 53 schools that chose to participate.

The length of time to contact willing schools and distribute materials created an additional challenge. Attempts to recruit schools began in late February and continued until the end of March, 2006, at which time it was decided to cease searching for additional schools and distribute the questionnaires to those who agreed to participate.

Questionnaires were to be returned by the end of April, but some were still outstanding in late May. In all, questionnaires were received from a total of 920 households with children enrolled in 38 schools.

During the course of negotiating with schools and arranging for the distribution of questionnaires it became clear that the third category of schools that had been created to accommodate those which were not classified as religious or as members of the

Conference of Independent Schools actually contained other schools which were clearly quite similar to those in the Conference of Independent Schools. Indeed, the tenability of the third category as initially created became more and more suspect as the recruitment of schools proceeded. This category had initially been created by following Davies and

Quirke's (2005) recognition of religious, CIS and other schools. On close inspection it became clear that the third category spanned the entire spectrum of private schools as recognized in various typologies proposed by Boerema (2006) and others as discussed in 26 Chapter two. For example, this initial third category included special needs schools,

Montessori, Walfdorf, one military and a ballet school. In retrospect it became clear that

Davis and Quirke's restriction of their first category to only members of the Conference of Independent Schools assigned all other schools with an academic emphasis to the third category. To compensate for this initial restriction, the CIS category was re-designated as

"academically-defined" schools and schools that appeared, on the basis of information gathered during the recruitment phase to better fit this category were reassigned. Of the

36 schools initially classified as being in this third category that were contacted during the recruitment phase, no less than 30 were reassigned to the academically-defined category. Fourteen of these reclassified schools agreed to participate, seven provided responses.

Once those schools more appropriately identified as academically-defined were removed from the third category, those remaining were clearly special clientele schools of various kinds. As discussed further in the next chapter, this category includes schools that serve special needs students, primarily provide tutoring, or meet special activity concerns such as ballet or military preparation. No schools of this type were included in the final responses generated in the sampling phase of this study. This is not regarded as a flaw or a distorting limitation. As shown in Table 2.4 in Chapter Two this category of schools actually accounts, at best, for 14 percent of non-state schools in the province enrolling some 0.7 percent of the school aged population (14,938 students of the province's 2,104,102 students in 2006 - 2007 [Ontario Ministry of Education, 2009, par.

4]). Moreover, and more importantly, given their specialized mandate they cannot be readily recognized as being in direct competition with state schools. Aspects of these schools have been recently investigated by both Davies and Quirke (2005) and by

Hepburn and Morzek (2004) and in both instances the accounts demonstrate the special purpose, limited clientele character typical of schools in this category.

Admissible, usable data was collected from 920 families with students enrolled in

38 schools. A total of 524 of these families were supporters of religious schools and 396 of academically-defined schools. Despite the disappointingly low rate of return on the questionnaires, the final sample of 920 was within the initial target of a 4 percent confidence interval at the 95 percent confidence level. Assuming a total population

100,000 families supporting all academically-defined (ADS) and religiously defined

(RDS) non-state schools in Ontario5, which is probably an over generous estimate, then a sample of 920 of those families has a confidence interval of plus or minus 3.22 percent at the 95 percent confidence level, and 4.23 percent at the 99 percent confidence level.6

Similar statistics apply for each of the two sub-samples: assuming a population of 42,000

ADS families then the sample of 396 yields a confidence interval of 4.9 percent at the 95 percent confidence level, and assuming a population of 48,000 RDS families the sample of 524 has an associated confidence interval 4.26 percent at the 95 percent level of statistical confidence. Moreover, these statistics apply to the worst case percentage response condition (i.e. 50% positive responses and 50% negative). When recalculated at

80 or 90 percent agreement levels, as was obtained with highest rated questionnaire stem responses, then the confidence intervals drop to 2.57 and 1.93 percent respectively (at the

5 The initial typology of schools included three categories of approximately 90,000 families, 30,000 in each. The adjusted typology based on the findings of this inquiry included two major categories of approximately 100,000 families in total. The details of how the adjust typology of non-states schools emerged are reported in Chapter two. 6 Calculated using the sample size calculator available at http://www.survevsystem.com/sscalc.htm and verified using the Raosoft calculator at http://www.ezsurvev.com/samplesize.html. 28 95% level; 3.39% and 2.54% respectively at the 99% level). It must be kept in mind that while great pains were taken to ensure the 38 participating schools were randomly selected, it cannot be known whether the assumption of random distribution of questionnaires within the schools can be satisfied. Even so and on balance it was concluded there were no reasonable grounds for rejecting the admissibility of the sample data. The uncertainties associated with the in-school distribution of the questionnaires require the confidence intervals reported above to be accepted with caution, especially in the case of anomalous finding which diverge from expected patterns and known population values. On this last point, the close approximation of responses to demographic questionnaire items with the corresponding population estimates from census data was encouraging, a point discussed in more detail below.

Questionnaire design

The questionnaire was designed to collect data of two kinds, (a) demographic and other characteristics of parents with children enrolled in Ontario non-state schools and (b) their reasons for choosing a non-state school. A complete copy of the questionnaire as distributed is included in Appendix B.

Demographic questions were designed to collect data on family composition and size, mobility between state and non-state schools, religious affiliation, political participation, education of parents, household income, and cultural background. Where possible, questions were selected and replicated from the 2001 Census (Statistics Canada,

2006a, 2006b) and the 2003 General Social Survey (Statistics Canada, 2004). Such replication facilitated comparisons with the comparable population of Ontario parents who did not send their children to private schools. It also ensured that the questions were 29 worded in a controlled, standardized fashion. Where appropriate, response scales were designed to collect demographic data from both parents or equivalents in each family. In consequence, the full data set included demographic responses from a total of

1797 parents in the 920 families.

The second part of the questionnaire was designed to collect parental reasons for choosing non-state schools. Three types of questions were posed. First, drawing on the literature review of reasons parents gave for selecting independent schools for their children as summarized in Chapter Three, 61 questionnaire stems were developed.

Parent respondents were invited to rate the relevant importance of each of these stems in their decision to choose their selected non-state school on a four-point response scale where the choices were "not at all important", "not really important", "somewhat important" or "very important". In the balance of this report, data from this portion of the questionnaire are referred to a 'stem data' or 'stem responses'. In all, a total of 920 questionnaires were returned with full or partial responses to the stems.

The second measure invited respondents to state in a single sentence, their "most important reason for sending your child(ren) to an independent (private) school rather than choosing other options" (question 44). This was supplemented in the immediately following question which invited parents to "describe, in one sentence, your most important reason for sending your child(ren) to this particular independent (private) school" (question 45). Responses to these questions are referred to as 'statement responses' or similar in the following text. A total of 858 responses to question 44 and

850 to question 45 were received. When initially analyzed it was unclear how respondents' answers to the two questions were sufficiently different from one another to 30 warrant analysis. Some answered question 45 with an indication to see their response to question 44. Others were left blank. For the purposes of this inquiry only the

statements provided in question 44 were analyzed.

In the third approach to collecting data on reasons for choice, the questionnaire ended with a blank page headed by this statement:

Is there a particular story about your family's experience with this school, or reason for choosing and staying with this school, that you would like to share with us? We may use your story in publications from this study or future research to help others better understand why you choose an independent (private) school. Please be assured that all identifying information will be removed before publication.

A total of 223 responses to this question were provided. Throughout this inquiry, the responses to this question are referred to as 'stories'.

Approach to data analysis

Chapter two explains in more detail how non-state schools were conceptualized as

belonging to one of two major types. At the end of that chapter, a detailed explanation is

given for the decision to categorize Ontario non-state schools into these two types. It

concludes with categorizing and briefly describing the schools from which questionnaires

containing stories were received. The analysis of data in Chapters four and five proceeds

by separating the data into these two categories and comparing questionnaire response

data. Along the way, Chapter three reviews what has been found through other inquiry

regarding reasons for choosing schools without regard to school category (type of school chosen). It was upon this literature that the stems stating reasons for choosing schools were designed.

A code book was created and all data received were entered into an Excel

spreadsheet. Ultimately 920 rows were created, one for each questionnaire. This 31 spreadsheet was entered into NCSS (2006), a statistical analysis package for qualitative data, and the demographic data were analyzed through simple descriptive statistics. Stem responses were also analyzed through descriptive and frequency analysis with particular attention to the stems most frequently selected as very important to parents' choice.

The sentence statements provided by parents in responses to question 44, although entered into the spreadsheet, were of a qualitative nature, and thus their analysis was somewhat different. A total of 858 distinct statements were offered. All of the 858 statements were reviewed once and an initial aggregated list of all reported reasons was constructed based entirely ori the reasons that emerged from the statements. The initial list included approximately 76 reasons. The items in this list were grouped by theme and eight distinct categories were identified. In most cases the categories contained subcategories and in one case a subcategory required further sub-categorization. Once these categories and their components were identified, the 858 sentence statements were again reviewed and classified according to the category list that had been constructed in the first phase of analysis. A complicating factor was that some respondents provided more than one reason in their sentence statements, reflecting the reality that parents often choose private schools for a multiplicity of reasons. To respect this finding and conserve data each statement was classified as contributing up to (and including) three reason categories. In most cases, these would be the first three reasons mentioned in the statement (unless, as in several instances, an item later in the sentence provided substantially different information). Because of this, totals add to more than 858 as response statements counted towards one, two, or three reason categories. 32 One of the limitations to this question is that it followed the question asking respondents to indicate the importance of 61 possible reasons for selecting private schools. The immediate saliency of such a provided list, while perhaps preparing the respondent to think widely about the multiplicity of possible reasons for their choice, could also have narrowed, focused, or even foreclosed deeper, more divergent thought about possible responses to the question. Nevertheless the data provided by the answers to this question, unlike the earlier question which provided 61 individual possible reasons and asked parents to individually indicate the importance of each reason, provided an additional source of features and factors important to parents when choosing private school.

Another limitation with the question is that not all parents are able to distinctly recall what their initial motivation might have been in choosing their private school.

Some even use language to indicate that what they were reporting is their current experience at the school (e.g. my daughter is happy here). As solid a reason as that might be for continuing to choose the private school, it could not possibly be an initial reason.

Most statements are less obvious than this and the reader must always keep in mind that perhaps the respondent is projecting current reasons onto initial reason, supplementing or supplanting the initial reasons with newer, on-going reasons.

The results of the analysis of the stems and statements is reported in detail in

Chapter four of this dissertation. While some preliminary analyses of the stems and

statements data has been previously reported elsewhere (Van Pelt, Allison, P., & Allison,

D., 2007a; Van Pelt, Allison, P., & Allison, D., 2007b), no analysis of the stories had been undertaken prior to that reported here. Neither has any previous analysis across the 33 three stem, statement, and story data sources been reported. While the stem and statement data reveal much about contemporary parental reasons for choosing non-state schools, this present inquiry sought to probe the meanings conveyed through the voices of the parents in the stories they shared.

The stories of secession used as the data source for this dissertation were analyzed not only for emergent themes but compared with the findings from the stems and statements. This analysis, through using NVivo 7, is found in Chapter Five and a synthesis and analysis in context and in light of the frameworks offered in Chapter Two are reported in Chapter Six, the final chapter of this dissertation.

Summary

Compulsory provision and compulsory attendance are arguably linked as educational triumphs of our times. Yet more than 6% of Ontario parents secede from the usual means of compliance—that of state school attendance for their children—and instead choose non-state schools. It is not entirely clear why growing numbers of parents do so. The next chapter probes the arrangements for state schools and for non-state schools in Ontario and uncovers that Ontario is a unique site in its arrangements for schooling. Chapter two also offers a conceptualization of school features and proposes a typology for conceptualizing Ontario non-state schools, already alluded to in this chapter.

Both will assist in addressing the main questions of this inquiry regarding what is attracting about non-state schools. CHAPTER TWO

CONCEPTUALIZING NON-STATE SCHOOLS AND THEIR FEATURES

In the last chapter the question for this inquiry was established: why do Ontario parents in our times select, in ever increasing numbers, non-state schools for their children? What stories do parents tell about this choice? The chapter sketched the historical context of non-state schooling in Ontario that shaped the current non-state schooling arrangements yet it was not specific nor did it conceptualize these current arrangements and the types of schools within each conceptual category. In this chapter the conceptual framework for understanding schooling arrangements and school types will be established and applied by plotting the schooling arrangements of each province in Canada on the taxonomy. Not only will this reinforce that Ontario is indeed uniquely situated in terms of arrangements for schooling and thus is an excellent site for exploring our question of what compels parents to choose non-state options, but it will also serve as a reference point in the final chapter of this dissertation for discussing the potential policy implications of our findings. The current chapter will conclude with providing an approach to conceptualizing the features of schools in order that features attractive to parents can be analyzed, again with a view to finding meaning behind the stories parents provide and to suggesting the implications of the stories.

The chapter, however, begins with a brief introduction to the epistemological and ontological orientation of this inquiry which explores why asking parents for their opinions is a defensible approach to inquiry. 35 Epistemological and ontological orientation

Social theory has long been concerned with the relationship between the individual and society. How are individuals constrained by social forms? How much freedom do individuals have to choose their lives and their actions? Scott (2000) explains that on either side of this debate are the schools of thought that claim social forces have the effect of reducing the human actor to a position of impotency while reifying institutional properties of society, as contrasted to those schools of thought that emphasize creative or intentional dimension of human activity, downplaying the effects of structures (p. 28). Both Scott and Archer (1988, in Scott, 2000) claim that when theorizing it appears prudent to avoid both the over-socialized or over-individualized perspectives. Archer labels the first "downward conflation" and the second "upward conflation" and claims that accepting the over-socialized view would

condemn us to the adoption of methods which fail to capture the intentional dimension of human agency in the production and reproduction of social institutions. Likewise too great an emphasis on agency may be reflected in the adoption of methods which.. .fail to capture the institutionalized nature of human life. (Scott, 2000, p. 29)

Between the two is the claim of structuration theory which Giddens (1984, in Scott,

2000) describes as "the basic domain of study of the social sciences... [which] is neither the experience of the individual actor, nor the existence of any form of social totality, but

social practices ordered across space and time." (1984, p. 2). Scott (2000) explains:

Human agents may have acquired a store of tacit knowledge which they are unable to articulate in the course of an interview, for example, and that they may be unaware of many of the structural features which define the contexts within which they act, and even that they may be motivated by unconscious forces which are at odds with their professed reasons for action '.. .all social actors, no matter how lowly, have some degree of penetration of the social forms which oppress them' (Giddens, 1984, p. 9). Structural properties therefore cannot be understood or analyzed outside of the reasons social actors have for their actions.... 'every competent member of every society knows a great deal about the institutions of that society: such knowledge is not incidental to the operation of society, but is necessarily involved in it. A common tendency of many otherwise divergent schools of sociological thought is to adopt the methodological tactic of beginning their analyses by discounting agents' reasons for their actions (or what I prefer to call rationalization of action) in order to discover the 'real' stimuli to their activity, of which they are ignorant. Such a stance is not only defective from the point of view of social theory, it is one with strongly defined and potential offensive political implications. It implies a derogation of the lay actor' (Giddens, 1984, p. 8 in Scott, 2000, p. 30).

In this inquiry I recognize that social actors have "reasons for their actions" when choosing alternatives to state schooling. The epistemological question for this inquiry is

"can we ever fully or accurately understand what these reasons are?" I hold that we can approach some indication of actors' responses to institutional structures by considering what they choose to do as well as asking them, as suggested above, their reasons for doing as they have done. Methodologically the implications are not entirely simple. How can we know why anyone does as he or she does? How can we sensibly ask them their reasons for acting?

Before I move to specifically to discuss the methodological aspects of this inquiry

I want to elucidate, a little more precisely, my ontological and epistemological stance. I continue to follow Scott (2000) and draw on Elgin (1996).

I hold to a view of reality and how it is known that has been described as realism.

Ontologically and epistemologically it is positioned somewhere between naive realism and radical relativism. Scott (2000) offers an explanation of the positions. Naive realism is the closest to a positivist / empiricist approach which holds that what is given to the senses—senses which must be cleansed as thoroughly as possible of preconceptions—is the world as it is. This is the world as it is and not the world as 37 constructed by communities of knowers. In this approach language is a neutral medium. Events are treated in isolation and events are equivalent. Scott explains that this approach collapses text into reality and ontology and epistemology are conflated.

The knowing of the world is conflated with what the world is, and thus the question of knowing is bypassed. On the other end of the continuum is radical relativism. This stance holds that the world or reality does not and cannot exert a specific influence on the mind.

It is entirely up to us as to how we see the world. By substituting one conceptual frame for another we literally change the world. In this approach it is not possible to develop criteria whereby we can judge one version of reality against another as each mind creates its own world without reference to the way other minds create their worlds.

Observational data are never theory neutral, but always mediated through structures, paradigms and world views which are normative beliefs about how interested inquirers would consider the world to be. Disputes are settled by exercises of power, where those with allocative and authoritative resources impose their preferences on the world. In this view reality is collapsed into text and the question of reality is bypassed—knowing / epistemology is all there is (see Scott, 2000, p. 11 -13). The position of realism, somewhere between the two, holds that an observer is not passive but rather an active mediator of knowledge; that the mind works in the world in a public sense and theories about the world are always historically specific and dependent on communities of knowers producing and modifying knowledge. This position holds that epistemology is always transitive, and therefore also subject to the prevailing power arrangements in society; and that ontology is relatively enduring "once we constitute an intransitive dimension, we can see how changing knowledge of unchanging objects is possible" 38 (Bhaskar, 1979, p. 11 in Scott, 2000, p. 14). Thus ontology and epistemology are distinct from one another.

Kuhn (1977) argued that scientists generally choose between theories based on epistemic values—predictiveness, explanatory power, empirical support, simplicity, and agreement with what one has reason to believe. It is possible that one theory might be supported by a given reason while another theory might be supported by another reason.

In such cases, the scientist must weigh the reasons and judge. In other words, Kuhn used a methodology of inquiry which considers scientists to be real agents who decide what theory to accept on the basis of reasons. He also argued in 1977 that because

"idiosyncratic factors" such as background experience, aversion to risk, etc. are involved, two scientists can arrive at different conclusions when using the same choice criteria for selecting amongst competing explanatory theories. Elgin (1996) also presents and defends an account of persons as real agents who strive to develop a reflective equilibrium in their thinking by using the epistemic values. So for both Kuhn (1977) and

Elgin (1996) the general methodology sees decision makers as real agents who choose between theories (or equilibriums) on the basis of their reasons and beliefs. Many have defended this global methodology. For example, Margolis's Science without unity:

Reconciling the human and natural sciences (1987) provides reasons for the global methodology and defends it from critics such as Stephen Stich who argue that belief (and reason) have no role to play in a (social) science account. These remarks are relevant to this dissertation because the thesis will use the global methodology which takes persons to be real agents who choose between real educational options in the world on the basis of their reasons and beliefs. And as in the case of scientific thinking, in some situations one option will be supported by certain reasons while another option will be supported by other reasons. In such cases, the real agent has to weigh the reasons and judge which is the better option. In this thesis I assume that the reasons given to support this global methodology are adequate to justify my inquiry. In what follows, I work within this global methodology.

As inquiry is never a disinterested activity, I recognize autobiographically that my own experience not only as an educator in public schools but also as an educator in private schools, and particularly my own experience in selecting and providing non-state schooling for my own children creates an inescapable bias. My personal and professional experience with school secession will be an unavoidable pre-text for understanding as will my own on-going research program of inquiry into various forms of non-state education, officially over the last eight years, but unofficially extending back decades.

The implications of holding an experience bias and a realist stance for this inquiry include my asking "what is the nature of the reality about which we are attempting to find out? How can we know it? What are the implications of answers to these first two questions for choice of methods if engaging in empirical research?" (Scott, 2000, p. 16).

The approach to this inquiry was introduced earlier and will be more completely discussed in a later section, but, as indicated earlier, I will first outline the adapted theoretical framework for this inquiry.

Frameworks for conceptualizing schooling arrangements, for conceptualizing features of schools, and for conceptualizing school types are offered in succession and then it is proposed that together they provide a theoretical framework for understanding 40 the schooling choices parents make. Paquette (1991)'s model is used for building a

conceptualization of schooling arrangements. Russell (1929), Kandel's (1933) and

Allison's (1991) models of interna and externa are employed for conceptualizing school

features. Carlson's (1964) and Davies & Quirke (2005) model of types of schools are

applied at various points to conceptualize school types.

Conceptualizing schooling arrangements

By now it will not have escaped the reader's notice that the terms selected to describe the schools in question are "state" and "non-state" with occasional use of

"public" and "private" or "publicly-funded" and "privately-funded" to describe the same entities. Rather than a reflection of careless writing, use of these alternate terms is intended to indicate a tension, not only in labeling but also in conceptualizing the entities.

The matter could be easily resolved if we followed the Ontario Education Act and decided to use "public" and "private" as is done there where "public" is a reference to those schools supported entirely by public funds and "private" refers to those schools not

supported by public funds. My concern is that while a binary distinction between public

schools and private schools may be administratively helpful, it provides a theoretically

simplistic accounting of the privateness and publicness of the state and non-state education options. While it may be clear that public schools are generally understood as those supported by public funds and private schools by private funds, other dimensions of schooling arrangements remain buried and understanding of the diversity of possible schooling arrangements remains obscure despite their actual proliferation in other jurisdictions. My most urgent concern is that by continuing to use the terms "public" and 41 "private" we perpetuate a uni-dimensional understanding of schooling arrangements.

Another problem, which I'm not sure I can resolve here, is that the continued use of these terms trivializes the private benefits of public schools and the public benefits of private schools.

To conceptualize schooling arrangements Carlson (1964), Walberg (2007) and

Paquette (1991) offer excellent frameworks upon which to build a conceptual framework of schooling.

Carlson (1964) claims that one single environmental factor affects the nature of the relationship between a service organization and its clients. This factor is the "extent to which the relationship contains the element of selectivity on the part of the members of the relationship...some service organizations select their clients and some do not, and...in some service organizations-client relationships, clients must (in the legal sense) participate in the organization and in others they can refuse to participate" (p. 264).

Table 2.1 below is adapted from Carlson (1964, p. 265). 42

Table 2.1

Selectivity in client-organization relationship in service organizations

Adapted from Carlson (1964, p. 265)

Client control over own participation in iorganizatio n Yes No

Yes Type I Type III Organizational control over admission No Type II Type IV

Given the single factor of selectivity Carlson suggests the typical organization that

would fit in each type. Family practice doctors' offices and universities are Type I

organizations. Type II are less common but might include colleges or adult education

programs that must accept an applicant over a certain age. The least common

organizations are Type III, where the client must participate and the organization has

control over selection of clients. Carlson suggests a citizen army might be an example

but dismisses it because it is not a service organization. Type IV organizations include

prisons, public schools, and public mental hospitals. In his discussion of the differences

between Type I and Type IV service organizations, Carlson (1963) characterizes the Type

IV organization as "domesticated".

By definition, for example, they do not compete with other organizations for clients; in fact, a steady flow of clients is assured. There is no struggle for survival for this type of organization. Like the domesticated animal, these organizations are fed and cared for. Existence is guaranteed. Though this type of organization does compete in a restricted area for funds, funds are not closely tied 43 to performance. These organizations are domesticated in the sense that they are protected by the society they serve, (p. 266).

Type I organizations, in contrast, he calls "wild".

They do struggle for survival. Their existence is not guaranteed, and they do cease to exist. Support for them is closely tied to quality of performance, and a steady flow of clients is not assured. Wild organizations are not protected at vulnerable points as are domesticated organizations, (p. 267)

Not only are wild organizations, like wild organisms, characterized by their ability to adapt to their environments, they also do so quickly, Carlson claims. For the purposes of this inquiry it may be useful to consider non-state schools as Type I organizations and to consider state schools as Type IV organizations. We may be able, through the stories parents tell, to identify adaptations that are particularly attracting to contemporary parents, adaptations that the Type IV school has not yet been able to make but which are regarded as important features of education in our times.

While organization and client selectivity are important features, schools can also be categorized by whether they are government operated or government funded. Table

2.2 below is an adaptation of the model provided by Walberg (2007, p. 14). As helpful as it is for discretely plotting the most salient types of schooling, it does not allow us to account for the recent proliferation of varieties of funding and provision / operation structures in various jurisdictions. 44

Table 2.2

Categories of school funding and operation

Adapted from Walberg (2007)

Government operated

Yes No

Self-schooling N/A Homeschooling For-profit tutoring No For-profit schooling Government Funded Private schooling Early North American locally controlled schools

Traditional public Charter schools Yes schools Ontario separate schools

This is where Paquette's (1991) conceptual framework "for classifying school arrangements" (p. 53) becomes helpful. His framework accounts for three elements, each of which is positioned as a continuum (and not discrete categories), all of which are placed to intersect and create a three-dimensional grid resulting in eight distinct sections.

Thereby schools are no longer understood simply as public or private, but as varying in degrees of publicness or privateness. The three elements he considers are: extent of public/private provision, extent of public/private funding, and extent of public regulation, from high to low. Any conceivable schooling arrangement could theoretically be plotted somewhere on this conceptual grid. Thus private schools in Ontario can be distinctly conceptualized when compared to those in other provinces. Let us more closely examine Paquette's framework. A system that is almost

entirely publicly provided, almost entirely publicly funded and highly regulated would be

plotted (as in Figure 2.1) as near the "completely regulated public monolith" label, while

a system that is almost entirely privately provided, almost entirely privately funded and

very low in terms of government regulation would be plotted near the "deregulated free-

market privately funded and provided schooling" label. The binary opposites of these

positions are indicated by two dark semi-spheres in the following diagram from

Paquette's discussion on this conceptual scheme (1991, p. 54>.

COMPLETELY REGULATED PUBLIC

iTBO FREE-MARKET RIVATELY FUNDED PROVIDED SCHOOLING

Figure 2.1 An adaptation of Paquette's (1991) model for conceptualizing schooling arrangements. 46 Schooling arrangements in each Canadian province currently include options for non-state schools but they vary in type and particularly on amount of public regulation and public funding. The Choice and Accountability in Canadian Education

(C ACE) Technical Report prepared by the Community-University Partnership for the

Study of Children, Youth and Families (2004) which reviewed many aspects of private schooling is a helpful source for summarizing policy aspects of private schooling arrangements in Canada. On the grid below (Figure 2.2) the arrangements for private (or independent) schools in each province are plotted based on two of Paquette's dimensions, amount of funding and amount of regulation. 47

High Regulation

Aa Ma BC, BC2 QCP SKp PEIp

NLp

NSp

Public Private Funding Funding

BC3

ONp

NBP

Low Regulation Figure 2.2 Private provision schooling plotted according to degree of regulation and funding by Canadian province.

Legend Aa - Alberta Accredited Private An - Alberta Non-accredited Private BC1 - British Columbia Group 1 BC2 - British Columbia Group 2 BC3 - British Columbia Group 3 Ma - Manitoba Approved Independent Schools NBp - New Brunswick Private Schools NLp - Newfoundland and Labrador Private Schools NSp - Nova Scotia Private ONp - Ontario Private PEIp - Prince Edward Island Private QCp - Quebec Private SKp - Saskatchewan Private 48 The CACE Technical Report (2004) reviewed the funding and regulation of

"private or independent schools" province by province; these are described below and summarized in Table 2.3 which follows.

Alberta. In Alberta private schools are attended by almost five percent of students and are either accredited or non-accredited where accredited schools receive 60% of instructional funding received by public schools (although no funds are allotted for transportation, operations, maintenance or capital) and all the schools must follow provincial curriculum, teachers must be certified and students must write provincial examinations.

British Columbia. In British Columbia approximately nine percent of students attend one of four groups of independent schools where Group 1 schools receive 50 percent of public funding. This includes most Roman Catholic schools and programs are consistent with BC curriculum and teachers are certified, Group 2 schools meet same requirements and receive 35 percent of public funding, Group 3 schools do not match the curricular requirements or employ certified teachers and receive no funding, and Group 4

are for non-provincial students and receive no funding. Schools are inspected and

students write a Foundation Skills Assessment (Grades 4, 7,10).

Manitoba. In Manitoba, more than six percent of students attend private schools which, in order to be funded, must provide curriculum and standards of education

equivalent to public schools. Non-funded independent schools also exist.

New Brunswick. In New Brunswick, only one percent of students attend private

schools which are minimally legislated, receive no funding and arrangements are not

made for eligibility for the New Brunswick High School Diploma. 49 Newfoundland. In Newfoundland and Labrador, slightly more than one percent of students attend private schools which do not receive funding but must receive permission to operate, follow provincially prescribed curriculum, which may be supplemented by ministry approved alternatives, and students must write provincial assessment standardized examinations and must register with a publicly-funded school district even though attending a private school.

Nova Scotia. In Nova Scotia, one and a half percent of students attend non- funded private schools which must be provincially registered but not licensed, and must offer curriculum equivalent to public schools. The option to recognize programs for High

School Diploma is offered.

Ontario. In Ontario, less than six percent of students attend private schools.

Private schools must notify the ministry of education of their intent to operate, receive no funding, and may apply for inspection to offer Ontario secondary school diploma.

Prince Edward Island. In Prince Edward Island, one percent of students attend private schools. The private schools "must apply for a license ...[by] submit[ting] a plan of operation that includes an outline of goals, a course outline by grade, and plans for staffing the school" (p. 22) All teachers must be eligible for certification and all schools must meet all applicable health and safety standards. While the provincial curriculum need not be followed, curricula must be approved and textbooks may be supplied by the

Ministry if requested.

Quebec. More than nine percent of Quebec students attend private schools some of which receive some funding and all of which must follow provincial curriculum that may be supplemented "by Minister-approved courses or programs" (p. 24). 50 Saskatchewan. In Saskatchewan, private school curricula and programs must be approved by the Ministry although the schools are not mandated to follow provincial curriculum. Schools are reviewed and students evaluated. No private elementary schools are funded and some secondary schools receive 50 percent of provincial funding.

Table 2.3

Funding and regulation of privately provided schools by province (adapted from CACE, 2004)

% of students in Requirements for Regulative requirements province funding attending private school Alberta 5% Accreditted Schools- 60% Follow provincial of instructional costs curriculum, teachers Non-accreditted Schools - certified, students write no funding provincial exams British Columbia 9% Group 1 schools - 50% Group 1 most Roman funded Catholic schools, provincial Group 2 schools - 35% curriculum, teachers cert. funded Group 2 same requirements Group 3 schools - not Group 3 own curriculum, funded teachers not necessarily Group 4 schools - not certified funded, for non-provincial Group 4 Schools are students inspected, students write standardized tests (Grades 4,7,10) Manitoba 6% Funded Funded schools must Non Funded provide curriculum and standard of education equivalent to province New Brunswick 1% Not funded Minimal legislation, no eligibility for New Brunswick High School Diploma Newfoundland 1% Not Funded Need permission to operate, and Labrador follow provincial curriculum, may be supplemented by ministry approved alternatives, students write standardized tests, and must register with a public school district 51 Nova Scotia 1.5% Non-funded Must be provincial ly registered, must offer curriculum equivalent to public schools, High school diploma option Ontario 6% Non-funded Notify ministry of intention to operate, upon satisfactory inspection may offer Ontario Secondary School Diploma Prince Edward 1% Apply for license to Island operate, submit plan of operation, teachers certified, curriculum and texts must be ministry approved Quebec 9% 35% Ministry approved courses must be followed, schools reviewed, students evaluated Saskatchewan Some funding, 50% for Curriculum must be secondary schools ministry approved None for elementary schools

A review of the above plotted schooling arrangements by province indicates that conceptually the common feature amongst non-state schools in Canada is that they are privately provided but they vary greatly in terms of levels of public funding and levels of government regulation. Thus schools that have a significant level of public funding are still considered private; similarly schools with a significant level of public regulation are still considered private. It is only once the school is publicly provided, say in the case of charter schools, that that arrangement suggests the school is conceptually no longer a private school. Charter schools, report to neither a local school board nor school district

(which is the usual feature of a public school) but rather report directly to the ministry yet their provision is not maintained privately and therefore they are not considered, using 52 this conceptualizing scheme, as private schools. To summarize, private non-state schools in Canada are privately provided and not accountable to local boards of education, but can vary in level of public funding and often function within moderate levels of regulation.

It can be seen then, that the schooling arrangements in Ontario are distinct from those in the rest of the country as, unlike anywhere else in the country, Catholic elementary and secondary schools are entirely publicly provided, entirely publicly funded and highly regulated. Thus they would be located in the conceptual grid with the secular public schools.

Furthermore, a scan of the grid above indicates that the schooling arrangements for private schools in Ontario are matched only in level of funding, regulation and provision by those in New Brunswick. Private schools in all other provinces have higher levels of regulation and, in addition, higher levels of funding for private schools are available in half of the provinces.

So, while private schooling may be as equally un-regulated and un-funded in New

Brunswick as in Ontario, private schooling in Ontario is distinct from that in New

Brunswick by the difference in the higher percentage of Ontario students that are attracted to them and by the difference in the absolute numbers of schools. In New

Brunswick one percent of students attend private schools; in Ontario about six percent of

students do so. In New Brunswick, 20 private schools exist; in Ontario in 2009 more than 900 private schools operate.

Thus private schools in Ontario are empirically distinct from those in the rest of the country as indicated by the low level of regulation within which they operate and by 53 the complete absence of opportunity to receive public funding. Furthermore because

Ontario is the Canadian province with the greatest number of private schools, together these factors create an exceptional province for the study of features that appear to attract parents. The schools can be viewed as relatively unfettered by regulatory constraints and rather free to meet and accommodate parental and consumer expectations. What is it then that parents want and that school designers offer, when education is provided in a context of low regulation and no funding?

Conceptualizing schooling features—interna and externa

Now I move to another promised task for this chapter, that of proposing and explaining a framework for the categorization and understanding of the features of

schooling. For this I draw on Kandel (1933) who built his ideas on Russell's (1929) proposal of several years earlier.1 Kandel's proposal was further explicated and

diagramed in the Report of the Royal Commission on Education in Ontario in 1950, an

explication that informs my own model proposed in a later chapter of this dissertation.

Allison (1991) also fruitfully used Kandel's proposals to explain the divisions of

responsibility in school administration.

In his consideration of international systems of schooling in the early to mid- twentieth century, Isaac Kandel, a foundational contributor in the study of comparative

education, drew helpful theoretical distinctions between two types of features of schools.

Although most of Kandel's (1933) investigation considers state-regulated schools, the

lens is promising for the purposes of this inquiry as his distinction between school

' I am indebted to Derek Allison for his suggestion of this approach to understanding features of schools. 54 characteristics appears to provide useful points around which to group the

characteristics of schools. When compared with Russell's (1929) conceptualization and then with Allison's (1991) a progression in the sequence of conceptualizations can be noted.

Kandel asserted that aspects of schools can be classified as either "externa" or

"interna". "Externa", for Kandel, included "those factors that make an efficient educative

process possible" (p. 58) including those aspects that can arguably have little or no

essential impact on pedagogy. Items such as compulsory attendance, teachers' salaries,

qualifications and pensions, class sizes, buildings, length of school term and of school

sessions and other decisions about physical environment, such as medical inspection and

treatment qualify as "externa". "Externa" "make it possible to bring the right pupil to the

right school under the right teacher; they ensure that equality of opportunity which

democratic systems of education are seeking to provide" (p. 216). Kandel's "interna", on

the other hand, include all those aspects of the school which are essential to its purpose,

such as curricula, courses of study, methods of instruction, approval of textbooks,

assessment and examinations, standards of achievement, time-schedules, and student

admittance. "Interna" are those "aspects of education for the promotion of which

teachers and pupils are brought together...these are aspects of education which cannot be

legislated and prescribed from above if genuine progress, adaptation to the pupils and

their environment, and professional initiative on the part of the teachers are to be

encouraged" (p. 216). According to Kandel, centralization of "externa" will promote

equality of opportunity as "certain definite and recognizable standards can be set up" (p.

237), while decentralization of "interna" — "the actual content and conduct of instruction" 55 (p. 238) — will "encourage the development of the professional growth of teachers" (p.

217) and allow for "local initiative and local adaptation" (p. 238). A major concern of

Kandel's was to expand the professionalization of teaching, or as Sato (1991) calls it "the

conversion of teaching into profession" (p. 241), and this autonomy of judgment in

context is reflected in his interpretation of "interna".

Russell (1929) did not appear to specifically have this issue of professionalization

in mind when he delivered his speech in July of 1929 to the General Assembly of the

National Education Association meeting held in Atlanta, Georgia. Russell (1929)

explained what he observed as "internal" and as "external" in European education of his time.

Internal has to do with what is taught, how it is taught, how the teacher is trained, and the life and spirit of the school. External deals with seeing that the pupils attend, providing suitable places for instruction, keeping the school building clean and habitable, the pupils well, the teachers paid, the equipment provided. The chalk that the teacher uses is external; what he writes with the chalk, internal. His salary is external; what he teaches and the way he does it, internal. That the pupil shall be given glasses so that he may read is external; what he reads is internal. The pupils march out of the building to study plants in the garden; this is internal. The janitor walks into the building to fire the stove; this is external, (p. 29)

Russell summarizes: "The material side of education is external; the spiritual and mental

side is internal" (p. 29) and he concludes "so commonly is this concept accepted in

Europe that different school officials are assigned; and in general the external is

controlled and supported by governmental units different from those controlling and

supporting the internal" (p. 22). In France at this time, for example, the "internal" were

controlled by Paris and the "external" by the locality, while in the England of his day, the

locality controlled the "internal" and the Parliament the "external". France he calls

centralized, England decentralized. Applied then to the context of non-state schooling in Ontario, the aim of this inquiry can be rendered as asking about what aspects of schools are seceders from state schools most concerned. If the reasons parents give can be categorized as either interna or externa, then an assessment can be made regarding which features of non-state schools are compelling and which of state schools are repelling. Is it the externa, the material side of schooling, or the interna, the spiritual and mental side of schooling, that cause the most parental concern with state schools and provides the most attraction to non-state schools? Russell claimed that "we need centralization to provide equality; [and yet] we fear centralization as a menace to our liberty" (p. 22) and suggested that centralizing the one, externa, and decentralizing the other, interna, will ensure both equality and liberty.

In Ontario, as we have seen from the mapping of schooling arrangements, parents are faced with either entirely centralized or entirely decentralized options, in Russell's view, which place an emphasis entirely on equality or entirely on liberty.

Allison (1991) described "interna" as "the strategic factors at the heart of the schooling process, particularly curriculum, textbooks, examinations, and teacher training, certification, and supervision" (p. 223). "Externa" he describe as "the surrounding elements which condition and support the provision of schooling, such as buildings and personnel policies" (p. 223). School administration in Canada generally has been arranged such that interna is "under the direct control of provincial authorities and delegated defined responsibility for specified externa to local school boards" (p. 223).

The diagram offered in the Royal Commission on Education in Ontario (1950)

(commonly called the Hope Report) assists in further conceptualization of interna and externa for this inquiry. Despite my earlier simplification, the authors of the Hope Report do not simplify the categories by suggesting that in the publicly-funded schools the control of interna or externa are either centralized or decentralized, but rather that almost every aspect of both interna and externa are controlled to some degree by both local and by central authorities. They do conclude, however, that "the Ontario educational system is much more centralized than is commonly supposed, especially in view of the fact that even in those matters over which the local authorities have control their authority must, in many instances, be exercised within limits set by legislation or regulations of the central authority" (p. 183). According to Allison forty years later, the situation remained rather unchanged. Interna, in the Hope Report conceptualization, included: Curricula, aims, philosophy; methods of instruction, courses of study, standards and examinations, and textbooks. Externa "ensure that equity of opportunity which democratic systems of education seek to provide" (Royal Commission on Private Schools in Ontario, 1950, p.

180) and included: a co-ordinated system of schools, financing education, size of classes, medical inspection and health, length of school year and term, compulsory attendance enforcement, compulsory attendance age, character of buildings and playgrounds from

educational and health standpoints, teachers' salaries, teacher certification, teacher training (Royal Commission on Private Schools in Ontario, p. 181). By this account, externa became the natural provenance of the state (a focus on equity) yet as the Report mapped out, interna were also of chief importance to the state at mid-century a situation

that remains, despite some pendulum swings in the 1970s, rather unchanged. 58 Conceptualizing school types

In addition to this conceptualization of schooling arrangements which considers provision, funding, and regulation and the conceptualization of features of schools which considers interna and externa, one additional aspect of the classification of non-state schools needs consideration.

What are the various types of non-state schools in operation in Ontario? How might they be classified? A variety of categories have been offered to describe the types of private schools that have been or currently are in existence in the province of Ontario.

I have reviewed Commission on Private Schools in Ontario (1985), the Ontario Ministry of Education (2005), and Davies and Quirke (2005b) to consider how private schools in

Ontario have been categorized, and I consider Boerema's (2006) work in British

Columbia for further insight. Ultimately I propose a typology that we (VanPelt, Allison,

P. & Allison, D., 2007b) have found most helpful in our earlier analysis and will continue to use, at least in the first stages, in the analysis of the stories in this inquiry.

Shapiro in the Report of the Commission on Private Schools in Ontario (1985) characterized private schools by the period in which the schools were founded in the province. He identified five phases in the establishment and development of private schools, and therefore five types of schools: schools of necessity (late 1700s to 1867), schools of privilege (1829 - 1900), schools of innovation (1900 - 1950s), schools of protest (1960s - 1980), and schools of diversity (1980s and perhaps beyond). The period in which a private school is established reflects something of its purpose, origin, and intended clientele. All operating independent schools in Ontario today were established in the last four phases. For example, schools with religious orientations or affiliation 59 such as Jewish, Amish, Mennonite and many other Christian schools were founded mostly during the period of protest while schools with distinctive educational philosophies and pedagogical approaches were established in the last period, the period of diversity.

In its listing of private schools in the province, the Ontario Ministry of Education

(2005) recognized 20 self-identified affiliations. These affiliations give an indication of the types of schools that exist. While at the time of writing this (Feburary 2009) only 14 affiliations are listed, at that time they were, Armenian Schools, Amish Schools,

Association of Christian Schools International, Conference of Independent Schools, First

Nations Schools, International Schools, Islamic Schools, Jewish Schools, League of

Canadian Reformed School Societies, Learning Centres, Mennonite Schools, Montessori

Schools, Ontario Alliance of Christian Schools, Ontario Accelerated Christian Education

Association, Ontario Federation of Independent Schools, Rehoboth Christian School

Society, Roman Catholic Schools, Seventh Day Adventists Schools, Waldorf Schools,

Canadian Council of Montessori Administrators. The rest, and this is still a large percentage of the schools, are listed as Unaffiliated Schools. While this was a helpful list for recognizing the diversity and types of independent schools, it obscured the similarities between some affiliations and was too cumbersome.

Davies and Quirke (2005) succinctly categorize Ontario private schools into only three groups, or sectors as they call them, drawing attention to the broad distinctions between types of independent schools. They suggest that first sector schools are "well- institutionalized elite" schools (Davies & Quirke, 2005, p. 52), that is, those schools

"listed on an independent registry known as an association of venerable elite schools" (p. 60 528); second sector schools are those that can be "identified as religious" (p. 528); while third sector schools would include all other private schools in the province. The focus of their work has been newer third-sector schools (at the time of their study 49 existed in Toronto and 45 participated in their study), they nevertheless offer an initially helpful and most appealing typology for understanding the differences between and similarities among private schools in the province of Ontario.

Boerema (2006) studied mission statements of 81 of the 86 private schools in

British Columbia that offered a grade 12 program. He "divided [the schools] into six categories: Catholic, Calvinist, evangelical, British-style, international, and First Nations schools" (p. 186), characterized as follows:

The faith-based schools—Catholic, Calvinist, evangelical—reflect a desire to provide academic training that arises from the school communities' beliefs and that focuses on service to God and others. The First Nations schools are focused on maintaining a community's language and traditions while at the same time preparing students for roles in a larger society. The British-style preparatory schools provide a strong academic training that focuses on preparation for university and carrying out service in some of the most powerful roles in the community. International schools are businesses that are filling a market niche of providing English language teaching for international students, (p. 187)

In contrast to Davies and Quirke who focused their investigation on third sector schools,

Boerema does not investigate the other five independent British Columbian private

schools—presumably third sector schools by Davies & Quirke's definition—because they

did not fit any of the six groups analyzed. This also indicates the difference in the

direction of private school growth in the provinces of Ontario and British Columbia.

In our (Allison, P, Allison, D. & Van Pelt, 2007) earlier work on types of private

schools in Ontario we were guided primarily by Davies and Quirke and initially regarded 61 non-state schools as consisting of three sectors. Our dissatisfaction with their first sector category including only those that belonged to one affiliation (Conference of

Independent Schools) as well as our concern that the third sector was characterized as being a recently established school, led us to continue probing for a more satisfactory typology. As we pored over the twenty-six affiliations of private schools listed by the

Ontario Ministry of Education and studied individual private school characteristics, we recognized that all non-state schools in the province declared, in way or another, a strong academic orientation, with many also claiming a high degree of individualization and enrichment in the instruction offered. In these senses, then, all can be regarded as

"academically-oriented", whether they are small or large, traditional or avant garde, for- profit or charitable, following a specific educational philosophy or targeting a specific population. The main source of differentiation, we concluded, is whether this academic emphasis is accompanied by additional distinctive features, such as a religious identity or a commitment to serving a special clientele. In such cases we tentatively concluded that this source of additional distinction should be accorded priority when seeking to differentiate between different kinds of schools. Proceeding on this basis, we identified three broad types of private schools (a) Academically-Defined Schools (ADS), which are have no distinctive characteristic other than their declared academic or pedagogic orientation, (b) Religiously-Defined Schools (RDS) which have a declared religious character in addition to their academic orientation, and (c) Special Clientele Schools

(SCS), which cater to distinct populations, needs or aspirations in addition to a commitment to academic quality. See Table 2.4 below for this initial typology as applied to Ontario non-state schools. 62

Schools Enrolments # % Min Max Med Total Academically Defined Schools 327 37% 6 1514 99 55478 CIS 23 16 1173 300 8363 Profit 20 6 1514 63 3264 French 16 21 1260 192 4403 Montessori 109 8 1152 90 144410 Waldorf 8 29 427 100 1104 Other 151 6 1486 105 23593

Religiously Defined Schools 425 48% 6 1446 90 63774 Christian 339 (80%) 6 1243 78 43721 ACSl 48 9 808 96 7223 Adventist 8 12 526 67 1001 Amish 19 6 31 27 464 Armenian 2 91 363 227 454 Baptist 6 13 267 76 614 Brethren 1 26 - - 26 Christadelphian 1 25 - - 25 Greek Orthodox 1 111 - - 111 LCRS 14 26 417 116 1842 Lutheran 3 16 203 133 352 Mennonite 85 11 458 32 4373 OACEA 18 21 313 66 1588 OACS 72 12 501 175 12916 RC 20 8 1243 156 4267 RCSS 2 132 132 132 264 Unspec. Christian 37 7 956 117 7880 Hindu 1 100 - - 100 Islamic 39 (9%) 12 358 150 5281 Jewish 45 (11%) 8 1446 220 14806 Sikh 1 187 - - 187

Special Clientele Schools 125 14% 6 1285 79 14938 Adult 1 50 - - 50 Ballet 2 50 140 95 190 Cooperative 2 50 - - 50 Cultural 7 15 455 80 917 First Nations 35 (28%) 7 730 125 4938 International 26 (21%) 7 1285 116 4987 Lab school 1 176 - - 176 Military 1 130 - - 130 On line 4 50 400 83 616 Special ed 37 (30%) 6 284 50 1852 - general 15 6 251 57 934 - autism 5 6 20 13 65 - behavioural 1 22 - - 22 - gifted 3 8 284 39 331 -ID 13 9 101 30 500 Summer 6 125 125 125 750 Tutoring 3 15 125 92 232

UNKNOWN 8 6 168 74 593 TOTALS 885 134783 63 The term "definition" was used in order to avoid overstating the orientation of a school. There are, for example, some schools in the RDS group who would insist that their academic orientation is at least as important as their religious orientation, and many more who are concerned that labeling them as "religious schools" implies that their sole purpose is religious indoctrination or theological study. Similarly, there are schools in the

ADS group who would resist being labeled merely "academic" because their purposes extend beyond scholastic concerns and include character and moral development, physical well-being and so on. We concluded that it was more accurate to impose the limitation of "Defined", thereby recognizing that the priority given to this specific feature is for the purposes of our typology and does not purport to totally describe the school.

Some schools could arguably be placed in more than one of our three main categories. For example, a Jewish Montessori school, or a traditional boarding school with a Roman Catholic affiliation might both argue that their religious definition is secondary to their academic identity. Our classification scheme takes the opposite view on the grounds that it is characteristics other than the common commitment to academics which are distinctive. Thus, ultimately we decided that religious affiliations were regarded as superceding any other feature of the school, and any distinct educational philosophies or orientation, such as Montessori, Waldorf, special needs, or cultural education would be classified as variations within the academic category, rather than as special populations.

The only anomalies that remained in regards to this classification were international schools and First Nations schools which we decided not to include in our study. International schools generally serve off-shore parents and these were not the 64 target of our investigation, and First Nations schools are federally funded so in this regard they were not similar to the rest of the non-state schools. This categorization

decision while clearly informed by that of Davies and Quirke and of Boerema's categorization of faith-based schools and British-style preparatory schools, nevertheless represents a distinct typology of schools. Thus, for this inquiry we consider two types of non-state schools, religiously-defined non-state schools and academically-defined non-

state schools.

In the next chapter the literature will be reviewed on demographics of parents who choose private schools and reasons parents give for choosing the schools they do. 65 CHAPTER THREE

LITERATURE REVIEW OF NON-STATE SCHOOL SUPPORTERS AND

THEIR REASONS FOR CHOOSING

"Although both my husband and I work full time so we can afford the tuition, the teachers are still available to constantly communicate with us during evenings " (251).

It really upsets me when I hear politicians or people whose children do not attend private schools, talk about how we are all "rich people " with too much money and that we don't deserve any help to send our children to a private school. lam not a "well off person. My husband and I work two jobs, as well as try to run a farm. We have four small children and it is very hard every month to make ends meet ...I choose to send my children to an independent school to give them the best start possible. It's not easy - and if that means that we have to go without fancy vacations, home renovations or other luxuries in life - then so be it. My husband and I both feel that there is no sacrifice too great for our kids. (051)

This chapter provides a broad context for understanding parents who select non- state schools for their children and their reasons for choosing. It reviews the literature on what is known about supporters of non-state schools and their reasons for choosing them.

Demographics of parents

who choose non-state schools

While suggestions abound about the wealth and the segregation tendencies of parents who select non-state schools for their children, little has been reported on the demographics of parents who do so in Canada and, even less so, in Ontario. The recent

Canadian study (Community-University Partnership, 2004) which extensively considered 66 school choice and accountability in a number of western countries, concluded with a call for more research on who chooses choice in Canada. They argue that given the cultural, geographical, religious, and financial diversity that characterizes Canadian society and the potential of choice as a mechanism for social change it is increasingly important to know whether "certain ethnic or economic groups" find choice more appealing than others. "Understanding how and why choice is used will become increasingly important as choice options increase in different kinds of communities"

(Brigham, DeCosta & Peters, 2004, p. 67). The noted lack of contemporary empirical study on the question of who chooses non-state schooling in Canada is addressed by this broader inquiry and thus in reviewing the demographics of parents who choose non-state schools, I rely heavily on those findings and report them in the next chapter when I discuss the findings of the sample of Ontario parents that participated in the study.

One important distinction regarding the findings of studies of parental demographics of those making school choice in America should be noted. While

American parents state preferences for criteria such as educational quality, religious and cultural values, small classes and high standards (see, for example, Greene, Peterson &

Du, 1998), actual behaviour reveals a different predictor of choice in the US, with a match between the racial composition of the school and the household (see, for example,

Weiher & Tedin (2002). While the racial distinctions predictor may not map onto the potential differences between stated preferences and actual behaviour in a Canadian context, it does indicate the eventual need for a finer analysis of the possible discrepancies between what parents say and what parents do as they choose private schooling in Ontario. Hence the question of whether "ethnicity and economics"—despite what parents may say is attracting them to their non-state schooling option—may play

a more decisive part in parental selection of non-state schooling than expected. For my purposes here, although I am aware to the body of literature pointing in this direction, I do not investigate whether demographics might predict attraction to non-state schools, I only review what was found about the demographics of selectors of non-state schools.

Notwithstanding the above, it is clear that in Ontario because non-state schools receive no government funding, it is indeed higher income families that are situated to more easily access non-state schools, almost all of which charge tuition. The Trends in the use of private education report from Statistics Canada (2001) indicated that families

in top income brackets are more likely than those in lower income brackets to choose private school (for example, 6% of publicly schooled students lived in households with

annual incomes over $125,000 while 17% of privately schooled students lived in households where the income is over that amount). Yet the Trends study and the data

collected at the beginning of the survey from which the stories came indicate that not only the wealthy choose non-state schools, and that not all non-state school selectors are

wealthy. These details will be reviewed in the next chapter where findings on parental

demographics and reasons from the Ontario survey are reported and discussed. The point

in this brief review is that little by way of demographics of parents who choose private

schools has been collected.

Reasons parents choose non-state schools

Although a variety of sources in the literature deal with the question of parental preference / choice / attraction to non-state / private / independent schools, little of this work has been done in Canada and even less in Ontario. In this section, I review the

exemplars in the literature to summarize the various features of non-state schools that parents have claimed are attracting.

In general the literature on reasons parents choose private schools is of two sorts.

One provides deductive and rhetorical analyses as to why parents choose the non-state

schools their children attend and the other sort provides empirical studies which asked parents directly why they chose. According to a 2006 Proquest search only one of the 57

doctoral dissertations written on private and/or independent schools since 1980

investigated parental reasons for selecting nonpublic schools and even that was confined to one county in one American state, New Jersey (Sutherland, 1997). Before I probe the empirical studies for school selection reasons, I will review some of the deductive claims

made in the literature.

Paquette (2005) claimed that parents choose private schools because of what they

believe and value about them. He claims that parents primarily "enroll their children in

private schools because they believe such schools better fulfill their vision of what

schools ought to do for the young, especially for their own children" (p. 573).

Parents presumably believe that such schools offer their children higher scholastic expectations and achievement standards in an environment more conducive to both academic success and self-disciplined character development...in addition, parents frequently believe that children have a better chance of forming friendships and connections that will be positive and useful to them both in their personal lives and in future work and careers. Finally private school parents may regard private schools as more propitious than public schools for integration into a broad appreciation of the arts and 'high culture', (p. 573)

Magsino claims that "elite private schools.. .cater to the rich and exist partly to promote

social advancement or inbreeding" (Magsino, 1986, p. 260). Davies and Quirke (2005a) 69 claim that the popularity of private school selection may be the result of living in times of "intensive childrearing" (p. 523) . Axelrod (2005) suggests that parents select and establish private schools because we live in times of "cultural diversity and human rights considerations]" (par. 6). Furthermore, Ungerleider (2003) implies that parents choose private schools so that they can avoid contact with people of backgrounds who hold ideas different from their own (see p. 185).

Several suggest that all parents make a choice regarding their children's education regardless of type of school their children ultimately attend, state or non-state. Guppy,

Crocker, Davies, LaPointe, and Sackney (2005) asked Canadian parents the relative importance of factors in choosing the school "your (youngest) child attends" (p. 41).

They found, in order (from most agreed with statement) the factors influencing school choice (regardless of whether the school is publicly-funded or not) are: close to home

(76%), good academic reputation (72%), sibling in school (60%), special theme/teaching method (56%), friends recommended (42%), met religious views (36%), and other (38%).

Although they suggest that all parents choose for these reasons—which I summarize as convenience, academics, familial factors, philosophical and pedagogical factors, reputation and religion—it is fair to consider whether the same weight would be given to the factors by parents who choose only non-state schools.

In a recent American study, Bell (2005), using a perspective similar to that of

Guppy et al. (2005)—that is, that all parents choose regardless of where they finally settle, state or non-state schools—considered the schooling choices parents made within the context of an American city with "an option-demand choice environment [which means that although].. .children are assigned to neighborhood schools.. .parents can opt 70 out of these schools, most often into charter or magnet schools" (p. 13). She concluded that six categories would capture the 102 reasons parents gave for making their decision about which school to select for their children. Although the choices these parents made, again, were not restricted to choices for non-state schools alone, the categories Bell identifies are illustrative of the types of attracting dimensions of schools and the relative importance of each. Bell's categories are: "holistic" which focus on the child's well- being; "academic" which focus on concerns surrounding teaching and learning; "social" reasons which focus on relational concerns; "logistical" reasons which pertain to location, transportation, and cost issues; "administrative" which focus on how the school is organized and run; and "other" reasons which do not fit in any of the first five categories.

One of the most robust attempts to make sense of parental choice for privately- provided education was undertaken in the 1970's surrounding the initiation of partial

funding for non-state schools in British Columbia (Erickson, 1979). Erickson's study

was meant to capture the then current state of independent schooling before the fuller

effects of public funding would be felt in private schools of British Columbia. In 1986 he

documented one of the earliest empirically derived lists of reasons parents give for

choosing private schools. Through telephone interviews he found that the main reasons

parents chose independent schools in B.C. included: religion/spirituality, academic

quality, discipline, smallness, individual attention, and atmosphere (Erickson, 1986, p.

93-95).

Bosetti (2000), Davies and Quirke (2005) and Mirski (2005) also studied actual

reasons parents gave for sending their children to private non-religious schools. Bosetti

(2000) added aspects of communal identity to the list through her study of Alberta charter 71 schools where she found that parents continue to support—even their failing—charter schools because "the school affords a safe environment that reflects the values and ethnic composition of their community" (p. 179). That parents may be concerned not only with the academic achievement of their children, but also "the kind of subcommunity in which they wish their children to be socialized" (p. 179) is a salient point. Bosetti contends that

"teachers, students, and parents draw on [a mythology of specialness] to derive their identity and meaning, and to build a culture of sentiments, tradition, and practices" (p.

179). Further, Davies and Quirke (2005), in their study of newer "third sector" schools in

Toronto (those that they regard as neither elite nor religious), conclude that these schools are valued by parents because of "their customized offerings... pedagogical freedom, variety, and intimate relations" (p. 545). The '"small is beautiful' ethic" holds contemporary appeal for some non-state school selectors, they found.

As a synthesis to the above studies, I consider Mirski's (2005) master's thesis helpful. He viewed the broader literature on school choice and distilled eight main factors that organize the commonly given reasons for parental choice of private education

for their children. (These include empirically gathered reasons as well as those deductively suggested by academic observers). Mirski lists them as follows: better academic outcomes; better personality and ethical development; safer schools with better

discipline; smaller schools; more efficient and responsive; selective along income lines;

selective along cultural, linguistic, racial or religious lines; and special interest schools (p.

112-114). Although Mirski eventually studied a small subset of secular (non-religious)

independent schools located in only one area of eastern Ontario, and received only

limited parental response to his invitation to participate (n=30), I am nevertheless interested in the ultimate list of prioritized reasons these few parents gave for selecting their independent non-religious schools for their children. The prioritized list from his small group of respondents were: better academic outcomes; smaller schools with smaller classes; better personality and ethical development; responsive, accountable to their clients; more efficient and effective use of resources to deliver more varied programs; selective along cultural, linguistic, racial or religious lines; community schools formed by groups of parents and/or special interest schools; and selective along income lines (p. 80-82).

Each study points to important themes and categories in what is known about why parents choose private or non-state schools for their children. Paquette (2005), Magsino

(1986), Davies and Quirke (2005), Axelrod (2005), Ungerleider (2003), Guppy et al.

(2005), Bell (2005), Erickson (1986), Bosetti (2000), and Mirski (2005) contribute substantively to what might be known about the attracting features and facets of non-state schools and are summarized on Table 3.1 below.

The reasons, in all their fine detail, reported in the literature were then restated and reflected in 61 stems which are reported in Table 3.2 below. These stems were randomly ordered and inserted in question 42 and 43 of the questionnaire. Study respondents were asked to indicate how important the item was to their choosing a private school in Ontario, on the four point scale, "not at all important", "not really important", "somewhat important" and "very important" where the coding for the four items was assigned as 1 for the first option to 4 for the fourth option. Table 3.1

Summary of themes found in the literature on reasons parents choose schools

Broad findings in Axelrod Bell (2005) Bosetti Daviesfe Erickson Guppy et Al Magsino(1986) Paquette(2005) Ungerl eider literature (2005) (2000) Quirke (2005) (198(5) (2005) (2003) (summarized by Mirski, 2005) 1. better academic academic academic good academic scholastic outcomes quality reputation expectations and achievement standards 2. better holistic self-disciplined personality and character ethical development 3. selective along times of social religion/ met religious promote social avoid contact cultural, cultural spirituality views advancement or withpeople of linguistic, racial diversity inbreeding [other] or religious lines and human backgrounds tights 4. safer schools holistic discipline with better discipline 5. special interest build a customized atmosphere special theme / broad schools unique, offerings teaching appreciation of special method the arts and 'high school culture' culture 6. smaller schools smallness 7. more efficient administrative individual and responsive attention 8. selective along cater to the rich forming income lines friendships and connections 9. other logistical times of close to home; intensive sibling in childrearing school; friends recommended 74

Table 3.2

Stems developed from literature review on reasons parents give for selecting schools

Stems randomly ordered in question 42 of questionnaire (unless stated otherwise as q 43) 1. Relational Reasons

Community—historic, established traditional, solidarity, membership, mutual support, identity We know many other parents with children at this school, (q 43) Our child(ren)'s friend(s) attend(s) this school. Part of our family's identity is embedded in this school. A family member works (worked) at this school, (q 43) Other members of our family typically attend this school or one like it. This school provides valuable networks to our family and children. Community—sense of building newer place to belong, enforcing particular diversities and identities The school offers a supportive community. This school offers a supportive, nurturing, educational environment. This school community brings meaning to our lives. This school gives us a sense of belonging. This school has children from diverse backgrounds. This school serves families from a variety of social backgrounds.

2. Academic Reasons

Academic quality This school emphasizes academic quality. Graduates are typically accepted at the universities of their choice. This school has high achievement standards. This school emphasizes basic skills. Parent-teacher collaboration, interaction, communication This school values parent-teacher collaboration. This school offers frequent, detailed and open reporting to parents. In this school parents participate in decision making. Teaching This school has dedicated teachers. This school frequently evaluates student progress. This school offers outstanding classroom instruction. This school values collegial relationships amongst staff members. The teachers in this school regularly assign homework. 75 This school has outstanding, quality teachers. This school has high expectations for teachers. The staff at this school has a collaborative approach to problem solving. Learning atmosphere This school motivates students. This school is flexible and responsive. The students at this school seem happy. This school has a good reputation. This school instills confidence in the students. This school teaches students to think for themselves. This school encourages understanding and tolerance. This school sets high expectations for students. This school offers a sense of being special. This school recognizes student success. Unique curricular and program focus This school offers a broad appreciation of the arts and culture. This school offers a unique educational focus. This school educates the whole child. This school caters to the particular needs of our child(ren). This school serves specific students (e.g., gifted, athletes, etc.) This school offers opportunities unavailable in local public schools. This school has a long tradition of success. Additional services This school has additional activities before and/or after regular classes. This school has enrichment programs before and/or after regular classes. This school has extended day activities that suit our family's needs

3. Logistical Reasons

Size, smallness This school offers individualized attention. This school is small. The class sizes in this school are small. Safety This is a safe school. Administrative and organizational considerations This school is well administered. This school has clear admission standards. The principal of this school provides strong leadership. This school is less expensive than others we considered. This school is one of the closest to our home. This school has clear goals. No other viable alternative We were disappointed with our home schooling experience. (q43) 76 We were disappointed with Roman Catholic separate schools. (q43) We were disappointed with public schools. (q43)

4. Holistic Reasons

Religion, spirituality, character development, morals This school is conducive to character development. This school reinforces our religion. This school teaches right from wrong. This school supports our family's values. This school has good student discipline. Child's preference Our child(ren) wanted to attend this school, (q 43)

This chapter began with reviewing the call by Brigham, DeCosta & Peters (2004) that more should be studied about who chooses choice and why. Certainly in Canada little study has been completed recently on the demographics of who chooses private schools and thus little comparable data is available for Ontario. The Statistics Canada

Trends paper (2001) provided one benchmark study. The literature reveals that much more has been studied in terms of reasons parents chose the schools they do for their children. This was reviewed and served as a source for creating the first question in the questionnaire (consisting of 61 stems to be rated) on reasons for choosing.

The next chapter discusses what was found regarding demographics of Ontario parents and reasons they gave for choosing a non-state school. 77 CHAPTER FOUR:

ONTARIO NON-STATE SCHOOL SELECTORS: DEMOGRAPHICS AND REASONS

Being newcomers in Canada, it has been difficult to find our place in the community... Teachers, principal and all school members let us feel "welcome " and we finally 'belong'. (468)

The administration does all it can to keep education quality high while keeping costs to a minimum, in order to allow families with lower income to be apart of it. (358)

I apologize for not answering your earlier questions in one sentence alone. I did not find that one sentence alone could adequately describe why we choose financial difficulty in order to send our children to a Christian school. When the government finally provided a tax relief for parents sending their children to independent schools, I was relieved that we would get the help we needed. I was appalled that not only was the decision reversed but that people who choose an independent school for their children were painted as financially stable, even wealthy. Although some families are financially better off many of us are average income families who place a greater financial hardship on ourselves in order to send our children to a Christian school. (637)

This chapter reviews and discusses the findings of a survey of 920 Ontario parents. It reports the demographic characteristics of the parents and their reasons for choosing a non-state school for their children.

Demographics of parents

Because the history of education in Ontario, and especially the establishment of non-state schools, is somewhat marked by views of religion, and because our typology of non-state schools identified two main types, religiously-defined and academically-defined schools, these types served as the lens through which to examine parental demographics 78 such as income, education, occupation, and religious affiliation. It appears that demographics and type of school selected, whether academically-defined or religiously- defined, are linked.

The parent questionnaire collected demographic information about each of the

1801 parents in the 920 families surveyed. Many demographic questions were based on those used in the 2001 Census (Statistics Canada, 2006a, 2006b) and the 2003 General

Social Survey (Statistics Canada, 2004) to facilitate comparisons, not only between parents who chose academically-defined and religiously-defined schools, but also with the general population of Ontario families with school aged children. Below is a review

of the demographics and select comparisons as discussed in Van Pelt, Allison, P. and

Allison, D. (2007b).

Families. The vast majority of non-state school selecting families (93%) had two

parents, compared to 80 percent of Ontario families with school aged children in the 2001

census. A slight majority of single parent families had children in academically-defined

schools, as did all three of the families with two female parents. With a median of 2.4

children, participating families appeared similar to comparative 2001 census families,

which had a median of two children aged 6-17. Yet, as Figure 4.1 demonstrates, 45

percent of the families had three or more children, as compared to only 29 percent of the

comparative census families. Parents with children in religiously-defined schools were

likely to have more children. 79

1 child

• Study parents •StatsCan parents

Figure 4.1: Comparison of family size, study families and population at large

Mobility between non-state and state schools. While a growing preference for non-state over state schools is clear, the movement of students is not always one way as indicated in Figure 4.2. Overall, more than two-thirds (68%) of the 2,117 school-aged or older children in the participating families had attended only private schools, and six percent only public schools (other children of families sending at least one child to private school). The remaining 26 percent had moved between public and private schools:

16 percent began in public schools and moved to private; five percent had moved from private to public schools; two percent had moved from public to private and back again; and two percent had moved from private to public and back again. Children from families associated with religiously-defined schools were more likely to have attended only private schools: 75 percent compared to 56 percent from families supporting academically-defined schools. 80

All Public *///////>}

Public-Private-Public

Public-Private Y/W//////SS//S//1

Private-Public-Private

Private-Public

All Private vj;s/jj/>/ss/s//;ss/////;/ss/s/s/sssssssm>77A

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

• Religiously-defined schools 0 Academically-defined schools

Figure 4.2: Patterns of school attendance, all children in sample families

Parents with children in a religiously-defined school were more likely to have attended a private school themselves. Only 12 percent of parents, mostly from religiously-defined schools, had never attended a public school, but 62 percent of parents, evenly distributed between the academically-defined and religiously-defined groups, had never attended a private school at all, further exemplifying the shift in parental preference for non-state over state education in Ontario over the past generation.

Religious affiliation. The greater majority of parents (82%) reported a religious affiliation, the most common being some form of Christianity (72%), followed by Islam

(5.5%), Judaism (3.3%), then very small numbers of Buddhist, Hindu, Sikh (1.3%) and other religions (0.4%). Comparative 2001 census estimates yield a close match to this general pattern, 83 percent of Ontario parents with school aged children declaring a 81 religious affiliation, with 71 percent classified as Christian, 4.5 percent Islam, 3.1 percent Jewish and 4.1 percent Buddhist, Hindu or Sikh. These numbers imply higher proportions of Islamic and Judaic families are likely to choose private schools than are families with other non-Christian religious affiliations. Moreover, the proportions of

Buddhist, Hindu and Sikh parents in our sample were notably lower than the 2001 census population estimates, suggesting parents with such religious affiliations are likely to send their children to public schools. None of the schools in the sample were defined by one of these religions and broader inquiry identified only a very few in the province. Most of the families with Buddhist, Hindu or Sikh parents in the sample sent their children to academically-defined schools, but a handful sent their children to Christian schools.

The 71.5 percent of parents reporting some form of Christian adherence in the survey was virtually identical to the comparable 2001 census estimate of 71.2 percent.

There was a smaller proportion of parents identifying themselves as Catholic or Orthodox

Christians in the data (20%) than was the case in the 2001 census (37%). This is to be expected given the ready availability of publicly funded Roman Catholic Separate schools in Ontario. Slightly more than half (51%) fell into the category of Protestant or other Christian denominations, which is a substantially greater proportion than the 34 percent of comparable parents in the 2001 census. A full 34 percent of the Christian parents in the survey sent their children to academically-defined schools.

Parents who choose non-state schools appear to attach much greater importance to their religious beliefs than respondents to a 2003 survey (Statistics Canada, 2004). Ninety percent of private school parents declared their religious or spiritual beliefs to be important or very important to the way they lived their lives, as compared to 75 percent 82 of Ontario parents in the Statistics Canada survey. Almost all (98%) parents with children in religiously-defined schools declared their religious or spiritual beliefs to be very important to them, but so did many (77%) parents with children in academically- defined schools. A little over half (53%) of private school parents reported attending religious services or meetings at least once a week, but this was so for only 29 percent of the comparison group from the Statistics Canada data. Three quarters (74%) of parents with children attending religiously-defined schools reported attending religious services at least once a week, but only 17 percent of parents of academically-defined schools reported attending this frequently as indicated in Figure 4.3.

Religion is important >(»5i5«/I1iS5*5%V»»ZZ>^^

Attend weekly

Attend less often

Do not attend

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

EHRDS Parents E2ADS Parents BStatsCan

Figure 4.3: Importance of religion and religious attendance

Political participation. Private school parents were more politically active than their counterparts in Ontario society at large. Virtually all (98%) private school parents reported voting in the last federal election, 93 percent in the last provincial election and 83 82 percent in the last municipal election. In contrast, Statistics Canada's social survey data (Statistics Canada, 2004) show only 61 percent of Ontario parents with school aged children reported voting in the last federal election, and 59 percent and 49 percent in the last provincial and municipal elections, respectively. Nine percent of private school parents also reported being actively involved in a political party or group, as opposed to only three percent of comparison parents. Parents who choose private schools are just as likely to be involved in social and fraternal activities as are other parents: 44 percent reported being active in sports and recreational organizations as compared to 35 percent of comparable Ontario parents. Private school parents reported being less involved in union and professional association activity (20%) than did parents in the comparison group (27%) a difference that could be explained by the high incidence of self- employment discussed later. See Figure 4.4 below.

Voted federal

Voted provincial

Active in pol party fc^

Active in arts/culture

Active in prof/union

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

U Study parents IStatsCan Figure 4.4: Comparison of political involvement Education. Private school parents as demonstrated in Figure 4.5 appeared to be much better educated than other Ontario parents with school aged children. While five percent had not completed secondary school, most (75%) had attended university, and almost a quarter (21%) held graduate degrees, nine percent doctorates, i Among comparative parents in the 2001 census, more had not completed high school (15%) and only 36 percent had attended university, six percent having completed a graduate degree, one percent a doctorate. Moreover, private school parents who had not completed a

Bachelor's degree were much more likely to have earned another post-secondary credential (55%) than were parents in the census comparison group (36%). The most common areas of post-secondary study among private school parents were medicine and related health fields, which accounted for twelve percent of the reported fields of study, followed by business and commerce (11%), and then education, recreation or counselling

(10%); respective proportions for our 2001 census comparison group are 4 percent, 4.5 percent and 5 percent.

Parents with children enrolled in religiously-defined schools typically had lower levels of education than those with children in academically-defined schools, but they still tended to have higher levels of education than parents in the general population. Less than one percent of ADS parents had not graduated from high school, compared to eight percent of parents supporting religiously-defined schools, and whereas three-quarters of

ADS parents had at least one university level credential and 14 percent a doctorate, 43 percent of RDS parents had a university credential, and five percent a doctorate.

1 Including medical degrees (5.7% medical doctorates, 3% Ph.D.s). 85

Secondary incomplete

Attended university

Graduate degrees

Doctorates

E3RDS Parents BADS Parents BStatsCan Figure 4.5: Comparison of parental education levels

Employment. Twelve percent of private school parents reported being employed as professional health workers, as compared to three percent in the comparison census population. Business occupations provide an even sharper illustration of the effect of parents' education. A quarter of private school parents (24.7%) worked in management positions, as compared to 13 percent of 2001 census parents, and six percent of the private school parents were senior managers, compared to just two percent of comparison

Ontario parents. Overall, half (49%) of private school parents reported working in

management, health or teaching occupations, as compared to a quarter (24%) of

comparative Ontario parents in the 2001 census. In contrast, as shown in Figure 4.6

below almost one-fifth (19.3%) of census parents were classified as working in

construction or other trades, as transport or equipment operators, in manufacturing, or as 86 trades helpers or labourers, compared to ten percent of private school parents. Of the ten percent of the private school parents who reported working in lower status

occupations, most (89%) enrolled children in religiously-defined schools. Specific occupations reported by parents within this ten percent group were truck driver, construction worker, house cleaner, labourer, factory worker and taxi driver.

Nine percent (154) of respondent parents held a teaching qualification, and most

(71%) were currently teaching, 45 percent in publicly-funded schools. Slightly over half

(58%) of these public school teachers sent one or more of their children to a religiously- defined private school. The 2001 census estimates show four percent of parents with

school-aged children employed as "teachers and professors." This shows at least a modest tendency for professional educators to enrol their children in private schools.

Teachers/professors

Trades

Senior managers

Managers

Health care professionals

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

0 Study parents • StatsCan Figure 4.6: Comparison of parental employment percentages 87 Finally, 237 respondents (14%), three of whom were male, listed their occupation as

"Homemaker." There is no comparative occupational category in the 2001 census data, where such responses were classified as not applicable, together with responses such as unemployed or retired. The total of such inapplicable codes among our 2001 census comparison group accounted for 12 percent of all responses, the comparative proportion in our data being 15 percent. Families with children in private schools thus appear more likely to have a parent who regards him or herself as a full-time homemaker.

Income. The private school families' data spanned the full income spectrum, ranging from 18 who reported annual incomes of a million dollars or more to 27 with incomes of $30,000 or less. Figure 4.7 demonstrates some of the differences. Almost half

(49%) of the private school households reported total incomes of $120,000 or more, which is slightly more than twice the proportion (23%) of comparative census families

2 with such incomes. Eighteen percent of total private school family incomes were reported as $60,000 or less, compared to 38 percent of inflation adjusted 2005 family incomes in the census data. Some 32 (5.6%) of respondents reported family incomes of

$33,000 or less, which approximates the 2005 before tax Low Income Cut-off (LICO) for 3 families of four living in larger urban areas (Statistics Canada, 2006c). All but three of these families had children in religiously-defined schools. Families with children in

2 The 2001 census data reports incomes for 2000 whereas this survey collected income summaries for 2005. The census figures were all adjusted to approximate 2005 values using Consumer Price Index figures for Ontario. 3 There are several technical difficulties in sensibly applying the LICOs to this data, not the least of which is that Statistics Canada calculations are for economic families, which are not necessarily comparable to households in this study. Published LICOs vary with family size and location. The 2005 LICOs for families of four were $26,579 for rural locations, $30,238 for communities with populations of less than 30,000, $33,000 for those with populations of 30,000 - 99,999, $33,251 for populations of 100,000 - 499,999, and $38,610 for urban areas with populations >500,000. See Statistics Canada (2006c). 88 religiously-defined schools typically had lower incomes, with only one third (33%) reporting total incomes of $120,000 or higher, compared to more than three-quarters

(77%) of families sending children to academically-defined schools. This pattern is even more marked when schools supported by the top and bottom income echelons are compared. Of the 101 families with incomes of $310,000 or more, 75 percent sent children to academically-defined schools, 53 percent of this top income group enrolling children in CIS schools. In stark contrast, 90 percent of the 93 families with incomes of

$59,000 or less had children in religiously-defined schools. Yet, in contradiction of stereotypical expectations, three of these 93 families with the lowest incomes sent children to CIS schools. The source of income varies between groups. Wages and salaries were the major source of income for 83 percent of comparative 2001 census families, compared to 57 percent among private school families, with a further 10 per cent declaring that wages and salaries were combined with another source as the major sources of family income. And whereas forty percent of private school families identified self-employment as their major source of income, or one of their major sources of income, only seven percent of the census comparison families did so. A little over a third of private school families (37%) reported receiving the Child Tax Benefit, compared to three-quarters (75%) of the census families. Eighty-one percent of the private school parents receiving the Child Tax Credit sent children to religiously-defined schools.

4 Examination of the 2001 census data found no statistically significant difference between mean total incomes of parents declaring a religious affiliation and those who did not (f=1.33(df=16,361 p = 0.185). 89 1 j $120K+ wmwamm^^#^j^ ^

:'••:••:••:••.'••.'••:••:••:••.'••.'••.•••/••:•:] $90 - $120K

:-.'-.'\ $60 - $90K '////Awmm^m - J $30 - $60K U;:::| <$30K

0 20 40 60 80

iStatsCan 0ADS ORDS

Figure 4.7: Comparison of family income levels

Culture. A notably higher proportion of private school parents (62%) were born in

Ontario than were Ontario parents of school aged children in the 2001 census (53%). Ten percent were born elsewhere in Canada, compared to 11.5 percent of the census comparison group. Although nine percent of participating parents were born in Asia, they were nonetheless under-represented when compared to the 16 percent Asian born among comparison census parents. A greater proportion of private school parents, as shown in

Figure 4.8, held Canadian citizenship (92%) than did comparable 2001 census parents

(87%), with a lower proportion of private school parents being citizens by naturalization

(19%) than was the case in the comparative census data (30%). Higher proportions of private school parents identified English as their sole mother tongue (70%) and as the language they most often speak at home (84%), the comparative 2001 census proportions 90 being 64 percent and 78 percent respectively. The next most frequently identified hearth languages among private school parents were Dutch (5%), German (5%), Italian

(3%) and Chinese (3%). Comparative census estimates were Dutch 0.4 percent, German

0.8 percent, Italian 3.4 percent and Chinese 6.3 percent. The over-representation of

Netherlandic languages mirrors the relatively higher proportion of private school parents who were born in the Netherlands (2% in our data, 0.23% in the 2001 census data). This might be a result of parents from the Netherlands being more readily disposed to private schools as a result of the wide availability and acceptance of non-state schools in the

Netherlands.

While English clearly dominated the hearth and home languages identified by the private school parents, respondents nevertheless identified no less than 56 different hearth languages overall, 38 of which survive as languages most often spoken at home. The strong tendency for private school parents to be Canadian or European born English speakers is reflected in the lower proportion of visible minority parents among the respondents (15%) than in the comparative census data (23%). More specifically, the data contain smaller proportions of parents in each of Statistics Canada's visible minority categories (Chinese, South Asian, Black), the greatest discrepancy being in the Black category which accounted for only one percent of respondents as compared to the census estimate of four percent of Ontario parents with school-aged children. 91

Spoke English first «5555555555555555555555555555555555555555^

Are Canadian citizens J0»5SJS«55«!«5S<^^

0 20 40 60 80 100

• Census 0 ADS EH RDS

Figure 4.8: Comparisons of aspects of culture

Thus, demographically, private school families in Ontario tend to have more children than their counterparts who send their children to state schools, and fewer were lone parent families; a higher proportion of non-state school parents were Ontario-born

English speakers who were Canadian citizens by birth, and a lower proportion were visible minorities. The proportion of the full sample reporting a religious affiliation

(82%) was comparable to that in the Ontario population at large (83%). Even so, a markedly higher proportion of private school parents said their religious or spiritual beliefs were important to the way they live their lives than did Ontario parents at large.

Parents sending children to private schools typically had higher levels of education and tended to work in professional or otherwise prestigious occupations and thus private 92 school parents tended to have higher incomes than their counterparts in the general population. Yet many private school families reported relatively modest incomes, and some can be fairly regarded as poor. It is also clear that parents sending children to academically-defined schools will likely have higher levels of education and higher levels of income than those with children in religiously-defined schools.

Attracting features of

non-state schools in Ontario

From the literature on reasons parents give for the schools they choose for their children (as reviewed in the previous chapter), a list of 61 distinct reasons parents may have for sending a child to a non-state school was created. The parent questionnaire asked respondents to rate how important each one was in their selection of a private school for their child and to rate the extent to which they agreed the characteristic was indeed a feature of their chosen school. Consequently, two lists could be created, a ranked list of reasons for choosing non-state schools and a ranked list of the features present in non-state schools. The reasons were further examined by considering and comparing the responses for parents choosing academically-defined schools or religiously-defined schools.

The most highly rated reason for choosing any private school, when all the responses to the 61 stems were considered together, was the dedication of the teachers, which was seen as very important to their choosing a private school by 91 percent of all parents. In addition, more than 80 percent of all parents declared as very important an emphasis on academic quality. Teaching right from wrong and school safety were also 93 ranked highly as very important in the choice of private school. Differences between the top ten most highly rated responses from parents enrolling children in religiously- defined or academically-defined schools are shown in Table 4.1. While more than 79 percent of both groups of parents rated the same three features as very important in their choice of school (presence of dedicated teachers, academic quality of the education, and safety), there were differences among the groups on other top reasons. Respondents from religiously-defined schools gave particularly high ratings to features such as teaching right from wrong, supporting family values, and reinforcing the family's religion within a context of parent-teacher collaboration and student discipline. Strong ties to home, faith, cultural heritage, and family were very important to parents who choose religiously- defined schools. 94

Table 4.1

Top Ten "Very Important" Reasons by Type of Private School

Academically-Defined Schools Religiously-Defined Schools This school... This school... 92% - has dedicated teachers. 90% - teaches right from wrong. 87% - emphasizes academic quality. 90% - has dedicated teachers. 85% - motivates students. 88% - supports our family's values. 84% - is a safe school. 86% - is a safe school. 84% - has outstanding, quality teachers. 83% - reinforces our religion. 84% - instills confidence in the students. 79% - emphasizes academic quality. 82% - teaches students to think for themselves. 79% - has good student discipline. 82% - offers individualized attention. 77% - values parent-teacher collaboration. 79% - offers a supportive, nurturing, educational 77% - is conducive to character environment. development. 77% - offers outstanding classroom instruction. 77% - educates the whole child. Common reasons are bolded.

In contrast parents with children in academically-defined schools identified features such

as outstanding quality of the teachers, outstanding quality of the classroom instruction, a

supportive, nurturing educational environment that motivates students, builds confidence,

teaches independent thought, and offers individualized attention, as being very important

in their choice. Parents enrolling children in academically-defined schools thus appear to

value instruction by outstanding teachers concerned with individual student well-being

and growth.

Another way to understand these top ten reasons is with reference to Table 3.2 in

the last chapter. When the stems are categorized in groups derived from the literature, the

top ten "very important" reasons that both ADS and RDS parents selected were items

from the stems classified under Logistics and Academic Reasons, specifically academic 95 quality and dedicated teaching. Where the two parted ways was under Academic

Reasons where ADS parents selected outstanding quality teachers as well and three additional stems under learning environment were chosen (motivates students, instills confidence in students, and encourages independent thinking. RDS parents, alternatively, selected parent-teacher collaboration from the same broad category. While none of the community reasons emerged as top ten for RDS parents, they did (supportive nurturing educational environment) for ADS parents. Finally, five items under Holistic reasons emerged at the top for RDS parents. The findings of the literature appear to be reinforced through these selections albeit with deeper insight into which features are specifically attractive in the two categories of schools.

Parents from both kinds of school, religiously-defined and academically-defined, were equally likely to select as "very important" features such as educating the whole child, setting high expectations for students, being well administered, offering frequent, detailed and open reporting to parents, preparing graduates who are typically accepted at the universities of their choice, catering to the particular needs of children, and having teachers who regularly assign homework.

Parents choosing religiously-defined schools were significantly more likely than parents choosing academically-defined schools (p < .000 in all case) to rate the following items as very important: the schools' support of the family's religion, values, and morals; involvement of parents in decision-making and collaboration with teachers; and embedded family identity in the school, its community, and its networks. An emphasis on the importance of such features indicates an important enculturation function that religiously-defined schools appear to provide to their supporting families. 96 Parents enrolling children in academically-defined schools were significantly more likely to rate as very important to their choice features such as offering a broad appreciation of arts and culture, motivating students, and offering individualized attention

(p < .000 in all cases). In essence, parents choosing academically-defined schools appear to prize the provision of individualized and enriching environments for students.

In sum, parents supporting both types of school were equally likely to be looking for a school that would be interested in the welfare of the whole child and his/her particular needs, and would provide quality and effective education with sound school administration. Parents choosing religiously-defined schools appeared to be more specific in their expectations concerning religious values and moral teaching, and most particularly in their search for a sense of involvement, community and belonging. Parents choosing academically-defined schools were attracted by the individualized focus and broader cultural appreciation.

Disappointment with state schools. The parent questionnaire asked parents to rate how important their disappointment with other school options was in the choice of their current private school. Fully 94 percent of respondents said that disappointment with public or separate schools was a factor in their choice of private school. Indeed, 75 percent said it was a very important factor in choosing their private school. More than half (54%) of the parents who had at some time had a child in a publicly-funded Roman

Catholic separate school said that their disappointment with the separate schools was a very important factor in their choosing their current private school. About a third of these parents now send their children to a private Roman Catholic school, a third to another religiously-defined school, and a third to academically-defined schools. More than half (58%) of the parents who had at some time had a child in the secular public system

said that their disappointment with public schools was a very important factor in their

choosing their current private school. Half of these parents now send children to religiously-defined schools and half to academically-defined schools. Thus, while 75 percent of students in religiously-defined and 56 percent of students in academically-

defined schools have always attended such schools, when past experience with a

publicly-funded system was a factor in the parents' decision they were equally likely to

choose either a religiously-defined or academically-defined school.

Thus parent ratings of private school features show that in general they chose

private schools because of dedicated, outstanding, quality of teachers; safe, supportive,

nurturing, motivating, confidence-enhancing educational environments; and an emphasis

on quality academics. In addition, parents who chose religiously-defined schools

typically view a focus on faith, morals, character, family, and community as very

important Those who chose academically-defined schools typically see a focus on

individualized growth, confidence and motivation as very important and they are more

likely to have given a publicly-funded option a try before choosing a private school for

their child(ren). Altogether, an analysis of the responses to parental importance attached

to each of the 61 reason stems resulted in the conclusion that both kinds of non-state

schools are seen as providing a high quality education and different value added

properties, with religiously-defined schools providing specific enculturation functions,

while academically-defined private schools emphasize individualized enrichment. 98 Analysis of statements

Because of the limitations of asking parents to rate items on a prepared list, the questionnaire also included an open-ended question which asked parents to state, in one sentence, their most important reason for sending their child(ren) to a private school.

This too had the weakness of following the list in the questionnaire and could simply have elicited restatements from the stems above. Nevertheless it was one more means of coming to understand parental attraction to non-state schools. Parents offered a total of

858 distinct statements (collected through 858 of the 920 completed questionnaires) summarizing their most important reason for choice of private school. The question was intended as a qualitative source for gathering information. In most cases parents were not inclined to answer the question by providing only one main reason but rather, in many cases, offered several reasons—albeit generally within one succinct sentence—for their choice.

Ultimately the analysis resulted in eight categories of reasons being identified: academic quality, teachers, heritage, values, safety, withdrawal, structure, and other. (See

Table D in Appendix D for a complete listing of the subcategories and of the types of

reasons that were included in each category and subcategory). Below the eight most

important reasons for choosing private schools as indicated by the statements parents

provided are identified and discussed. They are summarized in Table 4.2 below.

Academic quality. Almost forty-five percent (44.6%) of respondents mentioned academic quality as (one of) the most important reason(s) for choosing a private school.

Fully 67 percent of these were by parents who had chosen an ADS for their child(ren)

while the other 33 percent were by parents who had chosen an RDS. The subcategories 99 in this grouping of reasons included individualized attention, general statements about academics, extensions to the academic program, and academic environment. From most often mentioned to least often mentioned they are as follows. Parents (15.2%) mentioned general statements about the solid, strong, quality academics. Some parents (14.1%) offered statements which indicated the importance they placed on the individualized attention their child(ren) would receive. Parents (10%) offered statements which mentioned the extensions to the academic program or the extensive push for outstanding academic achievement in statements such as high expectations of teachers, Montessori option, extra-curricula opportunities, and after-school programs. Parents (5.3%) volunteered reasons indicating the importance of an academic environment that was stimulating and nurtured the whole person. Thus while more ADS parents indicated that their reason for choosing a private school was primarily academically motivated, aspects related to academics were mentioned as one of the most important reasons for almost

45% of all parents.

Heritage. Following academics, for reasons of heritage parents (38.7%) choose private schools. Religion, language, and culture were considered as three aspects of heritage. As religion was the single largest subcategory of any mentioned by parents, it was broken down further into three categories, general statements about religion, statements about the integration of religion across the curriculum, and statements mentioning consistency of religious beliefs and practices across school and home. In almost all instances (98.8%) these statements were made by parents who chose RDS.

More than one third of the parents (36.5%) choosing private schools said the most important reason for doing so was religious. Almost a quarter (24.4%) gave general 100 religious statements, another 8.4 per cent gave statements referring to consistency of

religion between schools and home, and another 3.7 per cent talked about the importance

of integrating all of learning with religion. Although a small segment of the reasons

given, 1.2 percent of parents claimed that opportunity to learn the language of their heritage was a very important reason. Only 1 percent of respondents mentioned that preservation and sharing of culture was one of the most important reasons for choosing a

private school.

Structure. Almost a third of parents (29%) mentioned some aspect of the

structure of the private school as the most important reason for their choice. The most

often mentioned was size which fully 18.2 per cent of respondents indicated was the most

important reason for their choice. No issue other than religion and academics was

mentioned as often as size as the most important reason for choosing their private school

in these statements. The remainder of reasons in this category indicated that partnership,

stability, discipline, autonomy, or location were important. In as many ways as it is

possible to state it, fully 18.2 per cent of parents (two thirds of which were ADS parents

and one third of which were RDS parents) indicated that smaller class size was the most

important reason for choosing a private school. Others mentioned parental participation,

the feeling of parents, teachers and students all working together and stronger

communication between school staff and parents. Others mentioned that in a private

school there would not be so much uncertainty and upheaval due to changes such as

school closures. Others mentioned the overall disciplined environment.

Withdrawal. Fully 16.7 per cent of parents specifically mentioned in these

statements that a negative experience in a publicly funded school or a negative perception 101 of publicly-funded schools was the most important reason they chose a private school, some expressing deep animosity to the changes during the years Mike Harris was premier of Ontario (the mid- to late- 1990s).

Values. While 12.3 per cent of parents indicated that values, whether specific values, consistency of school values with home values, morals, or the valuing of an environment of care were important to their choice, almost three-quarters of these came from parents (74.5%) choosing RDS and only 25.5 per cent from parents choosing ADS.

Teachers. A small sector of the parents (6.5%) mentioned that the dedication and quality of the teachers and the limited likelihood that they would strike was very important to their choice of private school. This was mentioned with a surprising amount of infrequency given what the rating of the stems indicated.

Safety. Safety of the school environment was indicated in 5.2 per cent of the statements as the most important reason in the choice of private school. Again, the infrequent discussion of this feature as the most important reason for choosing a private school was somewhat surprising since it ranked as one of the most frequently chosen very important reason for choosing a private school.

Other. Parents wrote about several other reasons for choosing a private school that were not included in the first seven categories. The list of 65 such responses included at least eight types of reasons: child's preference, financial possibility, peers with same values, dress code, sheltered environment, parents have always done so (no perceived choice), attended good public school abroad (no similar options in Ontario public system), and several miscellaneous reasons such as the dress code and clean bathrooms. 102 Thus when parents were asked to succinctly state why they chose a private school for their children, it was difficult for them to give one main reason. In all, the reasons that parents gave as the most important to their choice were, in order, beginning with most frequently cited, academics, religion, size (and other structural considerations), withdrawal from publicly funded alternatives, values, teachers, safety, and a variety of miscellaneous reasons.

When the statements were explored by type of school chosen by the parents they fell out slightly differently in order of importance to parents. For the detailed percentages of statements from each category, see Table 10 below. The bolded percentages indicate whether the major category was more likely to be mentioned by parents of either the academically-defined or the religiously-defined schools.

The items mentioned more frequently by parents choosing academically-defined schools were academics, structure, withdrawal due to negative experiences in other systems, and teachers. The items mentioned more frequently by parents choosing religiously-defined schools were heritage which includes religion, values and safety.

They were also more inclined to offer a miscellany of reasons such as cleanliness.

Religion and values are highly prized by the parents that chose religiously-defined schools. This suggests a potential persistence with which parents will continue to select non-state schools with a religious orientation despite obstacles encountered. Many of these obstacles are discussed in the stories parents told about choosing a non-state school in Ontario. This is the subject of our next chapter. 103

Table 4.2

Condensed Analysis of Statements

Most important reason for choosing a private school Major Secondary Tertiary No. of all % of all % of total in % of total Category Category Category statements statements this category in this that men that from ADS category tioned this mentioned parents from RDS this parents 1. ACADEMICS 44.6 66.8 33.2 Academics General 130 15.2 46.9 53.1 Academics Individualized 121 14.1 68.6 31.4 Academics Extension 86 10 76.1 20.9 Academics Environment 46 5.3 78.3 21.7 2. HERITAGE 38.7 1.2 98.8 Heritage Religion General 210 24.4 1.9 98.1 Heritage Religion Consistency 72 8.4 0 100 Heritage Religion Integration 32 3.7 0 100 Heritage Culture 9 1 0 100 Heritage Language 10 1.2 0 100 3. STRUCTURAL 29.0 62.1 37.9 Structural Size 156 18.2 66.7 33.3 Structural Discipline 44 5.1 59.1 40.9 Structural Partnership 24 2.8 45.8 54.2 Structural Stability 16 1.9 62.5 37.5 Structural Autonomy 4 0.5 50 50 Structural Location 4 .05 25 75 4. WITHDRAWAL 16.7 58.3 42.7 Withdrawal Negative 93 10.8 60.2 39.8 Experience Withdrawal Negative 51 5.9 54.9 45.1 Perception 5. VALUES 12.3 25.5 74.5 Values Environment 30 3.5 43.3 56.7 of care Values Specific 30 3.5 23.3 76.7 Values Values Morals 25 2.9 16 84 Values Consistency 21 2.4 14.3 85.7 6. TEACHERS 6.5 66.1 33.9 Teachers Teachers 35 4.1 60 40 Teachers No strikes 21 2.4 76.2 23.8 7. SAFETY 5.2 42.2 57.8 Safety 45 5.2 42.2 57.8 8. OTHER 65 7.5 46.2 53.8 104 While the demographic trends do not, of course, hold for all private school parents, there is no doubt that there are indicators that parents who choose non-state schools in Ontario are different from their counterparts, Ontario parents of school age children. They tend to be wealthier, better educated, and more entrepreneurial. By some measures they demonstrate more civic engagement, hold higher status occupations, place a higher importance on their faith or religion for the way they live their lives, and are more likely to be Canadian born. They choose private schools for the dedicated teachers, the quality academics, and the safe, moral environment. Furthermore, parents choosing religiously-defined schools value the place of religion in education and parents choosing academically-defined schools value the individualized attention and enrichment their children receive. There is some indication that demographically parents choosing religiously-defined schools and those choosing academically-defined schools are not only different from the general population of Ontario parents but that they are different from one another. It appears that our decision to categorize Ontario non-state schools into these two types may well have been reasonable.

In the next chapter, we examine the stories parents from 223 households told about choosing a private school for their children and will continue to probe whether this school typology holds as a lens through which to consider the stories. 105 CHAPTER FIVE

STORIES OF SECESSION

Each of my children has had [one or more] teachers that touched them deeply. Perhaps it would have happened in the public system - it did happen here. [List of six teachers by name.] Bless their hearts! What you want as a parent is for your child to be touched-to have that inspiring motivational teacher that changes you forever. (519)

Being newcomers in Canada, it has been difficult to find our place in the community... Teachers, principal and all school members let us feel "welcome " and we finally 'belong'. (468)

What distinguished this school from others was the instant warmth and cohesiveness of the parents and children that we instantly felt. (014)

My son, as I mentioned was failing miserably in public school for years and never improving. He never enjoyed it because of being led to believe he was a failure. He was always being bullied, teased and left out when it came to his peers ....I will never put him back in public school again... this school...has changed my son's outlook on life and life itself (121)

On the final page of the parent questionnaire participants were invited to respond in an open-ended, written format to the question: "Is there a particular story about your family's experience with this school, or reasons for choosing and staying with this school that you would like to share with us". A total of 223 respondents offered submissions to this question, some giving one handwritten sentence while others gave multiple pages of type-written attachments. On average the usual response to the question was three or four paragraphs in length, a mean average of 118 words each (although this does not include 106 one very lengthy story with many pages of attachments and newspaper clippings).

Because of the often narrative and usually personal tone to the submissions, for purposes of this analysis, I refer to these as stories. The stories were transcribed into typewritten form and created a mostly single spaced document of 56 pages of consecutive text.

A total of 128 of the stories were from parents in religiously-defined schools and

95 from parents in academically-defined schools. These questionnaires were from parents of 36 schools, 22 RDS and 14 ADS. Stories were submitted from all but two of the 38

schools from which questionnaires were received.

The religiously-defined schools from which questionnaires containing stories were received included one Jewish, three Islamic and 18 Christian. The academically-

defined schools included four CIS schools, seven for-profit academic schools and three

Montessori schools. Christian schools were the source of half of the stories (50.6%); they

constitute the largest sector of non-state schools in the province (38.3%). The other major

categories within the two school types, RDS (Jewish and Islamic), and ADS (CIS,

Academic for-profit and Montessori) were represented, in all but one case, by a variety of

each. Table 5.1 below indicates the range of founding dates, student enrolment, family

numbers, and an indication of whether the schools provide elementary or secondary

education or both. 107

Table 5.1

Details on schools submitting questionnaires containing stories

School Type Number Number Enrolment Range Foundin g Year Grades of of Offered schools question naires Students Families Earliest Most Some Some recent K-8 9-12

Religiously-Defined Schools

Jewish 1 6 Nolt provided to protect identity of school islamic 3 9 100-185 60-100 1992 1996 3 0

Christian 18 113 25-525 11-420 1953 1999 15 6

Subtotal 22 128

Academically-•Defined School

CIS 4 42 120-694 80-450 1918 1993 4 2

Academic, 7 34 49-1469 40-NA 1952 1999 7 4 for- profit Montessori 3 19 100-372 60-270 1964 1993 3 0

Subtotal 14 95

Totals 36 223

Content Analysis

At first reading, the stories appeared to be neither packed with detail nor vividly engaging yet a range of poignant stories immediately captured attention and several 108 palpable themes seemed to lift themselves off of the page. While at first pass in many instances the stories seemed to reiterate the types of items selected in the stems or conveyed in the statements respondents offered earlier in the study, through systematic analysis, newer and richer images and themes presented. As a result of this analysis it became clear that participants used this section of the questionnaire to address subtle nuances or highlight unique experiences and thus, although the contributions were often concise, the stories demonstrated that parents have rich impressions about their children's experiences of schooling and solid ideas about what is important to them in their children's education.

The content of the stories was analyzed with the assistance of qualitative data analysis software NVivo 7. Each story was loaded into an individual file with an identification number that matched the questionnaire from which it came. The stories were read, examined for any theme(s) or point(s) being made by the respondent, and then a node (or a category label) was created for each theme or point that was found in the story. Themes, in many cases, were identified through exact words used by the story tellers but still, in some cases, themes were identified as a result of repeated readings and synthesis of the content of the stories rather than through a more simple reliance on locating precise words or terms used almost verbatim in various questionnaires. As the stories were often only three or four paragraph in total length, I coded the entire story in each applicable node rather than just coding a line or two of concordant text as is more typically done with longer narrative text analysis. I was then prepared for a later stage of analysis in which I would print out, in their entirety, all stories that addressed a particular 109 node and at which time the stories similarly categorized were read in succession and analyzed simultaneously.

As the coding proceeded I created new nodes whenever I located new themes or sub-themes. The intention was to allow the themes to emerge from the stories without imposing the findings of previous research onto the stories or using those previous findings as a lens through which to read the stories. I fully recognize that acquaintance with the literature on reasons parents give for choosing private schools, as well as intimate contact with the data and the extensive analysis of the stems and statements

given earlier in the questionnaire may have subconsciously affected the reading and

synthesis of the stories. I consciously attempted to avoid this pitfall. Although I had plans to analyze the theme that emerged from the stories through several theoretical or conceptual lenses, I wanted the themes that would emerge from the stories to be grounded in the stories and not in the what had been previously found by other research.

It is also important to be clear that this analysis is not based on creating mutually

exclusive categories, that is, restricting each story to fit to one category, but rather, stories

were coded into multiple categories, with some being coded with as little as one node and

others with as many as thirteen (although this occurred in only one instance). This

approach was an attempt to respect that participants often invoked multiple themes in

their stories, and to capture the complexity and nuance involved in school selection.

Each story became tagged by various applicable nodes and, conversely, a node

report could quickly identify which stories mentioned something of that node category.

This approach to content analysis was more precise and efficient, although it took much

longer than an earlier attempted cut and paste pencil and paper method had been. 110 Because each story was electronically coded for the themes that emerged, almost any theme encountered could be coded and the result was the identification of 179 such

Category nodes. A research assistant then checked all the codes that had been assigned to each story, confirmed selections, suggested collapsing some codes due to overlap, and made suggestions for several new code categories. Finally 139 nodes were recognized.

The next step in the analysis involved grouping these nodes into parent nodes, or tree nodes, as NVivo 7 calls them. Sixteen such nodes were created. These parent nodes represented what I came to view as important thematic units to emerge from the stories.

They were further clustered to create a total of five main themes which are used as units of discussion in this chapter. While some detailed analysis may be lost by such a synthesis of the data, clarity of overall perspective can be gained with this broad categorization. In this chapter, by the approach to the synthesis of themes and through extensive quoting of the stories themselves, I hope to lose neither detail nor perspective.

Ultimately, I found the stories addressed five major thematic categories: community, curricula, culture, climate and change, and concerns. Some of these terms I do not always employ in the usual way the reader may have come to expect that these terms be used. The first, community, deals with issues invoked in the stories of a social and relational nature; the second, curricula, deals with items that pertain to what might be referred to as the educational and academic aspects of the school; the third, culture, deals with those aspects of the school that are historical or religious; the fourth, climate and change, deals with the emotional and physical health and security that parents claim students find in the schools; and the fifth category, concerns, outlines the apprehensions parents have with both private and public schools. A summary coding map of the Ill constructs identified by the nodes created is presented in Table 5.2 below. A very detailed table, Table E.l, is in Appendix E. One final word is necessary on the analysis of the stories. As the differences in the demographics of the parents and their reasons for choosing private school were somewhat marked between parents choosing the two types of private schools, religiously-defined or academically-defined, the analysis of the stories was also completed with a view to accounting for the type of school. To assist in the reading of the tables, the higher frequency percentages are bolded by school type. 112 Table 5.2

Story Themes

Total number and percentages of stories addressing themes and sub-themes by school type Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Theme Total n of all n % n % Sub-theme n of discrete comments of all of all of all of all stories mentioning comments comments comments comments by mentioning sub-theme by RDS byRDS by ADS ADS parents sub-theme parents parents parents 1. Community Teachers 82 149 65 44% 84 56%

Students 29 32 22 69% 10 31%

Staff 24 30 12 40% 18 60%

Leadership 8 9 3 33% 6 67%

2. Curricula Program Variety 31 42 5 12% 37 88%

Atmosphere 112 156 78 50% 78 50% Orientation Curricular Program / 42 44 17 39% 27 61% Academics Size 25 26 7 27% 19 73%

3. Culture Religion 42 57 54 95% 3 5%

Cultural heritage 7 7 3 43% 4 57%

4. Climate and change Trauma 10 13 5 38% 8 62%

Improvements and 51 117 44 38% 73 62% Changes Safety 17 32 16 50% 16 50%

5. Concerns Financial 49 70 39 56% 31 44%

Concerns about 22 43 11 26% 32 74% private schools Withdrawal from 62 125 53 42% 72 58% publicly-funded schools 113 As indicated in the first part of this chapter 223 parent questionnaires contained stories, and 95 (43%) were from parents sending children to academically- defined private schools, while 128 (57%) were from parents choosing religiously-defined private schools. Analysis with a regard to type of school, at least initially, showed some promise for further illuminating understanding of the reasons chosen. Throughout the analysis quotations are taken directly from the stories. Each of the 920 questionnaires received was assigned an identification number from 1 to 920. As mentioned earlier, 223 questionnaires contained stories and these were distributed across the entire spectrum of questionnaires returned. Hence the numbers after the quotes indicate the ID number of the questionnaire from which the quote was taken.

Community

A great number of the stories conveyed an awareness of the importance of the social or relational dimension of schooling. The interpersonal influence and role of the teachers, staff, school leaders, and peers frequently surfaced. Discussions of teachers were noted 82 times, staff, 24 times, students, 28 times, and the school leadership eight times.

Teachers

In an earlier part of the parent questionnaire (question 42), parents indicated which items, from a list of 61 stems, were very important in their decision to choose a private school (they could select as many as applied). The most frequently selected item

(91%) as very important was "the dedication of the teachers". It is not surprising then that 82 stories contained at least one comment on the teachers. Stories told of various ways in which the teachers expressed care for the students, demonstrated respect for 114 students' learning needs and abilities, demonstrated their dedication, and served as role models to the students. Examples of each are offered and discussed below. Tables in the appendices containing further quotes are indicated.

Teacher care was recognized through the attitudes teachers had towards the students and the atmosphere they created, the individualized attention they demonstrated, the appropriate matching of students to teachers, the inspiration they provided the students, and the connections they made with the home.

A total of 39 comments in the stories conveyed some aspect of the care, empathy, love, consistency, joy, or attentiveness demonstrated by a teacher in a private school.

"We feel the love and mercy shown to our child will be the biggest life altering as well as

[life] shaping [experience] we as parents can give them" (120). "The teachers care and love each child and it shows!" (121). "The teachers are allowed to express their love for the children and hugs are encouraged" (172). "They (the teachers) all have a loving, firm and consistent approach with all the children. This in turn helps them to be the best that they can be each and every day" (173). Another parent mentioned how teachers build an atmosphere of care: "The school provided an atmosphere where 'building each other up' / complimenting / 'seeing the best' were the norms" (347). Caring teachers create an atmosphere of compassion, kindness, mercy, love, joy, and patience noted and appreciated by both parents and students.

Teacher care was also specifically noted through the individualized attention children were shown by the teachers working either alone with the student or collaboratively with others. "Both kids have their individual needs met by a team of caring teachers who work together to design a program which will meet their present and 115 future needs" (348). "The individual attention she received from the teacher made all the difference in the world" (435). "The teacher really worked with him individually and understood his needs and within a month he loved his teacher and never cried another day" (668). "His teacher is very attentive and gives him one on one attention to continue to progress at a rapid pace" (563). Another parent who commented on the disappointment in their daughter's public high school experience stated: "Her brother, by contrast, will be taking grade eleven math in grade ten, because of strong, involved teachers who take the time to nurture the talents of each student.. .our experience has been that teachers at smaller independent schools have more connection with the students" (248). As another parent noted, teachers work within a collaborative context as they attend to the individualized potentials of each student. "The teachers and staff all worked to help him"

(530). Attention to individual potentials and needs demonstrates the care teachers have for the students. In a later section, by drawing on more examples from the stories, I gather further evidence for the respect demonstrated for the learning needs and abilities of students.

Several parents noted how teachers inspired their children. "Each of our children found or established relationships with at least one teacher that has inspired them to

[embark upon] and/or study along a certain path.. .It's not a school with one or two star teachers, but a school with many star teachers" (068). "Each of my children has had [one or more] teachers that touched them deeply. Perhaps it would have happened in the public system - it did happen here. [List of six teachers by name.] Bless their hearts! What you want as a parent is for your child to be touched - to have that inspiring motivational 116 teacher that changes you forever" (519). Parents recognized that teacher care is reflected in the inspiration their child finds while under their tutelage.

As these parents noted, caring teachers not only build strong individualized connections with students but with the home also. "This was not our reason for choosing this school, but I do strongly believe that in independent schools there is a strong connection between the teachers and the families. [This] enables the teachers and students to exceed what they would [be capable of] in a public system" (481). "I feel I am rediscovering my child through the teacher's eyes: someone who spends a lot of time with him and for whom I have a lot of respect" (549).

Teachers who were available after hours to intervene in ordinary or anomalous situations made a deep impression on the parents. ".. .1 called the school after hours and managed to catch her teacher before she went home. The teacher, knowing my daughter, realized the magnitude of the situation and called me later that evening with a plan of action. The next day, the teacher kept to her word, dealt with the problem in an effective manner and sent my daughter home with a letter outlining what she had done" (774).

Another parent explained: "The class teacher went out of his way to call and plan with sure strategies that would help her succeed in the classroom. I truly appreciate [it] when the school has shown that they care and are happy to support and educate my children"

(815). "My son does fairly well in Math but he received a lower than usual mark on a test, and then again on a quiz. I received a call from the teacher indicating that, although I should not be alarmed, that she was going to be watching out for future marks that were below his ability. I was impressed that she knew what he was capable of, and that she took time out in the evening to call me" (251). "The teachers are motivated to see that 117 each student does well - they are available for extra help if needed and alert parents to possible problems" (327). "Although both my husband and I work full time so we can afford the tuition, the teachers are still available to constantly communicate with us during evenings" (251).

In sum, teacher care was demonstrated in multiple ways in the responses.

Through the caring attitudes teachers had towards the students, the caring atmosphere they created in the classroom, and through he connections they made with the home, teachers in non-state schools convey a level of care that is highly regarded and noted by parents.

Teachers, as discussed above, were seen as providing individualized care to their students. As many as 37 parents of children who had special needs or unique talents and gifts commented both specifically and generally on how teachers recognized, respected, and responded to these needs and abilities, in some cases, commenting on how those needs had been previously neglected.

Some noted a general respect of learning needs. "Our second child has significant special needs. This school openly welcomed her, and goes above and beyond the call of duty to support her. She is completely integrated and is viewed as enriching her classmates' lives" (200). "This school is teaching my son to work independently; the focus is on him doing his best. He is treated with respect by the adults, and the children return this respect" (500).

[Our son] was never very academic, but his school was extremely helpful and supportive, knowing what his ultimate life goal was [employment in agriculture]. They worked with him extensively, to ensure that he would receive the required credits to graduate. Although it's a city school, they incorporated agriculture into the science curriculum, even taking the class on a field trip to our farm - a great opportunity for my son to shine. Without this attention to individuality, I don't 118 think my son would have graduated. I believe that in the local public high school (with a population of 1200 students) that he would have been lost in the system. (044).

Others specifically recognized the teachers:

We enrolled two of our three school age children in this school and we haven't looked back! All of the staff are exceptional teachers and are truly interested in the children and their ability to learn. The teachers immediately addressed our concerns about our eldest daughter and provisions were implemented to accommodate her difficulties. Because of this special arrangement, our daughter has gained self-confidence and now has a better ability to handle the workload and stresses that may arise [in her life]. (480)

Our oldest two children are on opposite ends of the spectrum. One requires enrichment and extra challenging assignments. The other is in need of remedial help. Both kids have their individual needs met by a team of caring teachers who work together to design a program which will meet their present and future needs. (348)

"Our daughter, however, was able to flourish due to one on one help [in] an environment that fostered [her] development. [The people in this environment] listened to her personal rhythm and had a multi-sensorial approach to stimulate the child. She was evaluated by her teachers without being tested" (592). "She is in grade six and has just got her first A in math and spelling. We are proud of her and the teachers for the time and patience"

(565). This parent aptly summarizes the connection between respect by the teachers and improvement in learning:

Since my child started at this school, he has not needed a rehabilitation therapist, or a tutor. Teachers here recognize his talents and abilities; coupled with the smaller class size they are able to help him perform his best. [He was] previously labeled a child with 'behaviours' and 'distractible and disruptive'. Here he has been labeled 'a natural leader, confident, flexible and enthusiastic'. It's amazing what a little respect from teachers can bring out in a child. (905)

In addition to these specific examples of teacher attention to individual needs and potentials, some parents made more general comments about teachers respecting students needs: "Their teachers understand the needs and characteristics of children and provide 119 lessons [that] 'call' to them" (582); "Close attention is paid to struggling students and then they are helped" (212); and "I love the fact that the teachers realize, love and encourage each child. God has made them each special in their own way and they are able to use their gifts and talents because they are given the opportunity here" (312).

Parents specified the time, resources and energy teachers gave to addressing special needs. "At [this school] ... her teachers have always known and been able to describe exactly where she is at with her education, and they provide appropriate resources for furthering her education" (502).

Individually both our children recognized, between grades three and four in the public system that they were behind. When we approached the [public] school they felt 'they did not have the resources to provide the assistance the children were requesting'. At that point given our resources we left the public system and found an independent school that has met all their needs. (534)

"Public schools address the mean within the population, and recognize (sometimes) the high end of intelligence - provided it is conventionally expressed. They do not comprehend or value or recognize different learning styles" (618).

We feel that if our child was in another school system that her problem would have been overlooked and not dealt with right away. At her present school, her teacher saw the problem, addressed it and got the wheels in motion to help our daughter within the first week of the school year. We are very happy with everything that her teacher and therapist have done for her. (162)

Overall the role of individual teachers in respecting and addressing special needs and abilities of students where they had often been neglected in state systems emerged as a notable facet of appreciation parents had for independent schools attended by their children.

While teacher care and respect for student needs were frequently noted, thirteen respondents also specifically mentioned the dedication and commitment of the teachers in 120 their schools. "Our teachers are dedicated to the job, kids, and families" (189). "I have visited many schools, [both] private and public, and found that the most distinguishing difference is that the teachers have voluntarily wanted to be here among the private schools" (129). "We're extremely thankful for the school and its dedicated teachers" (294). "Our daughter brought her high school academics average up by 30% due to the dedication of her teachers and effort of her peers to help her succeed" (325). "I believe the success we experienced is due to the dedication of this private school [and its teachers]" (532). "We are particularly impressed by the dedication of some of the teachers at this school" (600). "While the school is small, without a lot of facility [sic] for the money, it makes up for it with dedicated teachers, strong music programs and a community of parents who care about the school" (828). "We are particularly impressed by the dedication of some of the teachers at this school. They express true interest and care, and [they demonstrate] excitement when their students show progress" (589).

Dedication was noted by one family through the teachers' involvement in extra-curricular activities:

The one thing that pleases us is that whenever there is an activity in the school (for example a concert), the teachers along with the principal and vice principal actually get [involved] by performing with the children. You don't see that too often in a lot of schools. If there is a dance at the school the teachers also take part and can be seen dancing with the students. (557)

Thus parent stories of teachers repeatedly included some form of the descriptor

"dedicated" and they cited teachers' alleged voluntary participation in school extra curricular activities and in after hours communication with them.

Teachers were also specifically appreciated for their role as models to their students. Parent stories expressed confidence in the teachers as positive role models for 121 their children and three mentioned the presence of male role models. "My children's school has an amazing team of teachers and individuals who serve as mentors to the children. So [as] these children enter the teenage years, it is comforting that they can communicate with honourable people other than their parents" (720). "[Our children] are well rounded, balanced individuals because we have brought them up with a firm foundation in God, [a philosophy that] has been taught and lived in those who have been their teachers and peers" (109). "It's good to know [that] your children.. .are cared for by

Christian teachers that also teach and model the spiritual and moral values that we parents have" (211). "We hope our children will be influenced by their teachers and administrators, and be able to hold firm to their faith" (636). "I also value the number of male staff that [become] excellent examples of safe role models for our boys" (743).

"[The school offered] a strong team of male teachers" (598). "In Canada, [public schools] are sadly lacking in male teachers as role models" (618).

In sum, the stories conveyed an emphasis on the influence and role of teachers in the non-state schools. Specifically appreciated and noted aspects of teachers included the care they demonstrate for the students, the respect they offer for learning needs and abilities, the dedication they bring to their role, and the positive modeling they provide to the students.

Comparing responses by school type

As indicated in Table 5.3 below more of the stories that included items about teachers came from parents choosing academically-defined schools, yet comments concerning teacher care and modeling were offered slightly more frequently by parents from religiously-defined schools. 122

Community

Table 5.3

Stories about teachers (mentioned in 82 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Teacher Total n % n % characteristic Teachers are caring, 39 21 54% 18 46% loving, empathetic, firm, consistent, attentive Teachers recognize 37 13 35% 24 65% and respect student learning needs Teachers recognize 20 8 40% 12 60% and respect student talents and abilities Teachers connect 17 9 53% 8 47% with students, viewed fondly by students, available beyond class hours Teachers are 13 4 31% 9 69% dedicated Teachers provide 12 7 58% 5 42% exemplary model, are respected Other 11 3 27% 8 73% totals 149 65 44% 84 56% 123 Students

Considering the number and proportion (n = 82, 37%) of respondents that

mentioned teachers in their stories, relatively few parents (n = 29,13%) mentioned the

importance of other students. Yet this interpersonal aspect of the educational

environment did not go entirely unrecognized in the parents' stories. While some

commented on the general character of the students and the tone they contributed to the

mood in the school, others mentioned the positive relationships their children had with

their peers.

One parent commenting on the influence of students said "this school is filled

with enthusiastic students" (239) and another commented on the cohesion even at recess

as "the gym program includes organized recess programs [in] which 90% of the students

participate" (258). "The children are happy in this school - my child loves to go here -

enough said" (327). "The first time I walked into the doors at [this school] I was most

impressed with the appearance that the teens were happy to be there, and that they

enjoyed positive, respectful relationships with their teachers" (920). A number of parents

noted the welcome offered by students and their influence on the climate of the school:

"The other students tried their best to make sure they became a part of their groups. They

felt at home right away" (309). "Being newcomers in Canada, it has been difficult to find

our place in the community... Teachers, principal and all school members let us feel

'welcome' and we finally 'belong'" (468). One family noted how they were attracted by

the "cheerfulness of the school" (804).

Not only were parents and students attracted by the atmosphere the students

helped to create, but they also conveyed the positive influence of interactions with peers. 124 "Our daughter brought her high school academics average up by 30% due to the.. .effort of her peers to help her succeed" (325). "Our son has a beautiful strong spirit that needs to be nurtured in the right manner. With the help of all of the staff and students at our school.. .his spirit shines through...more beautifully and stronger the longer he is in this environment" (033). Several commented on peer group size and peer group interaction: "The peer pressure from being in a small class setting assures that each student excels" (565) and "the aspect of three-year age groupings as opposed to grades is extremely valuable. The children have the opportunity to have mentors, settle into the environment and also be the role models when they are the oldest" (582).

Several commented on friendships, how they were attracted to the school because their child had friends in the school or how on-going friendships kept them in the school.

"Some friends of [our] child attended this school" (698). "The friend base, since the children are together from kindergarten to grade 8, is extremely important and strong.

The friends are kind, loving and the history is long" (176). "[Our children] all have good friends [here]" (071). "They have become better people since arriving at [this school] and have made friendships they will keep for life!!" (692).

It was important to a number of parents that their children attended schools where their peers would hold similar values or morals. "We were also concerned that our children went to a school with other children with similar morals" (290). "Friends are important to them and it is great to know that my children are spending time with other kids of like faith" (354). One Amish family stated "we do not believe in separation / divorce and we do not want our children being around children that come from broken homes" (415). Another parent wrote "we are assured that the friendships forged are 125 usually with like-minded ... families" (863). Several noted that childhood is valued:

"You only need to walk the halls to see that these students are 'kids' and not students that are in a hurry to grow up and mimic societal (negative) personas" (014). "The children attending this elementary school are real children, they still have innocence, [and] are not afraid to be themselves" (240). "The attitude and all-around wholesomeness of the boys at the school struck us [as being] so different from what we were used to" (731).

Comparing responses by school type

Table 5.4 summarizes stories which included references to students. Although not numerous, they were usually written by parents choosing religiously-defined schools.

Although some suggest that non-state schools are selected by parents for building connections with other children of privilege, from these stories parents are inclined to select non-state schools, particularly religiously-defined non-state schools, for the potential offered to their children of building relationships with morally grounded peers. 126

Community

Table 5.4

Stories about students (mentioned in 29 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Student Total n % n % characteristic Enthusiastic, 7 4 57% 3 43% welcoming, happy Students assist peers 5 3 60% 2 40% academically, socially Friendships with 4 3 75% 1 25% peers Peers with similar 4 4 100% 0 morals Students value 3 1 33% 2 67% childhood, wholesome, innocence Students are self- 2 1 50% 1 50% disciplined Students become 2 2 100% 0 respectful, caring, hard-working Well-adjusted, make 2 1 50% 1 50% positive choices Other 3 3 100% 0

Totals 32 22 69% 10 31%

Staff

Beyond teachers and students, parents noted the importance of other school staff.

School staff included persons holding positions such as bus driver, librarian, secretary, and custodian. 127 Twenty-four stories told of the caring and involved staff. "The office staff knows them all" (190), one parent claimed. Another said:

I cannot express the gratitude I feel towards the teachers and staff of this school for "rescuing" my daughter... The staff (teachers, TA's, our secretary and custodian) all are involved in these children's lives: they are the "village" that helps me raise my children. Their hearts and ears are for these children [and] I would not have believed that this was available for my children in today's society. [This] should be everywhere, in every school for children! It is an oasis for them. (347)

"I am forever grateful to the loving and dedicated staff (from the principal to the custodian) that we have dealt with" (368). "It is such a comfort knowing that the staff at our Christian schools care so much about our kids. When our children struggle, they too will pray for our children and do the best they can for them" (064). "When my son struggled with some depression issues, the staff sought him out and invited him to join activities and sports. They helped him in his area of strength. They cared and went out of their way for him as an individual" (708). "Three months after we moved to Toronto, our youngest (then six) was diagnosed with cancer. This deeply affected our other children who had just moved from another country and started in a new school. Our son's class teacher and staff were incredibly supportive and helpful" (729).

In several instances, parents explained about how staff responded in times of illness.

"Our son's class teacher and [the] staff were incredibly supportive and helpful [when a younger sibling was diagnosed with cancer]. They wrote his sick sister letters and sent 128 her gifts in the hospital. They listened to our son talk about his sister and how he felt about her illness" (729).

In several schools, staff, rather innovatively, included outside community members who serve as mentors to students: "My children's school has an amazing team of teachers and individuals who serve as mentors to the children" (720). "She has received excellent guidance from her own personal advisor" (448).

Comparing responses by school type

Although comments on staff were not too frequent (n=30), (see Table 5.5) yet because more of the stories overall were from parents in religiously-defined (n=128) than from parents in academically-defined schools (n=95), it was notable that 60 percent of the stories mentioning staff came from parents in academically-defined schools. Do parents, therefore, in academically-defined have higher expectations of, or greater appreciation for, all adults in their child(ren)'s selected schools or could this simply be a reflection of school size where ADS tend to be larger and have higher staff numbers?

Community

Table 5.5

Stories about staff (mentioned in 24 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Staff characteristic Total n % n %

Caring 19 10 53% 9 47%

Other 11 2 18% 9 82%

Totals 30 12 40% 18 60% It can be concluded that parents do note the important role that non professional staff play in establishing and maintaining a caring environment in non-state schools. Parents recognized the academic and emotional support that all of school staff offered.

Principal, vice-principal, headmaster

This section of the questionnaire elicited little overt comment on school leadership; only nine comments were coded in this category. A few parents commented on the principal and vice-principal but it seems that parents are largely disinclined

(certainly without specific prompting) to recognize or comment on those holding leadership or administrative roles in the school.

Several of the comments were general. "We believe in the people that run the school. The principal, vice principal, and the teachers are great" (354). "There is great leadership and focus here" (771). Others were more specific and more complex.

Some respondents commented specifically on interactions with administrators.

One day in chapel I saw the headmaster talking to my son. I discovered that evening that he was complimenting him for his work down at the [name of] mission. The fact that this man was in touch with the daily activities of a student spoke volumes to me on the interest being taken in my son's development. (719)

Sometimes [our son] gets picked on because he is small. He will retaliate with hitting. When this happens, the principal takes me, my son, his teacher and himself into a meeting where he tells my son how special he is and how he cares for him. He also explains why what he did was wrong. He then has both boys together in a meeting where he asks them to forgive each other and then prays with and for them. I appreciate this gentle yet firm way of discipline. (350)

There were to be three performances [of the play in which our son had the lead role] the week my wife passed away. My son felt terribly [sic]; he was considering performing (at least in one or two of the performances) because for him he would be letting down his classmates if he did not perform. The headmaster called the boy after my wife died and suggested something that had not even occurred to me. He suggested the play be delayed for two weeks so our 130 son could properly take part. After some discussion with my son about how we were putting people out (all the tickets, of course, had already been sold and the boys were ready to perform that week) we accepted the gracious offer and my son got to take part in the play two weeks later with the spiritual comfort and support that his mother was somehow seeing him perform. (744)

Another parent compared the actions of the principal in her child's private school to the principal in the publicly-funded school where she teaches.

I teach grade seven. For months, I'd had difficulty getting one particular boy to produce some work. He was quite capable and I know his family, as I had taught his older brother. After several attempts to contact home, detentions etc., I finally sent him to the office. My principal said to me that perhaps "I care too much". In other words she was not prepared to support me. That same day, I went to my daughter's private school and got into a conversation with her principal. She was preparing to meet with a family who was at their wits end because their son was not doing his work and didn't seem to care. The mom was ready to throw in the towel and told her son that she just didn't care anymore what he did. The principal was going to their home to explain to the mom that even if she was through caring, that his teacher and principal were not and that it did matter to them what choices he made. (185).

Several parents attribute positive aspects of the school directly to the administrators.

When my son was in grade one at [this school], I liked that the grades two and three teachers already knew him and that they would greet each other by name. It's a small example [of] the nurturing and supportive web that the headmaster has created to support the child. (695)

[This specific person's] leadership is strong, steady and always visible. It was and continues to be one of the main reasons why we chose [this school]. One does not always have to agree with her decisions but one will always know that her choices are made after great thought, deliberation and discussion. I will always remember her saying her priorities are such; that her students come first, followed by her teachers and then the parents. I admire her strength. (804)

Thus parents noted the general impact of good leadership even citing it as a reason for choosing a non-state school while others recognize with appreciation the

specific positive interactions their child had with a principal. Stories in this category 131 were fewer, but lengthier, suggesting that this may necessarily be a more complex and compelling aspect of choosing a non-state school.

Comparison between school type

The difference between responses from parents in either school type should not be overstated given the infrequency with which the topic was mentioned at all. The tabulations suggest that parents in religiously-defined schools were less inclined to comment on school leadership than those in academically-defined schools.

Community summary

This section of the analysis has focused on the interpersonal or community aspect of non-state schools as it relates to professional and non-professional staff, and students.

It is important to recall that parents were invited to offer, in an open-ended format, their thoughts on choosing and staying with a private school. That the majority of stories included comments on individuals with whom their child(ren) interacted demonstrates the importance of relational aspects of schooling. Most frequently mentioned were the actions and values of the teachers which included their caring intervention and attention of students. Next most frequently noted were the other school staff Other students and heads of schools were also recognized for the important role they played in creating caring, responsive school environments.

Curricula

Given that parents had earlier noted in their selection of reasons for choosing a private school (question 42 of the questionnaire) the overwhelming importance of the quality of academic instruction, it was somewhat surprising to note how infrequently 132 mention was made of the academic aspects of the schools in these open-ended stories.

While quality academics emerged as very important to a vast majority of parents (94%) when choosing a non-state school, this was not at the heart of the majority of stories parents told about their experience with choosing and staying with a private school. One aspect of the educational environment that did receive notable attention was the atmosphere and the orientation of the school, most notably the focus on character trait development, but also a wide variety of other educational orientations were mentioned.

The individualized focus and the program variety were also frequently mentioned.

This section of the analysis begins by recounting comments that parents made about the educational atmosphere and orientation of their schools that were cited as meaningful to them and their children. It then considers three additional aspects of the educational environment covered by the stories, namely, curricular program of studies, program variety, and size. Overlap exists with this section of the synthesis and analysis of the stories with the previous section. In the earlier discussion of community I sought to indicate the role and contribution of individual actors (especially of teachers, peers, staff, and leaders) as they contributed to the theme, while in this curricula discussion my intent is to highlight the theme as an important, even defining aspect, of the orientation of the schools without necessarily paying specific attention to the players who contribute to achieving that environment.

Atmosphere and orientation

Many parents wrote about aspects of the educational atmosphere. While at least nineteen responses commented broadly on the excellent environment, the stories also 133 included comments on an emphasis on character and virtue development, community and collaboration, responsiveness to individuality, and sheltered protection.

At least twenty-three stories included some aspect of the development of character traits and values. Some mentioned manners. "[This school] teaches young boys to be well rounded in all facets of life and reinforces the founding headmaster's statement—

'manners maketh the man'" (732). "We are so pleased with the progress our children are making with their school work BUT most of all we love that they have become children that are courteous and polite. They often give up their things to make others happy..."

(102). "Being at this school extends our family values also with polite and courteous behaviour, respecting others, being listened to and interacting with kindness" (126).

Another story talked about choosing the school for the curriculum and standards but staying for the values taught.

The school talks a great deal about its character education program, but we dismissed it [initially] as window-design. Over the last four years the character education component has become more and more important to us. The discussion of the virtues such as modesty, honesty and industriousness is unique to our school and we can see the positive influence it is having on our daughters and our family.. .most private schools have an excellent curriculum—we stay at [this school] because of the additional focus on character education program. (450)

One family wrote about choosing a school as a refuge from a bullying situation in a state school but stayed for what they called "character development" (466).

A number of stories focused more specifically on how appreciation for life and learning were instilled in their children. "Our children have learned sensitivity toward others, an appreciation for life and all its possibilities, and a strong desire to serve others"

(294). One even recommended "that the Ontario government adopt the Montessori approach to teaching ages three to twelve years [as] this approach to education instills a love of learning which carries on throughout life" (521). Another said "the school has fostered a great love of learning" (610). The broad exposure "to families with different cultures, international experiences.. .demonstrates to our children that the world is available to [them]" (705). Parents in one instance claimed that the value of "trying to do their best in everything" (759) was instilled.

For others the community and family atmosphere of the school was cited as an important educational feature. "What distinguished this school from others was the instant warmth and cohesiveness of the parents and children that we instantly felt" (014).

"The community is informed and involved" (239). "The friend base.. .is extremely important and strong. The friends are kind, loving and the history is long. Even parents have become friends—meeting on weekends and getting together" (176). "The other students tried their best to make sure they became a part of their groups. They felt at home right away" (309). "He always had difficulty making friends as poor social skills are part of his challenges, [but] at [this school] he seemed to make friends almost immediately... we largely attribute this to the very inclusive 'family' atmosphere of the school" (770). "The experiences of being involved and participating at the school have enriched our lives as a family and have essentially become the 'core' of our family lifestyle" (230). "This school, more than any other I have experienced or heard [of] from neighbours, co-workers, friends or relatives has a sense of community" (364). "This school is like one big family. It's like an extended family for our daughter.. .the teachers along with the principal and vice-principal actually get involved" (557). One immigrant parent talked about the welcome with which their son was integrated: "Because of their strong community attitude, our child loves very much the way the learning is set up" 135 (589). Another immigrant parent told about the difficult struggle to find their place in

Canadian society: "This school has become a family for us...and we finally belong"

(468). "It has a community feel" (743). "The students truly feel a part of the school

community" (799). "Everyone is accepted" (080). One parent noted that what the school

lacked in resources was made up for by the "community of parents who care about the

school" (828). "I [continually] feel the school family community gather around us to

emotionally support both my son and I" (021).

Stories from a few schools talk about how the community's values are reinforced through the school. One parent, for example, wrote how "our children and friends'

children and the whole community are not brought up with hydro, television, computer,

etc." (413). The school plays an integral role in supporting and even defining an

individual community's values.

The loving, nurturing aspect of the educational orientation of the schools was

featured in at least nineteen stories. "The atmosphere of the private school is loving and

caring and accepting of each other" (181). "It is a consistent, stable environment

supported by loving adults" (184). "The loving friendly environment we received upon

entering surpassed all [the other schools we considered] as well" (191). The teachers "all

have a loving, firm and consistent approach with all the children" (173). "It has been a joy to watch my son mature and grow in this nurturing environment" (021). "When I

drive to work I feel confident that she is in a safe, nurturing place" (568). "Our children

spend a large part of their day away from us (parents). We feel completely assured that

they are getting an excellent education in a loving and nurturing environment" (651).

After telling a tragic story of bullying in a public school one parent's story told of how in their newly chosen private school "the staff worked as a team and our children could not possibly be anywhere else where that kind of nurturing environment could be found"

(678). "These schools allow us as parents to care for and nurture the children of other

Christians", said another (072). "We are staying with this school because of its caring and compassionate environment and how that is hastened [sic] in the students" said yet another (729).

The collaborative orientation of the schools was often noted by parents. "I feel that it is important to mention that the success of the private school was a collaborative effort that included teachers, church members, parents, and volunteers—all assuming an active role" (196). One family was grateful for the gym teacher's intervention in noticing a health issue of their child: "This was not our reason for choosing this school, but I do strongly believe that in independent schools there is a strong connection between the teachers and the families. [This] enables the teachers and students to exceed what they would [be capable of] in a public system" (481). "We are truly honoured to have our children in a school that has worked together with us as parents to meet the needs of our children" (109). The teachers "communicate with the parents on their child's progress and correct, with the help of the parents, the things their children need to succeed" (189).

"They are committed to our students and open to parent/teacher communicating" (212).

"The parent / teacher relationship is one to be admired" (239). "We want our school to be an extension of the home, and our school is just that" (292). Another commented on the "strong connection between the teachers and the families" (481). "One of the main reasons why I love this experience is the feedback we receive from the teachers on a monthly basis. Not only do they report on how your child is doing academically relative to the class but how he's doing socially" (549). "They actually like to hear from the parents whether for good or bad reason" (550). "They are willing to work with parents to figure out the best way to teach a child to get the best results" (562). "The class teacher went out of his way to call and plan with [me some] sure strategies that would help her succeed in the classroom" (815). "They are great at communicating with the parents, both [the] good and bad. For us, this more than justifies the cost" (720).

In addition to the collaborations with parents, some stories mentioned parental involvement more generally. "Parental involvement is very strong" (810). "The parent community is supportive" (358). "As a teacher I have worked both in public and independent schools. In my experience, parents' opinions and input were valued and desired so much more at a Christian school" (035).

A frequently cited aspect of the collaborative educational environment, albeit primarily reported in stories from religiously-defined schools, was how it reinforces a family's values and beliefs. "I do not believe it is the school's responsibility to train my children spiritually. That job is clearly to be done from the home, but I do want an educational institution that reinforces the values and spiritual truths we are seeking to impress upon our children at home" (209). "This school reflects what we teach and believe at home" (211). "We chose a Christian school as a reinforcement or extension of what we started and have continued at home" (022). Our "requirements are that the school teaches skills, imparts knowledge and provides leadership to our precious children in ways that are consistent with our values and beliefs" (289). "We as a family appreciate the consistency of teaching between home and school. We want our school to be an extension of the home, and our school is just that" (292). After many years of sending five children to publicly-funded schools, this family stated that their youngest child's education was different. "Our values are being reinforced instead of undermined" (453).

"We believe we should do whatever we can to bring them up as good, Christian, moral people. The Christian school aids us in that task" (656). "The values we have taught them at home are also being taught at school" (071). "This [school] reinforces the

Christian upbringing that is given at home" (072). "As society reflects a decline in moral values and absolute truths, it becomes clearer to us as parents that in order for our children to have definite values and goals, it is necessary for them to have an education that supports this" (0883).

A number of poignant stories shared details of community support that families experienced during difficult or unusual times in the family's life. Community orientation was noted almost equally by parents choosing religiously-defined schools and academically-defined schools, and is discussed under the section titled climate and change. Even so, given it is clearly an important aspect of school atmosphere, community orientation is mentioned here as part of the educational atmosphere of the school. An aspect of the educational orientation that impressed parents enough to write about it in their stories had to do with the responsiveness of their schools to individual needs and abilities. After telling about their child's high activity level one parent commented "I feel public schools (and some independent) do not recognize or know enough about different learning styles. [This school] suits my child's learning style"

(126). Another said, "It was discovered in kindergarten [at this school] that our daughter had a learning disability.. .with all the help she received she was totally on par with the class by grade six" (290). After explaining how her child's social and academic needs 139 went unrecognized in a publicly funded Roman Catholic school, one parent said "In the previous school, my daughter was a number, a statistic and one of many. In this private school, she is an individual and is seen as unique and special" (441). Another parent talked about the early intervention of the kindergarten teacher who suspected a learning disability. The parent said she is convinced that "because of this early and effective intervention he was able to remain with his peers and graduate high school as well. Next month he graduates from college" (061). Furthermore, the same parents' other children were invited to challenge some grade 9 exams, received exemption from the courses and could spend more of their time at high school on senior level courses

(061). One parent of a child with Asperger's Syndrome tells about the remarkable change in a child in terms of grades, homework completion and attitude towards school since the change to a private school. "Public schools don't seem to be able to accommodate children with differences" the parent concludes (621). Another, at a different school, said

"the main reason we looked at the private school system was for our son who has a very high-functioning form of Asperger's Syndrome" (770). "My son, who currently attends a

Catholic high school, is doing well academically considering his learning challenges and

I credit his success to his private school background" (792). Another school responded to a child's "anxieties associated with the curriculum" (815). One story explained how a school arranged for an injured child to watch an awards ceremony by live video-cast to his hospital bed (094). "We chose [this] school because we felt it best met the needs of our eldest, introverted child" (610), another parent stated. "[Our child] has developmental delays. We chose [this school] for her [because of] their belief that all children can learn and be successful" (626). In these and other ways parents pointed to a 140 wide range of means by which individual needs were recognized. The academic accommodation experienced was an important aspect of the educational atmosphere in the schools.

Comparing between school types

In sum, while several stories mentioned aspects of the educational environment

such as "the cleanliness of the school" (191, 804) and the long-standing "reputation" of the school (598, 863), it was those aspects of community, caring and values that

dominated stories classified in this analytical category of educational atmosphere and

orientation. (See Table 5.6 below for summary.) When comparing the sources of these

stories by school type, half were told by parents choosing religiously-defined schools and

half by parents choosing academically-defined schools. The educational atmosphere does

appear rather equally salient to choosers of all non-state schools. 141

Curricula

Table 5.6

Stories about atmosphere and orientation (mentioned in 122 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Characteristic of Total n % n % atmosphere Character trait 23 9 39% 14 61% development, manners, 4> respect, equality, work ethic, selflessness, responsibility Community, family 20 11 55% 9 45% atmosphere Environment excellent 19 7 37% 12 63%

Loving, caring, 19 10 53% 9 47% accepting, nurturing Collaborations btwn 15 7 47% 8 53% teachers, parents, students Reinforces family's 13 11 85% 2 15% values Responsive to individual 12 4 33% 8 67% student learning, learning style needs Community support 10 7 70% 3 30% experienced Parental involvement 9 6 67% 3 33%

Appreciation for life and 6 2 33% 4 67% learning Other 10 4 40% 6 60%

Totals 156 78 50% 78 50% Curricular Program of Studies

Parent comments on the curriculum of the schools they had selected for their children included discussions on the superiority of the academics, the early skills training, and the general satisfactory quality of the program.

Parents told various stories which conveyed their confidence in the superiority of the academic program their children were experiencing. One said, "All of our teachers have worked with our sons at their levels that they are at and then gently pull them just a little further! They are well above their public school neighbours [and] friends in their reading, math, [and other] skills" (168). One mother with two children observed that the father of the second child, although reluctant to spend money on private schools, "has seen the quality education [that] all the students receive", including her first child, and consequently agreed to the desirability of sending their child to the private school in question (368). In all, superior education and expectations were recognized by many parents.

Other parents simply conveyed that they were satisfied with the solid academic program their children were pursuing in their schools. "This school [has]...a good academic program" (209). "The administration does all it can to keep education quality high while keeping costs to a minimum" (358). "I evaluate my daughter's progress on a regular basis and I am impressed with the quality of education provided in this school"

(376). "This school... educates] our daughter with the highest standards we look for"

(468). Note the implied satisfaction with the academic strength of the school in this statement: "Choosing private school was for us a chance to provide our daughter with a richer base, not just in the academic aspect [but also] in the special multicultural 143 experiences that this school can provide" (516). "Our two children both attend [this school]. We have been very pleased with their progress in ... academic.. .development"

(692). "We have learned [due to budget constraints] to make do with less—focus on academics rather than sports" (863). Thus, although some want additional features, parents appear satisfied with the quality of the academic program provided.

Seven parents told how they were rather impressed by the early acquisition of academic skills, which was typically portrayed as a priority in non-state schools. "We wanted a school that focused on reading, writing and math (the basics) at an early age"

(555). "We were very pleased that our son could read by the end of junior kindergarten"

(563). "Our child has learned skills not usually targeted until later years in a public system" (614). "My child may not stay in the private sector for her entire elementary education, but the start was important to me" (125). "We started sending our older daughter to this school when she was three years old only because they had an Italian immersion program. Once she completed senior kindergarten, it was a natural progression to let her continue to grade one and so on to continue along with the friends she made in nursery, junior kindergarten and senior kindergarten.. .1 would not consider a public school.. .for either child until at least grade nine" (018). Thus parents desire early academic success for their children and some non-state schools are meeting this expectation. Others remain in the non-state school because the path begun at an early age for academic reasons continues to satisfy.

Comparing between school types

Parents choosing non-state schools seem content that the academic content of the education their children are receiving is either good or superior. Proportionally fewer 144 parents choosing religiously-defined schools as shown in Table 5.7 share stories which contained references to the school being superior or expectations for students higher than elsewhere. These parents also offered fewer comments about the academic program being tailored to meet individualized needs and potential of the child.

Curricula

Table 5.7

Stories including curricular program of studies (mentioned in 42 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Characteristic Total n % n %

Academics superior 17 8 47% 9 53%

Good academic 10 6 60% 4 40% program Other 17 3 18% 14 82%

Total 44 17 39% 27 61%

On balance, the academic aspect of non-state school curricula, featured less prominently in the stories than might have been expected given the very high proportion of questionnaire respondents that rated "quality academics" as very important in their decision to choose a private school. Yet the question to which respondents replied did ask for a story or experience with choosing a private school, and they were not required to directly give an elucidation of their most important reason for doing so. 145 Program Variety

A variety of aspects of the schools' programs featured in parents' stories but some also commented on the lack of diversity in their schools' programs.

With respect to arts, culture, music, drama, athletics, clubs, and other similar activities at least ten parents included positive comments. "This school offered a good blend of academics, athletics, arts [and] cultural programs" (243). "The music, drama, physical education programs and extra-curricular activities are excellent...the concerts, races, and theatrical productions are excellent" (486). "[This school] offered a bilingual education program.. .as well, a large, well-equipped gymnasium space with a fully qualified male physical education teacher was an added important factor" (598). "We wanted a strong music program.. .clubs and activities" (737). "The school gives them a well-rounded education of academics and activities" (743). "[This school has] great art, music, and drama programs" (562). "This school has strong music programs" (828).

"This school provides a well-rounded group of activities... a multitude of performance opportunities and extra-curricular activities" (799). "While the academic standards...are important to me, I am equally impressed by all of the extras" (258). "We are choosing a

Christian school first.. .the music, computers, are just a bonus for us" (372).

Other parents were concerned about the lack of activities available which they only noticed once their son attended a public high school. One said, "We soon noticed things that had been missing in his private school.. .no science lab or equipment, no library, no arts or music (instrumental) program, no health program" (253).

Alternatively, an Amish parent, claiming to speak for the entire community stated:

"We don't have computers, so there is no need to have our children learn all that stuff. 146 Their time is better spent being taught how to do math, etc. in their heads, which the good Lord blessed them with" (415). Thus a limited and focused program was the preference of such parents.

At least five parents specified their satisfaction with the Montessori or Waldorf education their children received. "The Montessori program developed advanced skills in all areas" (253). "My experience of half-day public school during senior kindergarten for my two oldest showed me quickly how responsive and affectionate the Montessori

School was" (495). Compared to what s/he labeled as the chaos and noise experienced in a public school, one parent was "pleased with all aspects of this [Montessori] school"

(500). "We chose a Montessori school because we felt it best met the needs of our eldest, introverted child" (610). "The [Montessori] school offered an approach that we felt would keep her curious and eager to learn" (611). Parents who chose a Montessori education for their children tended to be explicit in conveying their satisfaction with it.

Second language and cross cultural opportunities were attractive because at least three parents discussed these aspects of schooling. One parent told how s/he chose a school because of the "Italian immersion program" (598); another for the "broad exposure to families with different cultures" (705). "Choosing private school was for us a chance to provide our daughter with a richer base ... in the special multicultural experiences that this school can provide", wrote another (516).

Several schools were preferred because of the child care opportunities they afforded. "The full day program also meets our day care needs" (506). The comments of this following parent were unique:

The main reason we enrolled our children in a private school is because of economic necessity. It is far cheaper to have them in private school with before 147 and after school [care] that to have them in public school and arrange for someone to drop off and pick up. (We have no family in our area to rely on.).. .At this point we will pull our children from private school when they are old enough to make it to / from school on their own. (852)

Although it was not mentioned by many in their stories, child care needs of children are a relevant aspect in school selection.

One parent noted the headmaster's "commitment to the IB program" (804) while another indicated that "the IB program is centred on strong values that are reinforced daily and not just a mission statement" (828). Although offered in a number of state schools in Ontario, a continued interest in the International Baccalaureate motivates some to choose non-state schools.

Another feature of non-state schools not commonly found, if at all in state schools, is the multi-age grouping of students, an aspect of one school noted in this statement, "The aspect of three year age groupings as opposed to grades is extremely valuable" (582). Two parents commented on their attraction to the gender specific aspect of their school.

Comparing between school types

As conveyed in Table 5.8 below, the proportion of parents choosing academically-defined schools who discussed specific program features and educational opportunities far exceeded the proportion of parents choosing religiously-defined schools mentioning these options. Academically-defined schools are often prized for, what could be called, their boutique offerings. These options are either not as readily available in religiously-defined schools or they not valued highly enough by parents to warrant their being discussed in the stories they told. Nor are they and other specifics noted in this section readily available in state schools. 148

Curricula

Table 5.8

Stories mentioning program variety (told in a total of 31 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Program Frequency Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Characteristic Total Arts, culture, music, 12 1 8% 11 92% drama Athletics, clubs, 10 1 10% 9 90% activities Montessori, Waldorf 6 1 17% 5 83%

Second language and 3 1 33% 2 67% cross cultural options Resources better 3 0 3 100%

Childcare 2 0 2 100% arrangements meet our needs International 2 0 2 100% Baccalaureate Gender specific 2 0 2 100%

Basics only 1 1 100% 0

Three year age 1 0 1 100% groupings (not by grade) Totals 42 5 12% 37 88% 149 Thus variety of unique opportunities in programming such as co-curricular diversity, cultural opportunities, philosophically and practically unique programs such as

Montessori or Waldorf programs, child care arrangements, options for pursuing an

International Baccalaureate and multi-age groupings were attractive to parents. The potential for market responsiveness to parental preferences for such boutique options is a noted feature in these schools.

Size

A total of 26 references to size were made in the stories; 25 discrete stories mentioned size. Twenty-two of these stories mentioned class size. This was not surprising given the frequency with which class size was mentioned, by far the most dominant aspect, in response to the earlier questionnaire item which asked about the most important reason for choosing a private school. "The large class sizes pushed us to consider private schools" (220), said some. Others recognized the benefits of smaller class sizes and gave examples of the impact on their child. "The small class sizes are great for one on one teaching" (212). "[There] is a small student: teacher ratio—with much personal attention" (327). "Our daughter has ADD so it's very important for her to have [a] small class size" (473). "[Our] child has some learning disabilities... we felt that to achieve success and to build on what success she had already achieved in [public school] grades one through six she needed a small classroom setting" (617). "At [this school] he was put in a class of twelve (including him) and it is impossible for him to hide now.. .he is very happy [now] and doing great academically" (770). "My mother was a lifetime teacher in the public school system, but even she agreed when we chose the 150 route of private school... You can't argue with the benefits of smaller classrooms"

(828). The issue of small class size was integrally important to many parents.

Four parents made reference to smaller school size. "We wanted a small family feel to the school" (737). When examining a number of potential schools for their child one parent reported, "The quaintness and smallness of the school is what we fell in love with" (191). Another parent reported, "Our school is small with only about 150 children and in a small building but it packs a lot of activity into one day" (258). "I like the size of this school. It is not too big and overwhelming", the fourth said (743).

Comparing between school types

Although the religiously-defined schools in the sample, were, on average, much smaller in terms of student enrollment, parents in those schools did not mention school size or class size in their stories as often as did parents in ADS. Data on class sizes were not gathered in this study, but the stories show many parents in the academically-defined schools found them to be relatively small and they valued this. Table 5.9 below contains the relevant tabulations.

Curricula

Table 5.9

Stories mentioning size (included in 25 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Size Total n % n %

School is small 4 1 25% 3 66%

Smaller class sizes 22 6 27% 16 73%

Totals 26 7 27% 19 73% 151 Overall numerous aspects of the school's organization and programs emerged

as important and meaningful to parents. Aspects of the atmosphere and orientation of

the school highlighted included the community atmosphere, the collaborative orientation,

the reinforcement of values, and respect for individuals. Academic aspects of the program were recognized as superior or at least sufficient. In many cases, specific or

unique programs offered by the schools were enthusiastically mentioned and appreciated

for their distinction. The final aspect of the educational environment of the schools that

received recognition was the size of the school, small schools, but especially small class

sizes. The intimacy and recognition afforded each student because class sizes are small

would further contributed to and enhance the community and collaborative atmosphere of

the schools.

Culture

As would be anticipated given the earlier responses on the questionnaire to both

ihe stems and the statements many parents commented on an aspect of the religious and /

or cultural focus of their school. Comments regarding religion could be grouped into

three sorts, the first are those that mentioned that the school reinforces Christian values,

beliefs, perspectives, and faith, the second that there is freedom to engage in, or avoid,

distinct practices which stem from religious beliefs, and the third mentioned the counsel

of a spiritual leader. Comments regarding culture were grouped as those mentioning

Jewish heritage and literacy, those mentioning diverse cultural exposures, those

mentioning an embracing of a version of Canadian heritage, and those that recognized a

founding legacy. 152

Religion

All twenty-seven respondents who mentioned some aspect of religious or spiritual preference for education in their stories had selected religiously-defined schools for their children.

Respondents indicated that they valued school teachings and an atmosphere that reinforces their Christian value, beliefs, perspectives and faith, an education in harmony with bible teachings. "Because the Bible is foundational to our lives, I want an institution that bases its education on the same" (209). The opportunity to specifically pray the

Lord's Prayer was noted by a number of parents. "We want no part of the public school because they have discontinued the Lord's Prayer, etc. Our religion is very important to us" (404).

At least five parents commented on their desire for a Christian and biblical perspective to be woven through all subject areas.

It gives us a perspective on this world that shapes our thinking, defines for us the present age in which we live and gives us guidance and direction for the future. It affects how we have our children taught in every subject. It should permeate every subject, not just be a covering. This way the future generations can serve as quality citizens of this country and as citizens of the Kingdom of God. (883)

"As a family, we have decided that the Bible is the Word of God. This means that all learning stems from it. It is therefore so important to teach its content along with the core subjects" (315). "Biblical values are taught throughout all subjects rather than being segregated to a single 'religion' class" (358). "This reinforces the Christian upbringing that is given at home and in church.. .They learn how to look after creation, to examine each subject of learning through the lens of how beautifully designed it all is" (072). "Our parents desired for their children [to experience] a Christ-centered education; an education that revealed to children that God is in all and over all in every aspect of life.

This has been the heritage given to us by our parents. We too have the desire to educate pur children that God is ruler over all" (652).

Four parents shared stories which contained appreciation of how the school reinforced the faith taught in the home. "This school reflects what we teach and believe

at home and is also supported at the church that we attend" (211). "The Christian influences from home and school has brought up a very incredible girl" (215). "As a result of my time at teacher's college, I decided my children should attend a Christian

school and develop a Christian world view where there would be consistent messages at home and at school" (035). "We want our children to be brought up in the nurture and admonition of God, and to be spared from as much sin and shame as possible. We as parents understand that we will be held accountable before God, as to how our children were taught and brought up" (408).

Six parent respondents indicated that they valued noticing evidence of a spiritual

or religious orientation in their children. "He comes home singing Christian Praise songs

and says he 'just had a great day mom'. I have a child also in SK and they say prayers at

suppertime (they always want to pray). The passion and concern they have in their prayers and about everything God does for them is a remarkable thing to see in their young life. It really is a blessing" (632). One public school teaching parent told this:

As two public school educators we feel that the current public school system is successful in all important areas but one: the spiritual growth of the students is neglected. We choose to send our children to a private Lutheran school so that they have the opportunity to grow in this area as well. The religious aspect of the school is the one and only reason we sent them there. In our opinion, public schools in our area are just as successful in all the other areas. (0167) 154

"God plays a huge role in the children's daily activities and they strengthen their relationship with God through their work and play time" (0172). "To hear my children and their friends break into a song of God's Love while driving in the car tells me that sending them to a Christian School is the right thing to do" (0208). "Now all our children attend Christian grade school and high school. It may be a high price to pay but with

God's guidance and grace we hope our children will be influenced by their teachers and administrators, and be able to hold firm to their faith in God" (0636). "They are teaching him to be a very thoughtful, responsible little Christian" (0168).

In these ways parents shared examples of how they valued school teachings and a school centred in harmony with bible teachings, a biblical perspective woven through all subject areas, reinforcement of faith taught in the home, and evidence of religious orientation in their children.

Six parents indicated their desire for their children to engage in, or avoid, without repercussions, distinct practices which stem from religious beliefs. These parents wanted freedom to pray, to openly ask religious questions, to dress according to their religious tradition, and to avoid talking about sexuality. "We wanted our children to have the freedom of prayer, the right to ask religious questions" (220). "Prevailing prejudices to

Muslims is the main reason I want my child in an Islamic school. I'm glad my daughter can wear her headscarf and not feel different. Praise be to God" (373). "We want no part of the public school because they have discontinued the Lord's Prayer" (404). "We are not brought up with hydro, television, computers" (413). "We believe in the Lord's

Prayer which they use daily at this school. We don't teach about sex in this school, [and]

I feel the world would be a better place if children were not taught this in their young 155 years" (415). "It is important that our children can practice their religion, honour God, and pray - without being told that they are violating the rights of others" (630).

Two respondents mentioned the role of a spiritual leader in their decision to choose a private school. "We sat down with our Principal and Pastor as well as [the] teacher - they were open to everything that was put forth and let the decision [rest] in our hands" (120). "The great spiritual leader [name of person] a man many credit to be responsible for keeping Iraq out of a civil war and for [the] urging of open and democratic elections for all Iraq has [lent] his support and encouragement to this school"

(432).

Comparing between school types

On almost all counts, aspects of religion were mentioned exclusively by parents choosing religiously-defined schools as indicated in Table 5.10 below.

As would be anticipated, religion and its influence in the school, through curricular perspectives, through reinforcing family beliefs and practices, and through development of religious responsiveness, for example, was important to parents choosing religiously-defined schools—so important that it featured prominently in the stories of 42 respondents, that is, 19% of the stories included one or more explicit references to the role of religion in the education of their children. Yet it is curious, and most important to the central findings of this study, that not all, not even the majority of parents choosing

RD schools for their children, chose to discuss this aspect of the school when sharing a story of their experiences of the school or their reason for choosing the school. Parents, 156

Culture

Table 5.10

Stories about religion (mentioned in 42 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Aspect of religion Total n % n %

Reinforces Christian 25 25 100% 0 and biblical values, beliefs, perspectives Religious training 12 10 83% 2 17%

Freedom to hold 7 7 100% 0 beliefs or engage in religious practices Reinforces "our" 5 4 80% 1 20% beliefs Other 7 7 100% 0

Totals 56 53 95% 3 5%

in part, are choosing religiously-defined schools because of their religious aspects, and

some mention the importance of being able to practice their religious distinctives in

freedom and a few mentioned the role of a spiritual leader in their decision, but the

majority of those, that is, 35 of the 42 that discussed religion in the their stories,

mentioned their desire for biblical perspectives to be offered throughout their children's

educational program so that their beliefs would be reinforced and their knowledge

deepened. Still this is not the item that warranted the most attention in the majority of the

stories by parents choosing RD schools. 157 Cultural literacy or heritage

Seven stories included references to the importance cultural exposure played in their decision to choose a private school.

One parent's thoughts on the importance of Jewish cultural literacy for his or her children were offered at some length.

We chose this school for our children (in fact, we helped to found it) in order to ensure access to high school level Jewish literacy. We do not mean language skills, although studying Hebrew is included among these skills, but basic knowledge of Jewish history, sacred texts, legal reasoning (i.e Talmudic study), literature, etc. Too much prejudice comes from ignorance. We wanted our kids to learn respect for all, including themselves, but not only themselves. We hoped that mature literacy would lead to pride in their heritage and appreciation of other belief systems - from Islam to atheism to Wicca... .It is only when young people have a well-rounded understanding of their roots that they can make informed decisions about what works for them and what does not. Strength as a people comes from knowledge with judicious flexibility. [These are] the same qualities which breed tolerance. (335)

Four others were more generally concerned with broad cultural exposure. "Even though our school is very diverse, the children have much in common, [and] this contributes to a positive atmosphere all the time. We do not have to worry about our children being different. We do not have to worry about them trying to fit in yet they are interacting with children from every walk of life" (374).

Children from several ethnic backgrounds were part of the class. The teacher... made it a point to celebrate everyone's holiday, to learn about the holiday and pass along wonderful ethnic foods, ceremonies, etc. There are so many religions and ethnic backgrounds in [this city] alone. Too much fighting goes on because of not understanding others' reasons and religious ways. This teacher brought so much unity and pride to each child in so many ways. (607)

"[This school provides a] very broad exposure to families with different cultures, international experiences, family businesses, etc. [This] demonstrates to our children that the world is available to [them]; there are no limits, [so they should] think big" (705). 158 One parent expressed concern about the erosion of their heritage and the school's role in that preservation: "[Our] children are not the only white people at the bus stop. [This school is] not trying to change our inherent 'Canadian' traditions (we are fourth generation Canadians)" (550). This comment was anomalous yet it does point to the role some parents may expect their schools to play in the preservation of various cultural and ethnic traditions.

One parent mentioned their own family legacy which was part of the school. "Our experience with this school has a long history. It was established by our parents. In fact, one of our parents actually helped build it" (652).

Comparing between school types

Only seven respondents contributed narratives which were classified in this area with their being almost equally divided between the two school types, RDS and ADS.

Thus the passing on of a heritage through a private school motivates some to choose such an education for their children while others appreciate the broad cultural exposures evidently available in some private schools. Still, this was a topic which elicited little comment overall.

Religion—and culture but only to some degree—plays a significant role in the selection of private schools in Ontario. Given that more than a third of non-state schools in Ontario can be categorized as Christian schools (in 2006-2007, 339 of 885 non-state schools) it is not surprising that many of the stories that discussed aspects of religion and spirituality made biblical and other Christian references. Although it may seem self- evident, parents are choosing religiously-defined schools for religious reasons, an apparently simply account, but one which embraces substantial diversity. For one family, 159 freedom to live their religion may be decisive. For another it is participating in a family legacy. For yet another it is the opportunity to be educated from a distinct religious perspective. Still, the religious aspect of religious schooling does not fully account for the on-going choice of non-state schools in our times. In the following section we shall consider another set of stories which offer a more full account of reasons for non-state school choice.

Climate and change

The most poignant and gripping narratives offered by parents in the stories had to

do with the emotional and physical experiences of the families and the students.

Surprisingly, traumatic life circumstances such as illness or death of a family member proved to be pivotal experiences related to private schooling. As well, many stories told

of remarkable improvements in students particularly in their emotional satisfaction with

life. Many others mentioned the security and safety they and their children felt in their chosen private school.

Traumatic life circumstances

In a total often discrete stories parents told of traumatic life circumstances and their relation to choosing a private school. Seven stories were told of illnesses

experienced and the support the school community offered to families. Many of these

experiences confirmed the family's commitment to their school choice.

The children's mother [explained the father who wrote the story] is currently gravely ill with cancer. In the time since her diagnosis and surgery, the school has truly been remarkable. The community has been in prayer several times to lift our hearts. More astounding, the parents at this school organized to provide lunches and dinners through the week while school was in... now providing transportation to/from school for the children and are providing emotional support.. .It reinforces our judgment in bringing the children to this school! (353)

Two years ago my husband was diagnosed with a life threatening heart disease. The school (community) became a tremendous support to our family as the community rallied to help our family. We were touched by the commitment [and] care that we were given. (296)

My niece had a car accident and subsequent concussions, [and] doctors never explained the degree of problems stemming from so many (six) concussions. The school gym teacher took notice and with her connections was able to [place] my sister [in contact with] with people who were able to help.. .1 do strongly believe that in independent schools there is a strong connection between the teachers and the families. [This] enables the teachers and students to exceed what they would [be capable of] in a public system. (481)

We decide to keep our child in this school because it provided a very supportive environment when our child was ill. The experience has been most positive. (677)

When our oldest daughter became ill and was hospitalized, missing months of school, the administration and all staff were outstanding. They visited her in [the] hospital, provided tutoring, modified assignments, sent encouragement and ensured she could graduate. It was over and above what any family could expect. When we as parents would show up on the schools doorstep, everyone would ask about our child and offer emotional and academic support. We always felt our child was [very] important to them. (708)

Three months after we moved to [this city], our youngest (then six) was diagnosed with cancer. This deeply affected our other children who had just moved from another country and started in a new school. Our son's class teacher and staff were incredibly supportive and helpful. They wrote his sick sister letters and sent her gifts in the hospital. They listened to our son talk about his sister and how he felt about her illness. Class parents jumped in to help as well with driving, food, and play dates. We are staying with this school because of its caring and compassionate environment and how that is hastened in the students. (729)

My wife was diagnosed with cancer five years ago and shortly after that we chose the grade seven school for our oldest. I knew that a bad outcome was a 50/50 proposition and having our child in a smaller community where he would get as much support as possible was critical to our decision as to where our oldest would go. Unfortunately my wife passed away a couple of months ago. We live downtown in [an Ontario city] and I've realized that living in a large city is all about communities. We have been so fortunate to have a supportive church and neighbourhood community but most [important were] the two independent school communities where our three children go to school. (744) 161

The parent above describes how accommodations were made so that the student could still play a lead role in the school play despite his mother passing away during the week scheduled for performance. As one parent stated earlier, this may have occurred in a state school; the importance for this family and their on-going commitment to their chosen school was that it occurred in a non-state school.

In addition to those told above, several other stories mentioned a death in the family and discussed either the support experienced or the influential instruction offered just before a parent died.

When my son began attending this school.. .he was .. .just starting kindergarten. His father had passed away a few months before he started school. I [continually] feel the school family community gather around us to emotionally support both my son and I [sic]. It has been a joy to watch my son mature and grow in this nurturing environment. (021)

Our eldest son passed away three years ago and the support we have had from our school community was immeasurable. The support through this experience and just raising our children (and the difficulties that come with it) was incredibly solid because our children and their friends and families lead faith-based lives. (054)

My father died 2.5 years ago and my daughter was about to start kindergarten. I was scared about the money and how we were going to manage [tuition payments for Christian schooling]. He told me on his deathbed that "you just [write] that check first and everything else will figure itself out." It's something I will always remember and I use it to put everything in perspective. It's the best advice I ever got from my father. (051)

Comparing between school types

Respondents choosing academically-defined schools were more inclined to mention, almost with surprise, the support their family received during times of trauma such as a serious illness or a death in the family. (See Table 5.11.) Perhaps this support is experienced by families choosing religiously-defined schools; perhaps that support is 162 experienced elsewhere such as in a religious community centred in a place of worship. Regardless, what is noteworthy is that the school function as support-base through traumatic life circumstances of its students and their families. This is deeply appreciated and attractive to parents.

Climate and change

Table 5.11

Statements about traumatic life circumstances in parent stories (told in 10 discrete stories) Religiou!sly-define d Academically-defined school1 parents school parents (n == 128) (n = 95) Trauma Frequency Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Total Serious illness in 5 2 40% 3 60% family Death in family 4 3 75% 1 25%

Supportive through 4 0 4 100% illness Totals 13 5 38% 8 62%

Traumatic circumstances such as serious illness or death thus appear to influence parents to consider their educational choices with depth. Times of crisis may well be times of considering those aspects of life which are most deeply valued; education appears to rank.

Improvement experienced

A total of 51 different parents discussed one or more aspects of the improvements they and / or their child(ren) experienced through their move to a private school. Twenty-five parents mentioned the gains in confidence or self-worth that their children experienced. These gains were often associated with other improvements; most were enthusiastically conveyed.

You can see the difference in him - he is confident, he has self-esteem, he is even a more loving, respectful child towards others. The teachers care and love each child and it shows! I will never put him back in public school again - the difference in our son is like night and day and I thank God everyday for this school and how wonderfully it has changed my son's outlook on life and life itself. (121)

"He started this year (grade five) and we have seen remarkable results in terms of his increased confidence, academic results, and overall enjoyment of school" (252). "We have found [that] the school lives up to its name and is providing our child with the confidence and interest in learning to continue on the path of positive learning" (278).

Her first year at this school ([in] grade seven) totally changed this girl into a confident, carefree young lady. My daughter will enter high school (publicly funded) next year -1 will never regret the sacrifices we made to watch her today walk in confidence and secure in who she is. I only wished I had found this place earlier! (347)

"It was this individual attention that transformed her into a much more confident girl in just two years" (435). "[This school] is helping her to develop a stronger sense of herself and compassionate strategies for coping with life situations" (448).

Our daughter was sad and angry at her public school. She was constantly teased because of her difficulties and slow progress. She has gone from a D and F to an 87% average in less than a year [at this private school]. She is confident, happy, and very proud of herself and her school and participates and contributes as much of her time and energy as she can. (763)

These stories of improvement in self-esteem and confidence indicate a deep satisfaction that both parents and students have with their non-state school experiences.

A total of 24 stories involved some mention of happiness of the children, and in some cases of the parents' happiness, a state that is clearly valued by parents as noted by 164 the enthusiasm with which it is often reported. "He came home full of excitement and happiness.. .I'd never seen him so happy..." (121). "The... happiness of our son is well worth any inconvenience" (123). "Another child, and seven years later we are still here and are very happy" (014). "We are very happy with everything that her teacher and therapist have done for her [here]" (162). "He has never been happier" (186).

The frequency with which the word "happy" was used in the stories again indicates parental and student satisfaction with non-state schools.

Parents, in 23 cases, indicated that their children love school and look forward to it. "He now loves school. If he is sick he will fake that he is well so I won't keep him home!" (121). "He loves the school so much [that] he wakes up every morning looking forward to going to school" (153). "[She] looks forward to going to school" (376). "She now loves school" (453). "He is now an 80 average student and loves school, which is more than I can say about the other two boys who went to public and separate schools.

They never enjoyed school and the word hate is still used" (530). "It has not been an easy choice financially but [it is] worthwhile to see our son happy and looking forward to going to school" (731). "She is in love with school and learning" (828). The enthusiasm with which parents expressed their child(ren)'s love for school has some possible implications which will be further discussed in the final chapter.

At least 18 parents mentioned positive academic improvements or achievements made by their children. "We are so pleased with the progress our children are making with their school work" (102). "My son... was failing miserably in public school for years and never improving... [now] he never brings home tests with less than 80%, in fact he is averaging 93% so far this year" (121). "She has gone from a D and F to an 87% average m less than a year [at this school]" (763). "He is.. .doing great academically"

(770). "She is in love with... learning" (828). Thus academic and achievement improvements were experienced and reported with satisfaction by a number of parents.

At least a dozen parents indicated other types of improvements their children experienced. Some parents referred to a general growth. "[It is] a joy to watch my son mature and grow in this ... environment..." (186). "We are very happy with our son's progress and highly recommend this school for the positive changes in [our son's] ... socio-emotional behaviour" (267). "When we transferred my daughter to the private school, my daughter's behaviour instantly improved" (441). "They have become better people since arriving at [this school]" (692). "Our second eldest was struggling with peer pressure at public high school...We are happy to say [after we switched to this school] we got our son back!! He is back to his happy, optimistic personality" (920). Other respondents indicated an emotional improvement. "Her first year at [this school] was a healing experience" (448). "Our daughter .. .now has a better ability to handle the workload and stresses that may arise [in her life]" (480). "[This] is helping her to develop a stronger sense of herself and compassionate strategies for coping with life situations"

(448). Some mentioned social improvements. "He is even a more loving, respectful child towards others" (121). "He...continues to develop social...skills" (614). He is growing

"both socially and academically" (521). For the first time he now has a few "best" friends and regular play dates. (770) Thus emotional and social growth were recognized and associated with attending a non-state school.

Twelve parents indicated a general improvement that they described with words such as blossoming, soaring, flourishing. "[This school] encouragfed] her to soar....it is an oasis for them to flourish" (347). "It has allowed our children to thrive and flourish in so many aspects that we feel would not have been possible at another school" (230).

"Our child has blossomed. She has lost her extreme shyness" (453). "He is 'soaring' in his new school" (521). "My son has blossomed in this environment" (621). One parent claimed that they are now "...watching them grow and mature..." (647). "His spirit shines through victorious more beautifully and stronger the longer he is in this environment" (033). "She has blossomed at [this school]" (779).

Comparing between school types

Stories including accounts of improvements and changes students experienced when attending a non-state school cannot be underestimated. Almost one quarter of all the stories shared mentioned an aspect of positive improvement their child had experienced. These stories were often told with passion and delight. Parents choosing religiously-defined schools told slightly more often of their child's contentment at school, talking about their joy in attending school and their love of school. Parents choosing academically-defined schools commented more often on a flourishing or improvement in academics, behaviour, and self-confidence. Although parents were in general inclined to celebrate the improvements in their child, RDS parents seem to report more on their satisfaction at their child's comfort with the school while ADS parents report more on their satisfaction at their child's personal and individual improvements. Table 5.12 reflects these findings. 167

Climate and change

Table 5.12

Stories about improvements and changes (told in 51 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Improvements Total n % n %

Gained confidence, 25 5 20% 20 80% improved self-worth Joy, happiness 24 13 54% 11 46%

Looks forward to 23 13 57% 10 43% school, loves school Academic 18 6 33% 12 67% improvements Disposition, 15 4 27% 11 73% behavioural, social improvement Thriving, flourishing 12 3 25% 9 75%

Total 117 44 38% 73 62%

Thus parents frequently conveyed the improvements their children were experiencing or had experienced while in a non-state school. These included gains in confidence and self-worth, increased happiness and contentment, demonstrated or declared love of school, improvements academically and otherwise, or a general flourishing and growth.

Safety

In their stories, parents conveyed a broad and sustained concern about the emotional and physical safety of their children. At least a dozen specifically shared their 168 confidence that the schools they had selected for their children were safe. This is not surprising given that the vast majority had, in the first section of the questionnaire, selected "safety of the school" as very important to their choice of private school (84% of

ADS respondents and 86% of RDS respondents).

The following quotations from the stories add depth and meaning to this dominant theme on the safety parents and students find in non-state schools. "I know my children are safe and.. .that is important to us" (354). "They.. .never have to worry about physical intimidation that seems to be rampant in other settings" (364). "When we send our children to this private school we feel we are leaving our children in safe and reliable hands. We feel that they are safe and well looked after" (374). "This school is a safe and caring environment for our children" (385). "We have chosen to stay at this school because it provides a safe environment" (239).

[While in grade five] public elementary school ...she had thought of committing suicide on a number of occasions.. .the feeling of never fitting in with her peers.. .the games these kids play are very dangerous.. .it has taken only seven months at [this school] ...[for] my daughter to [become] a lovely little girl. (119)

The children attending this elementary school are real children, they still have innocence.. .my eleven year old son came home asking for a skipping rope to play at school.. .private school seemed like a great venue to let them have at least a taste of my carefree youth. (240)

I cannot express the gratitude I feel towards the teachers and staff of this school for 'rescuing' my daughter.. .we made the decision to place her in an environment that was much safer.. .her first year at this school.. .totally changed this girl into a confident, carefree young lady. (347)

"Being newcomers to Canada, it has been difficult to find our place in the community and trust somebody else to take care [of] and educate our daughter" (468). "My child feels safe and confident in his school environment" (561). "When I drive to work I feel confident that she is in a safe.. .place" (568). "We wanted to keep the child safe" (611). 169 Thus parents discussed various circumstances surrounding their desire for the safety of their children, from suicide concerns to issues related to their recent immigration, and from vulnerability while parents are away at work to desires for finding a place for childhood innocence.

Some parents were more specific in their concerns for their children's safety than those mentioned in the last section, explaining that they felt their children were now safe from bullying. "I want my children... in an environment safe from bullying" (101). "The school was primarily chosen as a reaction to a bullying situation in a Roman Catholic public school (which would not be addressed by the school)" (466). "We wanted to keep the child safe and free from bullying" (611). "Our son was bullied [in a public school] until he could take it no longer and fought back resulting in a visit to the principal's office. I would NEVER put my child through the public school system again" (123).

Three families told detailed stories about former bullying situations and imply that they found relief in their new setting:

I left my homeland six years ago. I left everything behind me and I was forced to leave my country because of circumstances out of my control. I took my children to another country, another culture, another environment. We fled and we went to live in [a large northern state American city]. Everything was very hard in [this city], but the worst was that my oldest son was a victim of bullying in every single school he went to. My youngest son was affected as well, but in a different way. When we came to Canada I had the hope that the situation could not happen again. However, in spite of the fact that I registered my sons in a Catholic school, my child was again a victim of bullying because of his knowledge. He was affected so deeply [that he and I both became] depressed [from] it. I was looking for another school — any school — in which my son could be better and where respect and consideration were the most important things at school. Somebody told me about [this private school]. I went there and I investigated about the private school. When I read about the principles of the school it was like a miracle. I knew it was the correct choice. Then I asked for the fees and because of my condition I could not afford it. I was sad, but they told me about their scholarship and bursary program. It was unbelievable but true. I applied and my children won the scholarship. (113) 170

My son, as I mentioned was failing miserably in public school for years and never improving. He never enjoyed it because of being led to believe he was a failure. He was always being bullied, teased and left out when it came to his peers....1 will never put him back in public school again.. .this school.. .has changed my son's outlook on life and life itself. (121)

[Due to financial constraints] the girls were removed from their independent schools and placed in the local public school. Both have a very strong sense of self, but as the bullying increased from name calling to physical beatings (because the teachers either didn't care or were unaware of [the violence] when it was happening) our girls, the older in particular, lost their lunches on the bus to other children and [would] come home cut and bruised. A lot of this was going on in the actual classroom, but since the teacher was often next door chatting, it continued despite our pleas for help. We spoke to both the principal and the teacher, but the bullying continued to escalate....we removed our daughter from the public system and we were lucky enough to once again to get her placed at [this school]. (678)

In contrast to these examples of serious failure in today's state schools, one respondent told of the experience they had with bullying in their current private school.

My child was experiencing some form of bullying in [this] school. The teacher and administration took care of the problem promptly and invited guest speakers to discuss bullying and its effects on children like them. The matter was resolved and inclusion in play groups was automatically implemented. Presently, our daughter is extremely happy at school. (376)

It appears that in the experience of at least some parents private schools provided, not a guarantee of an environment free of bullying, but at least a strong alternative when bullying is experienced elsewhere.

Another aspect of the safety and security some parents felt for their children had to do with the intentionality and speed with which difficult social and disciplinary situations were handled. One parent stated "social difficulties are dealt with immediately and irrevocably" (327) and another told,

We did have one time when another child who was new to the school (had come from a public school) was bullying my child. The teachers and principal handled the situation very well to ensure the safety of my child and there has not been another incident like that again. (354) 171

One respondent explained how the headmaster and teacher in the private school intervened when their own child was mistreated, mediating between the two students with firm and gentle guidance (350). Several parents felt that generally negative behaviours were deterred or were prevented entirely from occurring. "Bullying is not tolerated and the school is small enough that they always know where the students are" (568). Another claimed: "You don't hear swearing.. .or [see] mistreatment among the older kids with the smaller kids" (014).

One parent was so worried about their young child witnessing mistreatment that she enrolled her in a private school the next year.

My daughter was five years old and in SK at a Roman Catholic school in a "nice area" of our community. At age five she witnessed children fighting on the playground and was afraid of the older children. There seemed to be a lack of supervision.. .for grade one we placed her in a private school. The change in her was wonderful .(181)

Several felt that private schools had to manage less disruptive behaviour.

One of the reasons we avoided the public school system was the perceived lack of effective classroom discipline in that system. An independent school (theoretically) can focus more on student learning and less on managing disruptive behavior. Parents at independent schools tend to support a more respectful attitude to teachers and to the learning process. (679)

Another parent echoed this by asserting that "what is interesting about this independent school was that it did what the public Roman Catholic didn't or couldn't. It focuses on the core kids—the average, untroublesome child...independent schools weed out troublesome kids [and have] strong leadership [which] minimizes issues, doesn't tolerate them, and sets high behaviour standards" (232). 172 Comparing between school types

With 32 comments by 17 parents on some aspect of safety in their stories (they are specified in Table 5.13), safety is clearly a salient issue when choosing a non-state

school. Parents choosing schools in either category seemed equally as likely to note the

safety of their selected school although parents in religiously-defined schools were

slightly more likely to comment on the speed with which safety issues were dealt in their

school. Overall, stories regarding the safe climate in the chosen schools were as likely to come from parents in one school type as in the other.

Climate and change

Table 5.13

Stories about safe environment in parent stories (mentioned in 17 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Improvements Frequency Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Total Safe school 13 6 46% 7 54%

Bullying 7 4 57% 3 43%

Social difficulties 5 4 80% 1 20% dealt with immediately Lack of swearing, 3 1 33% 2 67% bullying, mistreatment Well-disciplined 3 0 3 100% students Was afraid 1 1 100% 0

Total 32 16 50% 16 50% Thus parents conveyed that they felt a sense of security, safety, and order when they chose a private school. They felt they were taking some measures to ensuring their child would not be bullied and that students would treat one another better than in publicly funded schools.

Concerns

Two themes emerged most frequently from parents in their stories about choosing a private school for their children in terms of their apprehensions. First, some shared concerns about public schools, and second, others summarized their thoughts about the financial aspect of sending a child to a private school in Ontario. While these stories of concern are not entirely negative, they best represent the angst parents feel about having to leave the public system and about managing the financial implications of sending their child to a privately funded school. Another thread, although not dominant, conveyed disappointment and concerns with private schools.

Aspects of these stories have already been included in one or more of the four previous sections of this chapter. Given this I grappled with whether to include this section at all. Moreover this was the least pleasant part of the chapter to prepare. The tone became disturbingly negative as I collected every story of concern about public schools. I began to wonder if I were instead studying the stories of families who had left private schools and gone to public schools, would the stories not be similar. The one- sidedness of the entire project became especially disturbing to me as I prepared this section. Yet because these parents on the strength of their convictions had willingly shared these, often painful, stories, I decided to include them in a distinct section so that their voice could be recorded and heard, with the hopes that I, or another researcher, could capture at some future time, absent voices, telling the stories of those who left non- state schools for state schools. I persevered in the hope that patterns identified might point to possible solutions to prevent such similar heartache in the future.

In this section I begin with the financial aspects of choosing a private school

(perhaps because many of them convey a hint of optimism!)

Finances

A total of 49 of the stories mentioned some aspect of the financial considerations in choosing a non-state school. At least 33 of the stories conveyed something of the financial challenge or compromises parents made to pay private school tuition. Only two other sub-themes were mentioned more than this in the 223 stories submitted; those were parents' positive impressions of the teachers in private schools and of the teachers' positive recognition of students' needs, both discussed in the earlier part of this chapter.

Some of these 33 stories discussed the sacrifices parents make and how it is

"worth it" while others discussed the on-going struggle they have with deciding whether to continue choosing private schools because of the financial implications for their families.

Some simply mentioned that they work hard or have sacrificed items such as vehicles or homes to pay tuition, adding and explaining they believe it is "worth it".

"Please remember that parents who have chosen private 'Christian' schools are not necessarily wealthy. Some parents struggle to meet payments" (071), one parent stated.

"When [our children's] grades fall we remind them that we have to work very hard to 175 keep them in that school, so they have to work very hard to stay in there. This seems very reasonable to them and assists in re-focusing" (173). "My husband and I have sacrificed much - we've even sold our home to be closer to the school as there is no bus - but we believe we've made the right choice. Our kids are worth it" (185). "The cost of her school is the cost of a car payment -1... drive an old truck [instead]" (568).

Christian education from K-8 has always been a financial commitment: one that hasn't always come easy. We have had to sacrifice many 'things' for this education, but feel that our children have been blessed with a great education, giving them a strong base on which to stand as they further their education through high school and university or college. The quality of their education has been excellent. (217)

Financially, our son's attendance at a private school is a bit of a stretch for us. We drive older model cars and forego expensive holidays and entertainment. However, we have only one son, and we will never have the chance to raise him a second time. That is why it was so important to make this investment in him. We could leave him a larger financial legacy that might shrink or get lost, but the investment we have chosen to make in his education and development can never be taken away from him. (695)

"My husband and I work full time so we can afford the tuition" (251). "Sending our children to a Christian school is a sacrifice, but well worth it" (035). "It may be a high price to pay but with God's guidance and grace we hope our children will be influenced"

(636). "Overall the sacrifices we made to send the kids to private school were well worth it. We do not regret spending the money, and feel we got our money's worth at [this school]" (176). After a lengthy story about how private education has assisted their children, one parent offered this comment: "In short, if you can afford to [educate] your children privately, then do it. You only get one chance to give them an excellent education, and it will stand them in good stead for the rest of their lives" (248). "It has been the best investment of our money that we could have made" (294). "This school has been worth every penny we pay for tuition" (480). "Even though it can be a struggle paying for Christian schools, it is worth every penny. It is worth the sacrifices we need to make" (064). "The financial 'sacrifice' is well worth it" (883). Following an explanation of a number of benefits of the school, one parent said: "For us, this justifies the cost" (720). "It has not been an easy choice financially but [it is] worthwhile to see our son happy and looking forward to going to school" (731) wrote another. "We are.. .definitely getting our money's worth" (771). "We both want this for [our] girls and are willing to make any necessary sacrifices to see their [private school] education through to completion" (368).

It really upsets me when I hear politicians or people whose children do not attend private schools, talk about how we are all "rich people" with too much money and that we don't deserve any help to send our children to a private school. I am not a "well off' person. My husband and I work two jobs, as well as try to run a farm. We have four small children and it is very hard every month to make ends meet .. .1 choose to send my children to an independent school to give them the best start possible. It's not easy - and if that means that we have to go without fancy vacations, home renovations or other luxuries in life - then so be it. My husband and I both feel that there is no sacrifice too great for our kids. (051)

My father died 2.5 years ago and my daughter was about to start kindergarten. I was scared about the money and how we were going to manage. He told me on his deathbed that "you just [write] that check [sic] first and everything else will figure itself out." It's something I will always remember and I use it to put everything in perspective. It's the best advice I ever got from my father. (051)

As indicated in the previous section, many families recognize the financial sacrifices of choosing a non-state school, but are also quick to recognize benefits gained.

Other families shared their on-going struggle with deciding whether to continue sending their children to their private school,

We were very happy with this private school however an increase in tuition (over $2,500.00 per year) has caused us to consider other options such as [the] separate school system. The price of tuition has increased every year by at least 10%. Due to no tax benefits coupled with high property taxes has made it increasingly difficult to keep our children in this school. (169) 177 We seriously considered taking our kids out of the Christian school and putting them in the public system in 2002 -just for a year. This was because of the expense of the tuition and the time-consuming commute, among other things. (022)

Each year we face quite a financial burden to send our children to our chosen independent school. It would be far easier from a bank account perspective to just send them to a publicly funded school. But with that [choice would] come all the pros and cons of this type of education. ... [We continue] to accept the financial burden. This means that we have carefully considered the investment of education of our offspring and will see / are now seeing the long term effect it has on them as young people and future adult citizens. We as a family appreciate the consistency of teaching between home and school. We want our school to be an extension of the home, and our school is just that. So [I continue] asking myself the big question "is this financial burden worth it?" This definitely receives an affirmative answer and will always be a better question to ask than the following question at the end of my children's education... "Should I have tried the route of private education?" (292).

The cost of a Jewish education in Ontario is oppressive but our family has endured the costs because of our strong views on faith based education. By high school, we were financially exhausted and we welcomed the decision of two out of three of our children to attend public high school. (329)

Several families shared their wishes to be able to send all of their children to a private school. "We would love to have our three children attend this school as well - however cost may prohibit this from happening" (252), said one.

Four families told about leaving private schools because of the price of tuition or the lack of funding for educational assistants. "If we had an unlimited supply of money, I think we would leave our children at [this school], but we decided to switch them over

[each after grade one]" (477). "We couldn't afford a renovation and tuition fees at the same time, so the girls were removed from their independent schools and placed in the local public school" (678).

Unfortunately we will take our older boy out of private school and put him in Catholic school. You might ask why. [The answer is because of] financial reasons. With three kids and two sets of grandparents that depend on us [it] is a very big commitment to try and put three kids through private schools - especially 178 when we are convinced that they will go to a university, and this [is what] we want to help them pay for. (922)

Our second child has significant special needs. This school openly welcomed her, and goes above and beyond the call of duty to support her. She is completely integrated and is viewed as enriching her classmates' lives. It is with greatest sadness we realize that as she enters grade one she will need an educational assistant. Since the Ministry of Education will not fund this in a private school, we must look at changing her into the public / separate system, or fund an educational assistant ourselves, which is not financially possible for us. In the end, our daughter will lose out from leaving this nurturing, calm environment. (200)

Four families told of how their financial struggles were accommodated. Many non-state schools appear to be responsive to accommodating financially strained families in various ways. Trading cleaning services for their children's education was the solution for one family. Another school supported a homeschooling arrangement of the family temporarily unable to pay tuition. Deferred tuition payments and scholarships were accommodations made in other circumstances.

After 9-11 [September 11, 2001] our finances were very strained. We continued to come and clean at the school to continue receiving the bursary and pay down our bill. Things continued longer than expected. The school and church leadership chose to allow us the privilege of buying our books through them while home schooling instead of having to get them at a higher price further away. The kids were tested at the school and their records maintained there as they were especially concerned when our oldest at home started high school. Our children were also included in our special days at school and field trips if they had met the scholastic requirements. They have done much to not only make the kids feel special individually, but also as a family feel special. (103)

They told me about their scholarship and bursary program.. .1 applied and my children won the scholarship. (113)

[When first enrolling my children in the private school] I requested to [have] my kids accepted free of charge until [I was able to obtain] my license and [be] able to work. [This] usually takes three or four years for foreign trained doctors. [The school] accepted [my request]! I appreciate them a lot and wish to be able to [obtain] my professional [license] soon. (429)

I am a full-time university student. I am a single mother. I use my money from school to pay for my daughter's education. The principal has been extremely 179 understanding and patient when I have not been able to make payments. I do not think any other school would be that tolerant. He has offered to defer my fees (last year) when we were away and did not have the money right away to start the school year. I cannot be more appreciative. (559)

Several parents indicated that tuition was intentionally kept low at their schools to accommodate the financial limits of the families. "I love this school and appreciate that they attempt to keep the tuition costs down so that it is affordable for our family to get a

Christian-based education" (172). "The administration does all it can to keep education quality high while keeping costs to a minimum, in order to allow families with lower income to be a part of it" (358).

Some parents offered policy-oriented comments in terms of financial support for private schools. "The Jewish schools in [this city] charge too much for the education they offer. The community must offer higher subsidies, by cutting back on charity to Ontario institutions in view of the discrimination in school funding by the Ontario Government"

(329).

I apologize for not answering your earlier questions in one sentence alone. I did not find that one sentence alone could adequately describe why we choose financial difficulty in order to send our children to a Christian school. When the government finally provided a tax relief for parents sending their children to independent schools, I was relieved that we would get the help we needed. I was appalled that not only was the decision reversed but that people who choose an independent school for their children were painted as financially stable, even wealthy. Although some families are financially better off, many of us are average income families who place a greater financial hardship on ourselves in order to send our children to a Christian school. (637)

To sum this up I would like to say I pay taxes for the public schools and I don't complain about it, we also pay our private school to have our children taught, so please let us continue to have it this way. (415)

I hope that one day the government will realize what a terrific job these private schools are doing and provide funding for them. I would gladly like to see my tax money go to the private schools vs. the public or Roman Catholic system. We know a lot of other people who feel the same way that the public and Roman Catholic school systems are a joke compared to what is going on in the private system. They also would like to see some support from the government or to have their tax money switched to support private schools. It is also interesting to note that in our hometown there are more and more people who are choosing to home school since they can't afford private schools and they have no confidence in the public or Roman Catholic systems. (162)

Several others stated: "We pay a lot of tax. Part of our tax goes to public school which our kids do not go to. I think it's only fair to reduce the tax for us" (380). "We need government funding for this school so it can give more because we pay taxes and this should be toward our children's education. That will be fair" (385).

Although a number of respondents, in their estimation, can afford the fees, they nevertheless still commented on the affordability of paying tuition. "We could afford it and the cost is well worth any perceived sacrifice. Because we have always sent our daughter to an independent school the experience is treated as an ordinary, necessary household expense" (611). "The money was there, although we made, and [continue to] make sacrifices to attend [to] three private school educations" (744). "It is money well spent when I compare [this school to] the local schools" (762).

Only one story was rather counter-intuitive as it claimed the private school option was cheaper than sending children to the publicly-funded schools. This had to do with the childcare offered.

The main reason we enrolled our children in a private school is because of economic necessity. It is for cheaper to have them in private school with before and after school care than have them in public school and arrange for someone to drop off and pick up. (We have no family in our area to rely on). We live in [a large Ontario city], and some public schools offer before / after [school] programs. The elementary school we are locked into does not. It is, although, in theory, possible to change to an out of district school, [but] in reality it is impossible. At this point we will pull our children from private school when they are old enough to make it to / from school on their own. (852) 181 One parent (022) left a note to the researcher suggesting that future research should specifically ask parents what other sacrifices in addition to often long commutes were made to send a child to a private school.

Comparing between school types

Concerns

Table 5.14

Stories including financial aspects of choice (mentioned in 49 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Financial issue Frequency Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Total Financial struggle, 33 20 61% 13 39% compromises to pay private school tuition Financially worth it 18 8 44% 10 56%

Financially unable to 6 2 33% 4 67% sustain private school attendance Government should 6 6 100% 0 finance private schools or the parents Can afford it 3 1 33% 2 67%

School provides 3 2 67% 1 33% financial assistance Finances insufficient 1 0 1 100% in publicly-funded schools Totals 70 39 56% 31 44%

The financial implication of choosing a private school education for one's children in Ontario is clearly a salient issue for parents. Table 5.14 above summarizes the points parents made about this. Although not a deterrent, by definition, for most participants in this study, it is nevertheless an aspect of private schooling that is a source of struggle to many that do choose this option. As well, a number of respondents made plaintive calls for some government financial support of non-state schools or of the parents that choose them.

Concerns about private schools

Not all parents are entirely taken by the private schools they choose for their children. Twenty-two stories included various accounts of a failure of the schools, programs, or teachers to meet the parent's or the student's expectations. Two stories especially were rather filled with examples of disappointment. Even so, not all stories including concerns had a negative tone; the concern is stated and seems to be accepted as an aspect of the choice they have made.

The lengthy commute was noted by six parents. "I may be changing schools next year to another private school closer to home" (012). "We drive our youngest son every day to and from school which is a twenty kilometer drive each way" (123). "We now choose to drive our child to this wonderful school thirty minutes away" (162). "We've even sold our home to be closer to the school as there is no bus" (185). "We seriously considered taking our kids out of [this private] school and putting them in the public system in 2002 -just for a year. This was because of the expense of the tuition and the time-consuming commute, among other things" (022). "[This school] became a possibility, even though it is quite a distance for us to travel" (920). One parent who asked not to be directly quoted noted how the geographical distances separating private school families undermined community. 183 Seven parents indicated that the limitations on programs, facilities, or resources was a concern. "To have a good selection of courses for the high school level is equally important. Unfortunately, some private schools do not offer this selection; I feel it is important especially in the last two senior years to expose students to a diverse amount of subjects" (244). Based on their experiences another said,

In hindsight we should have switched him in grade six [from private school]. He flourished in public high school. We soon noticed things that had been missing in his private school, such as: experienced not novice teachers, no science lab or equipment, no library, no arts or music (instrumental) program, no health program. Also, school philosophy / mandate changed as years went by. [Things] such as [the] 'star' program [were] dropped, individualized programming [was] dropped, [and there were] no resources for 'exceptional' students. (253)

One parent complained of the lunches: "The main complaint at this school is the limited lunch menu" (810), and another parent had a concern about the lack of before and after school care. Although she and her children deeply appreciate the school, she stated: "My fear for the future is that I depend on my mother to drive them to school. This school is not open at 6 a.m. Without any before [school] care options, and if I don't have my mom, they will be unable to attend" (562). Another parent cautioned about the general lack in private schools: "It is also important to look at the facilities. Most private schools cannot afford luxury buildings; therefore some new public schools are sometimes a better choice.

[The school should have] computers, science labs, libraries, pools, etc." (244).

Eight parents discussed ways in which the school they had chosen failed to meet their expectations. One school ceased recognizing their child's special needs.

Our son, however, has always struggled with school and has been frequently cited for behavioral problems. Initially the school was very supportive and attempted to work with him to some success. However, as he approached grades seven and eight, the pressure for him to conform to the standard norm (despite ADHD and learning difficulties) was intense. There was little flexibility or support to parents seeking other professional input (such as educational assessments). This is not a 184 school for kids with issues, even though that was our sole reason for coming to [this private school]. I would have been far better for the school to honestly say that they could not provide the necessary support to my child, so that we would not have wasted so much time and money in the latter years. My son now hates the pressure of school work and will not have pleasant memories of his time there. (779)

Another parent who had hoped that learning about their own heritage and religion would assist their child to appreciate other belief systems noted, "The school has not lived up to our expectations, well not yet in any case. However, we continue to hope that some of the outcome goals we had aspired towards will be fulfilled" (335). One parent told this story of disappointment:

The first year was great - a new learning of everything. But, as with all, with time comes knowledge and disappointment. The school has taken too much interest in ESL students to the point that has become uncomfortable to some students. My child is grateful that this is her last year because she hates school. It has become a place where she fees unsafe, harassed and unhappy. Every time she has complained to the teachers, they tell her to be more understanding [because they are only] trying to be a politically correct school. [This] is all fine and dandy, until someone can get seriously hurt. The gangs and rivalry is [sic] very apparent to most [people], except school administration. (516)

Several parents, one who did not want to be directly quoted, indicated that the headmaster failed to meet their expectations. Another said, "The main complaint at this school is ... that the director has full control: what [the director] says goes. But, if you don't like that, [then] you can always leave" (810). Several parents noted their dissatisfaction with some of the teachers:

My husband and I have learned throughout the 8.5 years that our children have attended private school that although it may be a private school, the key to a wonderful educational experience for the child is the teacher and the environment of the classroom. My eldest child has not always had teachers that 'fit' with her personality. My husband and I had high expectations for the private schools and believed that only excellent teachers would fit the mold of the school. We learned very quickly that it is not only about a school that has a good reputation but interviewing and finding the teacher that can work with the individual child, 185 especially if the child needs "extra attention". Unfortunately [our daughter] didn't get a great start at this private school. (607)

The parent who asked not to be quoted directly indicated disappointment with the many inexperienced teachers encountered at their private school.

Six parents indicated that their first preference would be for their children to attend publicly-funded schools.

Our decision to support this independent school is about access to this [preschool] program and not to support private schools in Ontario. Our preference would be to use publicly funded schools. However, they do not have as strong of a preschool program. Beyond this program (grades one through eight and beyond), I feel that the programs and environment offered by this independent school are inferior to the publicly funded schools in our community. Our child will be enrolled in a public school when she enters grade one in September 2006. (506)

I only have one son who is in junior kindergarten and I am not really sure if this school I am sending my son [to] is any better than other public schools at this time. I do not have any other schools to compare [it to]. Personally I do not believe private school is much better than some good public schools. It was my wife's idea to send my son [to private school], hoping it [would be] better than public school. (783)

We sent all five of our children from our previous marriages to public schools and watched the system gradually deteriorate through three decades.... We are sad that we had to make this choice [of private school for our youngest child]. We think every child in Ontario deserves quality education. But, except in the best neighbourhoods, they don't get it. (453)

One parent took stock of their decision to send their children to religiously- defined schools and wondered if public schools would not have served as well or better.

[Our] child is in grade twelve so this is our last year. If we had to do it all over again, I'm not sure we would put our children through Christian schooling. We might do it again but I'm not sure. Our Christian school constantly insinuated over the years that the public school system was bad. Now that I am in the public system, I see that there are many hard working, dedicated professionals eager to teach children and not just interested in money. Just like there are dedicated nurses in a public hospital and dedicated police officers, there are dedicated teachers in the public schools. Because our independent school was faith-based, I feel we sent our children there out of fear and obligation. In many ways it was a good experience, but our motives were not honorable. (076) 186

One parent, conceding to the wishes of the child's other parent, remains unconvinced about the difference:

Neither my wife nor I come from a private school background so we constantly struggle to understand the value we get from [the education provided by a] private school vs. a public school.. .At this point we will pull our children from private school when they are old enough to make it to / from school on their own [and no longer require the day care provided here]. Our conclusion is that there is no difference in education quality between private and public schools. Parents who spend over twenty thousand dollars per year are only trying to rationalize their decision. (852)

Several parents suggested that their private school was either too demanding or not demanding enough.

To do full terms in private schools and to do two sets of exams per subject I feel is penalizing students because some students do not do well on exams. Therefore only one set of exams should be sufficient. The private schools that do this are not serving their students justice. (244)

My child feels safe and confident in his school environment. I have wanted to make a switch but his reply is - "why would you want to hurt me like that?" What could I do? Even if I felt academics were not as strong as I would like [I need to ask myself] what is the most value: academic studies or a self-actualized child! (561)

One large family—the parents of which had been educated in Canada and in Europe— chose five different school types (public, Catholic, French Immersion, two other independent schools) plus home education for their children over a period of twenty-three years and commented: "We had our three oldest children in a Christian school until driven by mediocre teaching to home school" (371).

One parent discussed at length the isolation of students who attend private schools.

We also no longer liked the small friend pool available and the lack of cultural diversity.. .In general, we question if you really get 'bang for your buck' in private schools once the basic skills are established. We also find the private 187 school culture very insular and sheltered. We elected to send our children to public high schools to experience the 'real world' while they are living under our roof rather than sending them unprepared at the university level. (253)

While in all other cases of dissatisfaction parents told about how they left private schools or were planning to leave them, only one parent, who asked not to be directly quoted, suggested that private schools could be improved through more government inspection.

Comparing between school types

When parents discussed their concerns with private schools, the issues differed by school type. While the main concern of parents choosing religiously-defined schools involved transportation, the concerns of parents choosing academically-defined schools dealt with disappointment with limited facilities and programs, unmet expectations, and a discontent that their child could not be served in a public school. These concerns are summarized in Table 5.15. 188

Concerns

Table 5.15

Stories including concerns about private schools (from 22 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Concern Frequency Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Total Distance of 8 6 75% 2 25% commute, other transportation concerns Limited programs 7 0 7 100% and extras Not meeting or did 6 2 33% 4 67% not meet expectations Ultimately prefer 6 1 17% 5 83% public schools Limited facilities 4 0 4 100% and resources Rigour, not enough 3 0 3 100% or too much Other 9 2 22% 7 88%

Totals 43 11 26% 32 74%

When parents reflected on their experience with choosing a private school, a number of concerns were conveyed regarding the non-state school they had chosen.

These included lengthy commuting distances, limited programs, facilities, and resources, failure of the school to meet their expectations, their ultimate preference for supporting public education, the level of academic rigor and the insularity of the schools. One parent wondered whether more government inspection might improve private schools. 189

Withdrawal from publicly-funded schools

As mentioned earlier many parents voiced their dissatisfaction and concern with public and separate schools in their stories. In all, 62 parents included in their stories at least one concern that they explicitly had with publicly-funded schools, concerns that caused them to withdraw from state schools after a time of participation or to avoid sending their children to such schools altogether.

In the first four main sections of this chapter, community, curriculum, culture, and climate and change, the positive attractions and experiences of parents and students with private schools were highlighted and categorized. In contrast, this section outlines and categorizes the comments regarding what parents found to be negative about the public

school option. Comments ranged from general statements such as those ten parents who

said they could never imagine sending there children to a public school to more specific

statements highlighting single issues. As such, categorization of these comments and

stories of concern was not straightforward. Forty stories conveyed general disappointment with, or a general lack of confidence in, public and separate schools,

although some categorized here did also give specific examples from experience. In the

62 stories that I have broadly categorized as Withdrawal from public schools parents told

of their concerns, either generally or specifically, with the community (especially teachers and principals), curriculum (especially poor academic standards), culture

(especially lack of moral guidance), and climate (especially the emotionally and socially

negative aspects) in public and/or separate schools.

With respect to the community, concerns about teachers were specified in eleven

stories. "Teachers were overwhelmed and powerless to instill a love learning" (338). "Our eldest daughter was having great difficulty in grade two in the public school system. She had a teacher who didn't believe in homework, and she did not listen to our concerns as parents" (480). One story told of a teacher who, despite the parent's detailed introduction of the child, appeared unaware of the student's capabilities and sent the child, who could read the daily newspaper fluently, home with books that had one word per page (502). One parent, who could afford to only send their most high needs child to a private school, took another of their children out of a private school. Once their financial situation changed such that they could send her again to a private school, she declined the offer. Of this experience the parent said,

Whilst there are a number of committed and dedicated teachers at my daughter's public high school, they are very much the exception. There are also some truly awful ones whose attitude is such that one has to question why they ever became teachers, as they clearly have no empathy with the students, or interest in passing on a love of their chosen subject. (248)

Another parent noted a lack of care in the public school teachers with which she was familiar.

In the public school system, [people] go to school to become teachers for the salary and perks, not because they love their jobs. This was evident every time I entered the school. Even the "cornerstone", that being the genuine caring for children and their education and needs is severely absent from most staff I've met in the past. (776)

Two stories told of disappointing school leadership. "On the day we withdrew

our children from the public school, the principal (who knew the purpose of our visit in

advance) presented us with the required forms to sign. Despite knowledge of our concerns over a period of time, he made no apologies or requests for us to give the school more time. This convinced us that we made the correct decision" (045). Another family told this story of weak leadership: 191 Our daughter attended a Roman Catholic School up to grade six. Over the years she had very poor, inexperienced, uninterested teachers with a very weak principal. Each day she would come home bored, and losing interest in school.. .One day she was playing with two other students and one student accidentally hurt herself. The principal lectured all three students and embarrassed and disciplined them for no reason. That action resulted in the "last straw.. .knowing our daughter and how she is very shy, the Principal's disciplinary actions are not founded. (237)

With regard to the curriculum parents commented on academic weakness and disregard of learning needs. "When a sixth-grader transfers to our school from a public school and he can't even say his ABC's there's a definite problem with government funded schools. [These schools are] a joke" (0101). One parent's comments regarding their children's undiagnosed and unaddressed learning needs were:

Our two eldest children attended publicly funded local schools. Their learning needs were not identified or addressed resulting in frustration and low self- esteem. Our son was bullied until he could take it no longer and fought back resulting in a visit to the principals office. I would NEVER put my child through the public school system again. If your child has a learning disability the public school system will fail them. (123)

Individually both our children recognized, between grades three and four in the public system, that they were behind. When we approached the school they felt 'they did not have the resources to provide the assistance the children were requesting'. (534)

Another told how in a split kindergarten / grade one class "the kindergarten children were left at their desks and learned nothing" (453). Although another family's child had progressed well in the very early programs they were disappointed that by grade one and two their daughter was still being taught the alphabet, was becoming bored, and was becoming less receptive to new work.

In terms of the moral orientation of the schools, one commented, "I do feel that the lack of discipline and strong moral guidance has been detrimental to her overall 192 experience" (248). Another discussed the difficulties she found in giving moral guidance in a public school.

I have supply taught, and taught in the public school system, and although I support the dedication and hard work of teachers there, I feel ham-strung when dealing with situations requiring moral guidance. I can guide my students to "right" and "wrong" choices but can ultimately not guide them to the Source (God) [which would] enable them with power and motivation to do right. I believe that a teacher stands in the parent's place, and want my children to have a teacher that is truly my representative. (302)

Five stories told of the emotionally demanding climate of public schools, three of which told the following stories.

I have an eleven year old daughter who attended a public elementary school up until the end of grade five. During the summer months before she was returning to her public elementary school we had noticed many different problems. One of these problems was a lack of interest for learning. [Other problems included] sloppy work, very bad spelling, and the list goes on. One day she opened up to me out of the blue and asked if she could be home schooled, I said I would think about it. I asked her why she wanted to stay home and she cried and told me horrible things about what she had experienced and ultimately disclosed that she had thought of committing suicide on a number of different occasions. Her self esteem and self worth [were becoming very] low because of the feeling of never fitting in with her peers, even though she is an average little girl. The games these kids play are very dangerous and damaging to many individuals. It just so happened that we didn't realize until it was almost too late for our daughter. It has taken only seven months at [this private school] for the love of the supervisors and some children who have never been exposed to these dangerous games [to allow] my daughter to [become] a lovely little girl and grow up to [be] a [much] loved individual. Thanks [named private school]. (119)

My son, as I mentioned was failing miserably in public school for years and never improving. He never enjoyed it because of being led to believe he was a failure. He was always being bullied, teased and left out when it came to his peers. At this [private] school - on the first day he came home full of excitement and happiness. He said he had made 10 friends in the first minute of school. I'd never seen him so happy. I just sobbed from sheer joy. He never brings home tests with less than 80%, in fact he is averaging 93% for the year so far. He now loves school. If he is sick, he will fake that he is well so I won't keep him home! What a switch. Before, he would never want to go to school, sick or not. You can see the difference in him - he is confident, he has self-esteem, he is even a more loving, respectful child towards others. The teachers care and love each child and it shows! I will never put him back in public school again - the difference in our son 193 is like night and day and I thank God everyday for this school and how wonderfully it has changed my son's outlook on life and life itself. (121)

I decided to send our son to this particular high school after having experienced the public high school system with my other three children. I found the public high school experience truly traumatic, where teachers were overwhelmed and powerless to instill a love of learning and discipline in their students. My children were just one of the hundreds of students they taught and I never knew when they were late / absent or skipped school, did not do homework or misbehaved. Drugs, alcohol and smoking were the norm, with teachers and administration being powerless to deal with the most difficult students. My children did graduate with relatively good grades and went on to university, but the emotional toll was too high! My youngest is now almost at the end of grade three and so far the experience has been very positive. I only wish I had sent all my children to private high school! (338)

Another parent claimed that going back to public schools did not work for her children as the social aspect of the public schools did not match that in the private schools.

We chose this school and have tried going back to public school when we moved to a better public school area. Unfortunately it did not work out. The friend base, since the children are together from kindergarten to grade 8, is extremely important and strong. The friends are kind, loving and the history is long. (176)

In various ways some stories expressed concern about poor overall climate in publicly funded schools. One parent who sends her children to public schools once they reach grade one commented: "Our public school is [alright], but it is no Montessori school - that is for sure. The classrooms (in our public school) are cluttered, chaotic, and appear to have minimal consistency - that's on a good day!" (477) Another parent who eventually chose a Montessori school made similar comments: "My son's experience in the public system filled him with anxiety. The large class size (thirty-two) brought the noise levels up beyond his comfort level. The classrooms in all grades were cluttered.

The amount of homework sent home at night was so overwhelming, it began to affect our home life" (500). "There was no discipline in the classroom" (237) another parent said.

Various contrasts across school systems were noted in this story: 194 We had moved from BC to Ontario in 1999 and our children went to a public school for the first time. There was a noticeable difference (from their perspective as well as mine). The children were allowed to behave [poorly, for example, using] bad language, [being] disrespectful to teachers and each other, and [having] generally a lower moral standard than what our children were used to. (0295)

Another talked about the culture in her son's publicly-funded school in the following terms: "My oldest son ([in] grade seven) now goes to a French Catholic separate school and I am appalled at how the culture is such that students are [enabled to be] "bad". I am

[also] appalled at how the teachers talk to the children. They expect respect without respecting the kids first" (586). Another commented on a classroom experience in a public French immersion school: "Our son had four teachers in one year. He still did very well but the class fell apart. It was totally out of control!" (780). "One of the reasons we avoided the public school system was the perceived lack of effective classroom discipline in that system" (679) said another parent.

Although difficult to categorize, three additional types of stories should be mentioned: stories from 'insiders'; wishes for all children in the family to attend private school; and parents' own stories of negative schooling experiences. Several respondents told insider's stories about publicly-funded schools by way of explaining their choice of non-state school. One respondent whose parent had taught in publicly funded schools made the following claim:

My father was a teacher and throughout my schooling years I was well aware of the quality of education amongst public vs public (depending on neighbourhood) and public vs private. The gap of budgets has become greater to the extent that public school cannot offer the same level of schooling - reliably. For example, the number of janitors, the number of computers in the classrooms, and the size of the student to teacher ratio are all more desirable factors in the private system. You have to pay for quality education. (138) 195 After citing poor academics, violence, drugs, and bullying this respondent presented

another insider's view as follows: "Public and Catholic [schools] pass the buck and steal

funds. [This is] inside information from someone who works on the school board! Thanks

Canada for a great system" (101). A teacher in the public system wrote the following: "I teach grade seven. For months, I'd had difficulty getting one particular boy to produce

some work. He was quite capable and I know his family, as I had taught his older brother.

After several attempts to contact home, detentions etc., I finally sent him to the office.

My principal said to me that perhaps 'I care too much'" (185). One parent was discouraged by what he saw on the inside as a repair person. "Before my husband and I had children he fixed photocopiers and had to visit a lot of public schools (copiers). He was not impressed by the teachers' attitude to their co-workers or students or even to him" (636).

In several cases parents indicated their regret that not all of their children had

attended a private school or that they were planning for all of their children to eventually

attend a private school. "My youngest is now almost at the end of grade three and so far

the experience has been very positive. I only wish I had sent all my children to private

high school!" (338). "We are very happy with the school. Our second son will be

attending in September and eventually we will unite our four sons" (737). "Her brother

and sister are a bit jealous and will probably join her there soon" (763).

Several parents claimed that their own poor schooling experiences led them to

choose a private school.

Both of us (the parents) felt our own personal experiences with the public school system were overrated and under-funded. The large class sizes and lack of teaching ability from the overpaid and under-educated teaching staff pushed us to consider private schools when we had our own children. (220) 196

The school has fostered a great love of learning, and our children are almost always happy to go to school. I know my own personal experience of school was not like that; I was often bored and didn't want to go, and in talking to other parents it seems to be common. (610)

Comparing between school types

More families choosing academically-defined schools told stories about having given state schools a try and shared direct stories of disappointment than those choosing religiously-defined schools. Meanwhile, as demonstrated in Table 5.16, RDS parents told more stories indicating that through their observations and through their investigations they were disenfranchised by state schools.

Concerns

Table 5.16

Stories of withdrawal from publicly-funded schools (drawn from 62 discrete stories) Religiously-defined Academically-defined school parents school parents (n=128) (n = 95) Withdrawal reason or Frequency Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage issue Total Dissatisfaction with or 40 18 45% 22 55% lack of confidence in public and/or separate schools Ignored child's abilities, 13 2 5% 11 85% potential, needs Teachers are power-less, 11 3 27% 8 73% weak, over-whelmed, uncaring, of inconsistent quality, disregard learning styles, or poor attitude Difficulties in other 10 2 20% 8 80% system Could not imagine 10 7 70% 3 30% 197 sending children to public or separate school Poor discipline, 9 4 44% 5 56% behaviour, foul lang uage, lack of respect, drugs, alcohol, smoking We saw (see) what went 6 4 67% 2 33% on (goes on) there Public school took 5 2 40% 3 60% emotional toll on child Poor academic 5 2 40% 3 60% achievement Weak leadership or 2 1 50% 1 50% principal Wish all of our kids 3 1 33% 2 67% could have gone to private school Parent(s) had negative 2 1 50% 1 50% public school experience Totals 125 53 42% 72 58%

Parents conveyed numerous concerns in their stories. The concerns could broadly be categorized as dealing with issues of community, curriculum, culture or climate. In all, it seems that parents are, in general—certainly those who eventually choose academically-defined schools—quite willing to give public schooling a chance but when it disappoints some will turn to non-state schools to satisfy the educational needs of their children.

Regardless of school type, the large number of stories that mentioned some aspect of disappointment with the state schools demonstrates that parents, either by experience or by observing from afar, are conscious of the opportunities offered in state schools, and are turning away from them and choosing a non-state alternative. 198

Summary

This analysis of the 223 stories submitted by 920 of the parents regarding their experiences with choosing a non-state school in Ontario identified five major themes: community, curricula, culture, climate and change, and concerns. Under each theme, a number of topics presented; in all, 16 sub-themes were discussed, four under each of the first two themes, two sub-themes under the third major theme, and three under each of the last two major themes. Table 5.1 at the beginning of the chapter and Table F in Appendix

F capture these findings in brief and in extended detail. Four of the 16 sub-themes received more than 100 references each in the various stories, each under a different major theme. Only one major theme, culture, did not have a sub-theme that received more than 100 references in the stories. Under community, all things related to teachers received much attention; under curricula the school's academic atmosphere and orientation received much discussion; under climate and change many stories enthusiastically and appreciatively discussed the positive improvements and changes the students experienced when they moved to a non-state school; and under concerns a wide variety of stories discussed the reasons for withdrawing students from state schools.

A comparison between the stories of parents from religiously-defined schools (n =

128) and of those from academically-defined schools (n = 95), revealed an inclination by each group to address different themes. Parents choosing religiously-defined schools tended to talk more about teachers as caring role models, peers as positive influences, the community atmosphere and parental involvement, and the religious reinforcement and teaching that was offered. They tended to have more stories of the struggle to financially afford non-state schools for their children and appeared less inclined to consider state schools at all for their children. Alternatively, parents choosing academically-defined schools showed more inclination to discuss the teachers' respect and accommodation of their child's special learning needs or abilities, the caring involvement of all staff and school leadership, the program variety, the superior academics and the small size of the both the school and the classes. They told, with eloquence of how their child had improved since attending a non-state school, how their families were supported in times of trauma, and were more inclined to discuss their concerns with private schools and their disappointments with publicly-funded schools. Parents in both school categories appeared to be equally inclined to discuss the safety they found in their school of choice, and convey their satisfaction with the overall atmosphere and orientation of the school.

Both issues were addressed frequently by either group.

Overall, through their stories parents conveyed the following: "We were worried about the social / academic / spiritual / cultural/ emotional / physical well being of our child(ren) in the public school so we chose this private school". Non-state schools in

Ontario serve as a place to which parents when disengaged by the state system can find reprieve for their children.

In the next chapter a summary and comparison between the findings from the three data sources and with that of other research on reasons for choosing are discussed.

The chapter opens with considering whether the story-tellers might indeed be representative of the all questionnaire respondents. If some certainty could be had that the stories were not submitted by outliers they can serve to deepen and enrich what was told through the stems and statements. Following the conclusions, the chapter provides a synthesis which considers the findings from the stems, statements, and story analysis 200 through the lenses of the frameworks proposed earlier in this work. It finishes with offering implications. CHAPTER SIX

BEYOND RELIGION AND ACADEMICS: NEW EXPECTATIONS FOR TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY EDUCATION

The school we chose for our children has so impacted not just our children's lives, but [that of] my husband and I also. The experiences of being involved and participating at the school have enriched our lives as a family and has essentially become the "core " of our family lifestyle. (230)

The... happiness of our son is well worth any inconvenience. (123)

This chapter offers a summarizing overview of this inquiry, gives five major conclusions and proposes a synthesis of the findings through the lens of interna and externa. Finally, it suggests a number of key implications for future consideration with respect to arrangements for schooling in Ontario.

Summary

This journey began with the recognition that compulsory education, certainly in the West but also elsewhere, can be regarded as a unique triumph of our times. Not only is education provision compulsory but attendance is also. Yet despite almost complete compliance with the attendance requirement, not all students attend the state-provided schooling options. Ontario is no anomaly as more than 6 percent of its eligible K-12 students do not attend state schools.

The school choice movement has grown both in theoretical discourse and in practical options, with its wide array of funding and provision proposals and practices 202 ranging from funding of schools to funding vouchers for parents. Ontario, however, has remained aloof from embracing any of these options. In fact, the establishment of a private school is a relatively unfettered activity so long as the school files the appropriate notice of intention to operate in a timely manner. Attendance at such a school is regarded, almost always without inspection, as providing satisfactory instruction

(Education Act, s. 21(2)(a)). It has been the case throughout Ontario's history that neither the schools nor the parents that fund them receive any financial compensation from the state towards the education of the child enrolled in such schools.

While the unfolding story of non-state education (especially that of non-state schooling) in Ontario seems to have been rather amicable (although several actions in the courts and in the legislature dealing with the issue of funding may be considered by some as hurdles along the way), recently the disposition towards non-state schools appears to be changing. It is true that private schools, in numbers and in enrolments, have continued to grow throughout the province's history, yet the absolute numbers of students choosing this option can be considered, by some measures, modest. Nevertheless, theorists such as

Michael Apple (2000) claim that non-state schools are supported by anti-social, non conformist types of parents. Ontario's premier has weighed into the debate claiming that private schools promote segregation and drain public schools of students. To sensibly enter into such discussion, an understanding of the reasons parents in our times report for choosing non-state schools was required. To that end, the guiding research questions for this inquiry were:

1. What reasons did a sample of contemporary Ontario parents give for

choosing non-state schools for their children? 203 2. What accounts did some of these parents give of their experiences with

non-state schools in Ontario? What stories did they tell? What might

these stories mean and imply for educational design?

The approach to this inquiry built on a conceptual orientation for understanding schooling arrangements which accommodated both Ontario and other Canadian jurisdictions, and which included a conceptual framework mapping features of schools.

Not only did such an analysis uncover or reinforce the point that Ontario is indeed a unique jurisdiction in terms of its accommodation and provision for non-state schools, but it also promised value when seeking to make theoretical sense of the reasons given by parents for their choice of non-state schools.

Parent voices were heard in this study through their completion of a two-part questionnaire—the first part designed to collect descriptive and demographic data and the second part reasons for choosing non-state schools. Because questions relating to demographics were almost entirely drawn from various Statistics Canada questionnaires, demographic data of parents choosing non-state schools could be compared with those of parents choosing state schools. The findings of these data provide a focused and current overview of some relevant demographics of contemporary parents that choose non-state schools in the province and adds substantially to the literature in this regard.

Because of the subtle epistemological dimensions involved in asking agents to report their reasons for acting, three types of questions were designed for collecting reasons from parents for choosing non-state schools. First, the respondents were asked to rate each item from a list of 61 stems derived from the literature on reasons for choosing schools. Second, respondents were asked to answer, in a single, open-ended statement on 204 their most important reason for choosing a private school. Third, respondents were asked in an entirely open-ended format to tell about their experience with choosing a private school. A data set was compiled from the questionnaire responses of 1797 parents from 920 households who had one or more children in one of 38 participating schools, which had been randomly selected from a stratified list of Ontario non-state schools. The data collected regarding both demographics and reasons is distinctive, the first set of its kind collected in the province. This benchmark data set, its methods for collection and its analysis, both here and through possible future scrutiny, is powerfully positioned to enhance understanding of non-state school choice, not only in this province but also beyond.

Conclusions

At least five main conclusions emerged. First, the universe of non-state schools in

Ontario is a disparate space in which a wide variety of schools exist and yet the schools could be coherently categorized into a contemporary typology of non-state schools.

Second, the demographics of parents choosing non-state schools are far more various and complex than may often be assumed. Third, the reasons parents gave, especially as conveyed through the stems and statements, broadly conformed to previous findings reported in the literature, yet their analysis by school type, brought unprecedented clarity to the differences in attractions to the school types. Fourth, the stories told by parents amplified and brought deeper meaning to the stems and statements. Fifth, the search for reasons led me to recognize that across parents there is a broad-based shared set of 205 coherent reasons for choosing a private school, and thus for seceding from the state apparatus.

Universe of non-state schools

Non-state schools in Ontario, neither government-provided nor government- funded, are subject to low regulation (Walberg, 2007; Paquette, 1991). As such they must quickly adapt to their environment if they are to survive and prosper. In Carlson's

(1964) typology they are wild rather than domesticated organizations. Such conditions, coupled with a long history of tolerance for their presence, have provided a space in which a wide range of schools were established. The Davies and Quirke (2005) typology of Ontario non-state schools initially used to structure the sampling for this study recognized (a) religious schools (b) members of the Conference of Independent Schools

(CIS) and (c) those in a residual, third sector. Through making contact with schools in each category, either by telephone or by searching the internet, it became clear that the second, CIS category considerably under-represented the number, range and variety of non-religious, academically oriented non-state schools in Ontario. In consequence, Davis and Quirke's CIS limitation on academic schools was abandoned in favour of a much more broadly conceived category of academically-defined schools. Three types of non- state schools were thus recognized in the typology developed for this study, those that had a religious definition (RDS), those that were defined by a distinct academic orientation or academic philosophy (ADS), and those that sought to serve a special clientele (SCS). Not only did this typology aid in understanding and distinguishing among the types of reasons parents give for choosing non-state schools, this typology is a 206 contribution to what can be known about non-state schools today, in Ontario, but perhaps beyond.

Demographics of parents confirm the literature

While little has been studied on the demographics of parents that choose non-state schools, certainly in Canada, but especially in Ontario, the data collected in this study confirm the 2001 Statistics Canada Trends in use of private education findings showing while the wealthy are more inclined to choose private schools for their children, this does not preclude the poor from also making the choice of private schools. In essence, both this study and the Statistics Canada analysis found that "children from both ends of the income distribution attend private schools" (The Daily, 2001, par. 1). This study also found that private school parents tend to have more education and higher status jobs, especially in the case of those choosing academically-defined schools. Still, not all respondents matched this profile, some have markedly lower educational attainment and some worked in lower status occupations. Perhaps a most intriguing demographic contrast was that while self-employment formed the main source of income for 40 percent of the non-state school parents captured in this study, this was the case for only 7 percent of census parents with school aged children. This matter is worthy of future study and may indicate a tolerance for risk and a bent towards favouring entrepreneurial ventures among parents succeeding from the educational opportunities provided by the state. 207 Reasons conveyed through stems and statements confirm the literature

A total of 920 Ontario private school selectors rated 61 stems, the list of which was an amalgamation of findings from previous research on the reasons parents gave for choosing the schools they did for their children. Then 858 of those parents offered one- sentence-long statements addressing the most important reason in their choice of their private school. Table 6.1 (replication of Table 4.1 for ease of reference) and Table 6.2 (a condensed versions of Table 4.2) review these findings.

Table 6.1

Top Ten "Very Important" Reasons by Type of Private School

Academically-Defined Schools Religiously-Defined Schools (n=396) (n=524) This school... This school... 92% - has dedicated teachers. 90% - teaches right from wrong. 87% - emphasizes academic quality. 90% - has dedicated teachers. 85% - motivates students. 88% - supports our family's values. 84% - is a safe school. 86% - is a safe school. 84% - has outstanding, quality teachers. 83% - reinforces our religion. 84% - instills confidence in the students. 79% - emphasizes academic quality. 82%o - teaches students to think for themselves. 79% - has good student discipline. 82% - offers individualized attention. 77% - values parent-teacher collaboration. 79% - offers a supportive, nurturing, 77% - is conducive to character educational environment. development. 77% - offers outstanding classroom instruction. 77% - educates the whole child. Common reasons are bolded.

Not only were the dedication of the teachers, the academic quality of the curricula and programs, and the safety of the school rated highly by the vast majority of parents from both types of schools, these features also figured prominently in the written-in statements.

While, as would be expected, RDS parents reflected more concern for the religious, 208 moral and value aspects of the school in their stem responses and statements, ADS parents reflected more attraction to the individualized enrichment offered to their child.

Table 6.2

Condensed Analysis of Statements

Most important reason for choosing a private school Major % of all % of total in % of total in Category statements that this category this category mentioned item from from ADS parents RDS parents 1. Academic quality 44.6 66.8 33.2 (environment, individualized, excellent) 2. Heritage 38.7 1.2 98.8 (religion, culture, language) 3. Structural 29.0 62.1 37.9 (Size, discipline, partnership, stability, autonomy, location) 4. Withdrawal 16.7 58.3 42.7 (negative experience or negative perception) 5. Values 12.3 25.5 74.5 (caring, consistent, and morals taught) 6. Teachers 6.5 66.1 33.9

7. Safety 5.2 42.2 57.8

8. Other 7.5 46.2 53.8

The responses in the stems and the statements do not contradict the literature.

Rather they confirm and extend what is known about attractions to the two types of schools. 209 Stories amplify the stems and statements

A unique contribution of this inquiry is its collection and analysis of stories told by parents about choosing non-state schools. While not all respondent parents chose to tell a story, a large set of parents did so (n=223) and thus on their own warranted analysis. But were the storytellers representative of the larger set of respondents?

Before projecting the findings from the stories onto the larger sample of parents, its should be investigated whether story tellers were outliers or were indeed representative of the larger group. One means of determining whether the story tellers (n=223) were representative of the larger sample (n=920) is to compare the differences in their responses to the questionnaire stems. Below Table 6.3 and Table 6.4 reflect this analysis for ADS parents and RDS parents, respectively.

Table 6.3

Top ten very important reasons for ADS respondents Academically-Defined Schools Academically-Defined Schools j All respondents (n=396) Story telling respondents only (n=95) This school... This school...

92% - has dedicated teachers 94%o - has dedicated teachers 87% - emphasizes academic quality 85%o - is a safe school 85% - motivates students 84% - emphasizes academic quality 84% - is a safe school 80% - instills confidence in the students 84%o - has outstanding, quality teachers 80%) - offers opportunities unavailable on 84%> - instills confidence in the students local public schools 82%) - teaches students to think for 79% - motivates students themselves 78% - teaches students to think for 82% - offers individualized attention themselves 79% - offers a supportive, nurturing, 78% - offers outstanding classroom educational environment instruction 77% - offers outstanding classroom 78% - has outstanding, quality teachers instruction 78%) - the students at this school seem happy

Common reasons bolded. 210

Table 6.4

Top ten very important reasons for RDS respondents Religiously-Defined Schools Religiously-Defined Schools All respondents (n=524) Story telling respondents only (n=128) This school This school.. 90% - teaches right from wrong. 91% - teaches right from wrong. 90% - has dedicated teachers. 91% - has dedicated teachers 88% - supports our family's values. 90% - supports our family's values. 86% - is a safe school. 85% - offers a supportive, nurturing, 83% - reinforces our religion. educational environment 79% - emphasizes academic quality. 84% - is a safe school 79% - has good student discipline. 83% -educates the whole child 77% - values parent-teacher collaboration. 83% - is conducive to character development. 77% - is conducive to character 82%> - emphasizes academic quality. development. 81%) - reinforces our religion. 77% - educates the whole child. 81%> - has outstanding, quality teachers Common reasons bolded

Although the story tellers appear to be representative of the larger sample, the

RDS story telling parents, as indicated by the overall higher percentages of parents

choosing the items as very important to their choice, were perhaps a little more

enthusiastic than the larger group of RDS parents. Certainly there are minor differences

but on the whole the larger group seems represented by the story tellers. Thus their stories

are interpreted as bringing depth to what was found through the stems and statements. 211 Broad-based shared set of coherent reasons

The story tellers brought rich depth to what is known about contemporary non- state school selection. Five major themes emerged—community, curricula, culture, climate and change, and concerns—as summarized in Table 5.1 in the previous chapter.

The story tellers told stories, somewhat distinct from one another depending on the type of school they had chosen for their children. Parents choosing academically-defined schools told more stories about community, improvements in their child, and of withdrawing from state schools after negative experiences. Parents choosing religiously- defined schools shared more about religion, peers and financial struggles of choosing a non-state school. The stories cohered with the findings from the stems and statements, yet they yielded newer and richer findings than could be uncovered through either the stems or the statements.

The over-arching theme to emerge from the stories was that regardless of the type of school they chose, the overall well-being of the child was a priority for parents who seceded from state schools and chose non-state schools for their children. Parents choosing both types of non-state schools told of the flourishing of their child, their increased overall well-being, especially academically, socially, and spiritually. Thus, although schools may be differently defined, and although parents differ by school type

(ADS or RDS) in what they say attracted them to the school, overall, once they have made their choice, the parents across both types, report similar types of satisfactions with their experience. They tell of their educational experience with the private schools as one of addressing the overall wholeness and well-being of their children. Through various means, not the least of which are caring teachers set in a caring school community, 212 contemporary non-state schools are attractive because of the overall concern and care they offer to the child and the family, something that the state schools were not able to offer to their children.

Synthesis

These broad and coherent findings can be further analyzed through the conceptual framework proposed in Chapter two for understanding interna or externa of schools.

Russell (1929) explained externa had to do with the material side of schooling, and interna with the spiritual and mental side of schooling. As reviewed earlier, interna has to do with content of curricula, methods of instruction and purpose of education, while externa with location, facilities, and provisions for compulsory attendance, length of school terms, financing, co-ordinating a system of education, class sizes and teacher salaries, certification, and training. In short, interna is about the what, how and why of education verses the externa of where, when and with what.

Figure 6.1 below offers a modified version of the graphical representation of interna and externa appearing in the Hope Report (1950, p. 181) and is intended to display a synthesis of my findings from the analysis of stems, statements and stories.

Those areas for which parents appear willing to secede from state schools are shaded lightly. Shaded more darkly are those areas that parents appear willing to compromise over to achieve gains in the other areas. Those not shaded did not attract attention of respondents. Figure 6.1: Interna (inner circle) and Externa (outer circle)

Light shading = parents leave for these reasons Dark shading = parents will make major compromises in these areas Not shaded = not conveyed by parents as having an impact

Adapted from the Hope Report, 1950, p. 181.

This mapping, that is, my shading based on the findings of this inquiry applied onto the graphic representation of interna and externa offered in the Hope Report (1950, p. 181) strongly suggests it is primarily the interna of education that are related to 214 movement from state to non-state schooling, especially multiple aspects of methods of instruction, of curricula and philosophy, and outcomes. Specific courses of study and textbooks (other aspects of interna) do not emerge from the data as having a strong influence on secession, although textbooks by inference of concern for quality education could be included in reasons for secession.

This mapping also identifies that the chief externa that encourage movement from state to non-state schooling are safety and class size. Other material and physical aspects identified by the authors of the Hope Report as externa were buildings and playgrounds, teacher salaries, certification or training, financing of education, and a co-ordinated system of schools. None of these emerged from the data as motivating movement from one state schools to non-state schools. In fact, the mapping implies that parents are willing to make difficult compromises in several aspects of externa such as building location and financing of education to achieve the kind of interna they desire for their children.

Thus, the stories parents told amplified and enriched our understandings of why parents choose to secede. The stories convey strong indications about the importance of multiple aspects of interna to contemporary parents when choosing schools for their children, the methods and philosophies of the schools, and the positive outcomes. The stories also revealed that two aspects of externa also drove secession from state to non- state schools (size and safety). Furthermore, the stories also revealed the very interesting point that several aspects of externa (school location and finances) will be greatly compromised to achieve the overwhelmingly more highly prized aspects of interna. Implications

What might these parental reasons for choosing, understood as preferences for aspects of interna and externa, mean? The Hope commission on Ontario education

(1950) used the conceptualization of school features adapted in Figure 6.1 to map out degrees of local or central control over interna and externa in the prevailing system of public education at its time. Previously, Kandel (1933) had used the concept to promote teacher professionalization by claiming that teachers need control of interna to enhance their professional stature. Russell (1929) proposed the concepts of interna and externa as a way to resolve tensions between the apparently conflicting American goals of equality and liberty, suggesting both could both be achieved if interna (with its goals of liberty) were locally controlled and externa (with its goals of equality) were centrally controlled.

To be specific to this inquiry, what might these parental reasons, understood as preferences for aspects of interna and externa, mean when addressing the question posed in the first chapter of this dissertation? How might these understandings of preferences address the claim that private school growth is a hindrance or even a threat to public schooling? How do these preferred interna and externa assist in understanding school secession?

The interna / externa conceptualization of parental preferences points towards a tolerance of some parents for less than perfect conditions in terms of externa. Awkward buildings, facilities and locations coupled with financial inconvenience do not deter parent from choosing non-state schools. Thus excessive state attention to this area, beyond some minimal level of adequate provision, in the public system will not address secession. The externa aspects of safety and size do drive secession. It is encouraging to 216 note that in the years since the premier's 2004 declared concern for the rise in private school attendance and growth in private school numbers he and the Ministry of Education have extensively addressed these two aspects of externa especially in the last two years.

In terms of the issue of size, primary (JK-3) class sizes have been reduced to a maximum of 23 students (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2009, par. 1). Furthermore, 90.3 percent of junior kindergarten to grade three classes now have 20 or fewer students (Ontario

Ministry of Education, 2009, par. 2). As well, extensive safe school consultations have resulted in new regulation and policy {Education Act, s. 301, 306, 310; Ontario

Regulation 472/07; and Ontario Ministry of Education Policy / Program Memorandum

145). It is possible that both initiatives may go some distance in preventing further secession from state schools as they address the externa reasons of class size and safety that were important to seceding parents. The one other area of externa that has received extensive attention especially in 2006, had to do with the age of compulsory school attendance. In 2006, education is compulsory for students to age 18. Yet this change will likely have no affect on movement between systems as it applies to all students regardless of where they are educated {Education Act s. 21(l)(a)). In sum, with regard to strengthening state schools and reducing the threat of private schools, recent government policy initiatives appear to be directed primarily at material aspects, the externa, side of schooling. It is quite possible that these initiatives will reduce secession as it relates to reasons involving externa.

The curbing of secession becomes a little more difficult when considering aspects of interna. Interna, with its multiplicity of mental and spiritual aspects of schooling, are more difficult for a central government to modify, or even influence. Yet these are the 217 reasons most strongly conveyed through the analysis of stems, statements, and stories as motivating parents to secede from the state school option. Methods of instruction

(especially individualization of programs), content, purpose and outcomes (academic, social, emotional, and spiritual) emerged as frequently and strongly preferred features attractive to parents in their choice from among the wide variety of options of non-state schools.

With regard to the interna of methods of instruction, parents in both ADS and

RDS said they were attracted by caring, dedicated teachers who connect with the students and are available beyond ordinary school hours. Parents desire collaboration with their child's teacher and individualized attention to their child which respects and addresses his or her learning needs. Teachers that model character virtues are valued. A nurturing atmosphere that fosters excellence and reinforces a family's values were particularly attractive to parents.

But how effectively can a provincial government provide for and mandate such features from its centralized position? Some recent initiatives in character education appear to have been created to address this aspect of education including the Ontario

College of Teacher's Ethical Standards for the Teaching Profession (2006). Yet parents told in their stories that a culture of care and nurturing is not commonplace in state classrooms and state schools. In terms of the content and purpose of education, parents choosing religiously-defined schools declared they desire for an education that reinforces faith beliefs and perspectives throughout the curricula. The great majority of non-state selectors choosing both ADS and RDS said they desire superior academic quality and believe it can be found in non-state schools, but not so readily in state schools. Given the 218 limits of direct provincial policy influence on these crucial aspects of interna, the drain of students from the state schools may well continue.

The overwhelming attraction in non-state schools as conveyed by the stories were the improvements students experienced through secession from state to non-state schools.

In terms of these emotional, social, spiritual and academic outcomes of education, can a centrally-organized, state-provided, state-funded and state-regulated system of education ensure that students experience this sense of joy, happiness, improved self-confidence and self-worth that parents found in the non-state school they had chosen? Is it possible that centrally organized state schools can provide places for students to flourish, soar and blossom similar to those parents said they found in non-state schools? Can the parental reports of gains in academic accomplishment, behaviour improvement, and social contentment be achieved by individual students in a system where the interna is centrally designed and controlled?

From what parents told about their reasons for choosing a non-state school in

Ontario, it is, by and large, the interna that attracts. Can the interna be changed to attract parents back to state schools, or at minimun to prevent further secession from state schools? The troubling issue is that although it is the interna that seceding parents in our times especially value, it is the externa that the state is best at delivering. If Carlson

(1964) is correct and wild organizations demonstrate the most adaptability to changing environments, and if it is correct that parents who choose wild schools in our times have found what the domesticated schools were unable to provide, then we have here a window to new expectations for education in the twenty-first century. These new expectations suggest a new design for delivery of education must be considered. 219 The school choice literature of the last several decades has traditionally focused on efficiency, on lowering the ratio of inputs to outputs. Measurement of academic achievement through standardized testing was taken as an ultimate test of a school's success or failure. Coupled with marginally lower expenses, private schools could be often heralded as superior to state schools since the competition orthodoxy of the market held that cost-effective approaches to efficient and effective education should triumph above all else. In the light of the findings of this inquiry, the approach that school choice theorists or advocates have generally held of suggesting more funds for private schools or the parents that chose then is no longer a sufficient proposal to addressing the needs of our times.

Overwhelmingly the stories told that parents want a community of care for their children, a place of respect for the individual, a place where moral living is taught and modeled and, in some cases, a place of healing and a place of intimacy. That some RDS schools would offer religious instruction or a religious worldview and that all would offer a solid common academic core emerged as minimal, even rather ordinary minimal, expectations, echoing those articulated in another time, another era, still valued, but not the dominant, most contemporary and salient values. In general, the overwhelming finding emerging from this inquiry is that contemporary parents want the entire well- being of their child to be central and, even more so, parents want an educational space that is engaging—engaging for their children, engaging for the parents themselves, and engaging to the families of the students. In sum, what is sought is a place where teachers and all other members of the school community are engaged and committed to the child's whole well-being. What might this mean for contemporary schooling arrangements that address the needs of our times?

The older school choice model of the modern era which heralded financial efficiency in terms of high academic achievement scores for the lowest expenditure of resources, does not resonate that strongly with today's school-choosing parents. Post- industrial and post-modern times, it seems, call for the re-embracing of the inefficiencies of care, the inefficiencies of community, the inefficiencies of awakening the imagination, the inefficiencies of regarding the entire well-being of our children.1

Parents in wild organizations have recognized this new expectation for education.

Is it possible to open the gate, even pull down the fences around our domesticated organizations, and re-position the location of our schools on the continua of funding, provision, and regulation? Should Ontario position its schools on a different place in the three-dimensional schooling arrangements proposal of Paquette (1991)? Is it possible that new needs for community and spaces of caring could be addressed by changing arrangements for schooling?

Tonnies (trans. Loomis,1957), in his study of the effects of industrialization on communities, described two types of community. Gereluk (2006) summarizes.

[Tonnies] was troubled by what he saw as the dissipation of Gemeinschaft: communities based on kinship, neighbourliness and friendship. In its place was the proliferation of Gesellschaft: a more transitory and superficial aspect of community based on rational will and economic advantage. Gemeinschaft was a pre-social condition, and one that was to be valued as essential to civil society. People did not come to agreement or consensus, rather mutual understanding was the starting point of togetherness... Gesellschaft on the other hand is not brought together by kinship or neighbourliness, but out of a necessity to associate with others who may be of advantage to them. It is an artificially constructed

1 My thanks to M. Metzger who drew my attention to the celebration of inefficiency through his blog of February 2, 2009, Making babies and making love. 221 association, and one that is developed for a specific reason.. .the relationships formed serve a purpose, but do not necessarily start from a point of mutual understanding, (p. 144)

If he is accurate about the effects of industrialization on community, then Gemeinschaft has never been a possible achievement in state schools and, in its place many have experienced, not even Gesellschaft, but something more alienating and unhealthy. Some parents and their children reported finding something akin to Gesellschaft in the non-state schools they discovered. And some even alluded to their experience of Gemeinschaft as they told about their parents founding the schools, their children's deep joy and friendships, or the caring and healing they found in a mutually respectful space.

In the state schools as they are currently structured the only way forward when confronted with challenges is to focus on bureaucratic systems and structures, to establish committees, and policies, and programs, and procedures, with the almost unattainable goal of achieving some measure of Gesellschaft. The non-state schools in Ontario, conversely, have each developed out of a unique, individual circumstance, and are thus diverse from one another. From the outset they are each places more inherently oriented to the community, engagement, wholeness, and well-being of Gemeinschaft

Is this trade-off necessary? Is it possible to experience Gemeinschaft in the state schools of our post-industrial day? Toonies is not sure.

In the end [the state] will probably realize that no increase in knowledge and culture alone will make people kinder, less egotistic, and more content and that dead folkways, mores, and religions [often the root of Gemeinschaft] cannot be revived by coercion and teaching. The state will then arrive at the conclusion that in order to create moral forces and moral beings it must prepare the ground and fulfill the necessary conditions, or at least it must eliminate counteracting forces. The state, as the reason of Gesellschaft, should decide to destroy Gesellschaft or at least to reform or renew it. The success of such attempts is highly improbable. (Tonnies, p. 230) Yet, I would like to contradict Tonnies on this point and suggest that it may be possible in post-industrial schools. The key lies in the Paquette (1991) understanding of school arrangements. By altering our approach to the funding, provision and regulation of interna and by also changing our approaches to the funding, provision and regulation of externa, parents could find and build the educational spaces of engagement and understanding, caring and community they desire for their children and their families. If this study has yielded accurate insights, then more input and control over interna is what parents want, and is what is integral to their community experience of schooling. Externa is what the state is better positioned to provide so that equity of arrangements can be maintained. Separate organizational structures could be put into place for the funding, provision and regulation for each of interna and externa.

This new organizational structure for the delivery of education would require two of these three dimensional grids, one for positioning the schools in terms of interna and one for positioning for externa. Decentralized interna (in which decisions on the mental and spiritual, and I would add emotional and social, aspects of education) would be located in the three-dimensional quadrant of low regulation, private provision, and publicly funded. In this way all aspects of interna would be kept as close as possible to the local educational community and position the schools to offer what seceding parents in our times have indicated is lacking in state schools. Centralized externa, where all material decisions are made so as to maximize equality (and/or equity) between educational jurisdictions would create the responsive, caring educational community parents want for their children while maintaining equitable material standards across schools and boards. On this three-dimensional grid schools would be plotted at high government funding, high regulation, and high government provision.

While much future inquiry would be necessary to articulate this proposal, the separation of regulation, funding and provision for interna and for externa is the way forward for state schooling arrangements in our times. Not only will distinct communities of protection and care be created to address the wholeness and entire well- being of the student, but it will address any threat to the state schools regarding the draining of the system. This proposal would bring about the end of the public-private dichotomy in Ontario education for those schools willing to affiliate with such a scheme.

Local education providers would provide a place of community, caring, and engagement dedicated to the well-being of each individual student in the way it deems best given the nature of local circumstances and communities while everyone would be equally provided for in terms of the material aspects of education.

If the findings of this inquiry are accurate, and if the findings can be extended beyond the wild schools, locally designed and delivered interna aspects of education and centralized design and delivery of externa aspects of education are the desire of twenty- first century parents in the schools provided for their children.

The idea and experiences of intimate communities, of the well-being of children, of affirming deeply held beliefs, of parents leaning into the heart of learning, are the threads running through the choice for non-state schools. With creativity and imagination, these opportunities could be available to all. 224 REFERENCES

Adler vs. Ontario. (1996 November 21). 3 S.C.R. 609.

Allison, D. J. (2007). Enrolment in public and private schools in Ontario: 1960-2003.

Unpublished graph.

Allison, D.J. (1991). Pride and privilege: The development of the school

superintendency in the United States and Canada. Chapter 8 in K. Leithwood &

D. Musella (Eds.) Understanding school system administration. London: Falmer

Press.

Allison, D. J., Van Pelt, D.A., & Allison, P.A. (28 May 2007a). The study in context-

concepts, policy, design and analysis. First paper presentation at symposium

Choices and reasons: Who chooses Ontario non-state (private) schools and why?

Saskatoon, SK: Annual meeting of Canadian Association for the Study of

Educational Administration (CASEA) at annual conference of Canadian Society

for Studies in Education (CSSE).

Allison, D.J., Van Pelt, D.A., & Allison, P.A. (28 May 2007b). Who sends their children

to Ontario's non-state (private) schools? Third paper presentation at symposium

Choices and reasons: Who chooses Ontario non-state (private) schools and why?

Saskatoon, SK: Annual meeting of Canadian Association for the Study of

Educational Administration (CASEA) at annual conference of Canadian Society

for Studies in Education (CSSE).

Allison, P.A., Allison, D.J. & Van Pelt, D.A. (28 May 2007). Mapping the terrain:

Private schools in Ontario. Second paper presentation at symposium Choices and reasons: Who chooses Ontario non-state (private) schools and why?

Saskatoon, SK: Annual meeting of Canadian Association for the Study of

Educational Administration (CASEA) at annual conference of Canadian Society

for Studies in Education (CSSE).

Apple, M. W. (2000). The cultural politics of home schooling. Peabody Journal of

Education, 75(1 & 2), 256-271.

Axelrod, P. (2005, Winter). Public money for private schools? Revisiting an old debate.

Education Canada (45)\, 17ff. Located

Bell, C.A. (2005, October). All choices created equal?: How good parents select

"failing" schools. Working paper. New York: National Center for the Study of

Privatization in Education.

Boerema, A.J. (2006). An analysis of private school mission statements. Peabody

Journal of Education, 81(1), 180-202.

Bosetti, L. (2000, Summer). Alberta charter schools: Paradox and promises. Alberta

journal of educational research, 46(2), 179-191.

Brigham, S. M., da Costa, J., Peters, F. (2004). Choice and accountability in Canadian

education (CACE): Technical report. Choice and Accountability in Canadian

Education Project, University of Alberta.

Canadian Civil Liberties Assn. v. Ontario (Minister of Education). (1990) 71 O.R. (2d)

341. Retrieved 21 February 2009 at internet: http://www.law.uvic.ca/apetter/359/

course_materials/Chapter07/Can.%20CL%20Assn.%20-%20edit.doc.

Canadian Multiculturalism Act. (1985). R.S. 1985, c. 24 (4th Supp.) Located 28 January

2007 at internet: http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/multi/policy/act e.cfm. 226 Canwest News Service. (2007 July 24). John Tory's plan for religious schools

includes help from ex-premier Davis. The Ottawa Citizen. Located on July 24,

2007at www.canada.com.

Carlson, R.O. (1964). Environmental constraints and organizational consequences: The

public school and its clients. In D.E. Griffiths (Ed.) Behavioral Science and

Educational Administration: The Sixty-third Yearbook of the National Society for

the Study of Education, Part II. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Commission on Private Schools in Ontario. (1985). Report of the commission on private

schools in Ontario. (Shapiro Report). Toronto.

Community-University Partnership for the Study of Children, Youth, and Families.

(2004). Choice and accountability in Canadian education. Edmonton, AB.

Located November 30, 2005 at internet:

www.cup.ualberta.ca/resources documents.html.

Crook, K. & Truscott, D. (2007). Ethics and law: For teachers. Toronto: Thomson

Nelson.

Davies, S. & Quirke, L. (2005). Providing for the priceless student: Ideologies of choice

in an emerging educational market. American Journal of Education, 111(4), 523-

547.

Dolmage, R. & Dickinson, G. (1996 Fall). Education, religion and the courts in Ontario.

Canadian Journal of Education 21(4), 363ff.

Elgin, C. (1996). The merits of equilibrium. In Considered Judgment (pp. 101-145).

Princeton: Princeton University Press. 227 Erickson, D. et. Al. (1979). Consequences of Funding Independent Schools.

University of San Francisco.

Erickson, D. (1986). Choice and private schools: Dynamics of supply and demand. In

D.C. Levy (Ed.) (pp. 82-109). Private education: Studies in choice and public

policy. New York: Oxford University Press.

Gereluk, D. (2006). Education and community. London: Continuum International.

Green, J.P., Peterson, P.E., and Du, J. (1998). School choice in Milwaukee: A

randomized experiment. In P.E. Peterson & B.C. Hassel (Eds.), Learning from

school choice (pp. 83-106). Washington D.C: The Brookings Institution.

Goddard, T. (2000 December 30). The flight of the middle class from public schools: A

Canadian mirage. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy,

18. Located 28 October 2003 at internet:

www.umanitoba.ca/publications/cieap/issuesonline.html.

Goodwin, R.K. & Kemerer, F.R. (2002). School choice tradeoffs: Liberty, equity, and

diversity. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Greenberg, L. (2007 August 23). Faith-based schools idea backward—McGuinty: Tory's

pledge seized as an election issue. National Post. Located March 9,2009 at

internet: http://www.parentseduchoice.org/newsRoom/.

Guppy, N., Crocker, R,. Davies, S., LaPointe, C, & Sackney, L. (2005). Parent and

teacher views on education: A policymaker's guide. Kelown, B.C.: Society for

the Advancement of Excellence in Education.

Hepburn, C. & Mrozek, A. (2004). Let the funding follow the children. A Fraser

Institute Occasional Paper. Vancouver, B.C.: The Fraser Institute. Kandel, I.L. (1933). Comparative education. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Kuhn, T. (1977). Objectivity, value judgment, and theory choice. In The Essential

Tension (pp. 320-339). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Magsino, R. F. (1986). Human rights, fair treatment, and funding of private schools in

Canada. Canadian Journal of Education (11)3, 245-263.

Margolis, J. (1987) Science without Unity: Reconciling the Natural and the Human

Sciences. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

McGuinty, D. (22 April 2004). Premier's speech at Character Education Conference.

Located on 28 October 2006 at:

http://www.premier.gov.on.ca/news/Product.asp?ProductID=383

Merrifield, J. (2001). The school choice wars. Kent, England: Scarecrow Press Inc.

Mirski, J. (2005). Why some Ontario parents and guardians choose private schooling.

Unpublished master's thesis, Queen's University.

Neibert, R.W. (2006). How and why selected CIS schools were founded: 1960 to present.

London, ON: University of Western Ontario. Unpublished master's thesis.

New Webster's Dictionary and Thesaurus of the English Language. (1991). Secede.

New York: Lexicon Publications, Inc.

News Release. April 22, 2004 Ontario. Office of the Premier. Located on 28 October

2006 at: http://www.premier.gov.on.ca/news/Product.asp?ProductID=380

Newfoundland Department of Education. Fast facts. Retrieved June 21, 2007 from:

http://www.ed.gov.nl.ca/edu/facts.htm

NVivo7. (2006). QSR International. Australia. Located at internet:

www.qsrinternational.com. 229 Ontario. (2003, June 26). The Right Choices for Equity in Education Act (Budget

Measures), 2003, S. O. 2003, c. 5 - Bill 53. Located January 2, 2007 at internet:

http://www.e-

laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/Source/Statutes/English/2003/S03005 e.htm

Ontario. Committee on Religious Education in the Public Schools in the Province of

Ontario. (1969). Report on religious information and moral development.

(MacKay Report). Toronto: Department of Education.

Ontario. Office of the Premier. (22 April 2004). Media Release.

Ontario College of Teachers. (2006). Ethical standards for the teaching profession.

Locate March 10, 2009 at internet:

http://www.oct.ca/standards/ethical standards.aspx?lang=en-CA.

Ontario Education Act, 1990, R.S.O. c. E.2. (1990). Located at internet: http://www.e-

laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90e02_e.htm.

Ontario Federation of Teaching Parents. (2006). Homeschooling frequently asked

questions. Located 20 January 2007 at

http://www.ontariohomeschool.Org/FAO.html#howmanv.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2009). Class size tracker. Located March 11, 2009 at

internet: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/cst/faqSmaller.html.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2002, June 17). Policy/Program Memorandum 131.

Retrieved November 17, 2004 from

http://www.edu. gov.on.ca/extra/eng/ppm/131 .html.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2007, October 4). Policy/Program Memorandum 145:

Progressive discipline and promoting positive student behaviour. Retrieved 230 March 11,2009 from internet at:

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/extra/eng/ppm/145.pdf

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2005). Private elementary and secondary schools.

Located July 6, 2005 at internet www.edu. gov.on. ca/eng/general/elemsec/privsch.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2009). Education Facts. Located March 12, 2009 at

internet: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/educationFacts.html.

Ontario Ministry of Finance. (2001, May 9). News release. Budget supports equity in

education. Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer for Ontario. Located January 2, 2007

at internet: http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/english/budget/bud01/schooltax nr.html.

Ontario Regulation 262 (1980), R.R.O. 1980.

Ontario Regulation 472/07. (2007) Suspension and expulsion of pupils. Located March

11,2009 at internet: http://www.e-

laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_070472 e.htm.

Paquette, J. (1991). Social purpose and schooling: Alternatives, agendas and issues.

London: The Falmer Press.

Paquette, J. (2005). Public funding for "private" education: The equity challenge of

enhanced choice. American Journal of Education, 111(4), 568-595.

Prentice, A. (2004). The school promoters: Education and social class in mid-

nineteenth century Upper Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Royal Commission on Education in Ontario. (1950). Report of the Royal Commission on

Education in Ontario. (Hope Report). Toronto, ON: Baptist Johnston, King's

Printer. 231 Russell, W.F. (Oct 1929). School administration and conflicting American ideals.

Teacher's College Record, 31(1), p. 21-29.

Scott, D. (2000). Realism and educational research: New perspectives and possibilities.

London: Routledge Falmer.

Sorbara, G. (2003, December 18). Bill 2: An act respecting fiscal responsibility.

Statistics Canada. (2004). General Social Survey of Canada, 2003. Cycle 17: Social

Engagement, [machine readable data file]. 1st Edition. Ottawa, ON: Statistics

Canada [publisher and distributor] 10/1/2004.

Statistics Canada. (2006a). Census of Canada, 2001. Public Use Microdata File.

Individuals File: province 35 (Ontario) [machine readable data file]. 3rd (2nd

revised) Edition. Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada [producer and distributor]

3/31/2006.

Statistics Canada. (2006b). Census of Canada, 2001. Public Use Microdata File.

Families File 2001 PUMF of Families [machine readable data file]. 1st Edition.

Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada [producer and distributor] 1/10/2006.

Statistics Canada. (2006c). Low income cut-offs for 2005 and low income mearusres for

2004. Income statistics division, income research paper series. Catalogue no.

75F0002MIE, Vol. 4. Ottawa: Ministry of Industry.

Statistics Canada. (2001). Trends in the use of private education, 1987/88 to 1998/99 The

Daily. Wednesday, July 4.

Stich, S. (1983/ From Folk Psychology to Cognitive Science: The Case Against Belief.

Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books / MIT Press. 232 Sussel, T.A. (1995). Canada's legal revolution: Public education, the Charter and

human rights. Toronto: Emond Montgomery Publications Limited

Sutherland, B. J. (1997). An examination of parental reasons for selecting nonpublic

schools in Union County, New Jersey: A comparison of private and public school

consumers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers The State University of

New Jersey - New Brunswick.

The Hat. (2006). Located February 2006 at internet:

http://www.sharewareconnection.com/the-hat.htm)

Tonnies, F. (1957). Community and society. Ed. Trans. Charles Loomis. East Lansing:

Michigan State University Press.

Tupper, C. (1896). Debates of the House of Commons, 6th Sess, 7th Parliament, 59 Vict.

1896, Col. 2719, at 2724, March 3,1896.

Ungerleider, C. (2003). Failing our kids: How we are ruining our public schools.

Toronto: McClelland & Stewart.

United Nations. (1948). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved

February 21, 2009 at internet: http://www.un.Org/Overview/rights.html#a23

United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. (2006). Concluding

observations of the Human Rights Committee. Retrieved July 27, 2007 at

internet:

http.V/www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/0/7616e347823 8be01 c 12570ae00397f5d/$FILE

/G0641362.pdf

Van Pelt, D.A. (2002). Charlotte Mason's Design for Education. Unpublished Master's

Thesis, University of Westen Ontario. 233 Van Pelt, D.A. (2004). Home education in Canada: A report on the Pan-Canadian

study on home education 2003. Medicine Hat, AB: Canadian Centre for Home

Education.

Van Pelt, D.A. & Allison, P.A. (2008). Fifteen years later: Longitudinal study of

Canadian adults formerly home educated. Ethical approval.

Van Pelt, D.A., Allison, P. A., & Allison, D.J. (2007a). What attracts parents to non-state

schools? Forth paper presentation at symposium Choices and reasons: Who

chooses Ontario non-state (private) schools and why? Saskatoon, SK: Annual

meeting of Canadian Association for the Study of Educational Administration

(CASEA) at annual conference of Canadian Society for Studies in Education

(CSSE).

Van Pelt, D.A., Allison, P.A., & Allison, D.J. (2007b). Ontario'sprivate schools: Who

chooses them and why? Toronto, ON: Fraser Institute.

Van Pelt, D.A., Beckman, J. & Smith, J.C. (2008). Toward an international research

agenda for the study of Charlotte Mason's philosophy of education. Ottawa:

Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, International

Opportunities Fund, Development Grant.

Van Pelt, D.A., Smith, J.C, Beckman, J., Thorley, J., Cadora, L., and Coombs, M.

(2009). Into the digital mirror: The Charlotte Mason Archives in an information

age. Ottawa: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada,

International Opportunities Fund, Project Grant.

Walberg, H. J. (2007). School choice: The findings. Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute. Weiher, G.R. & Tedin, K.L. (2002). Does choice lead to racially distinctive schools?

Charter schools and household preferences. Journal of Policy Analysis and

Management, 21(1), 79 - 92.

Zylberberg v. Sudbury Board of Education. (1988). 65 O.R. (2d) 641. 235 APPENDICES Appendix A

Ethics Approval Notice

THE UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO FACULTY OF EDUCATION

USE OF HUMAN SUBJECTS - ETHICS APPROVAL NOTICE

Number; #05124 Applicant: Deani Van Pelt Supervisor: na TWUr. Wko chmses Ontario indepmd&tf (private) sehoak and y^ty? duration: January 2006 to September 2006 Type: Independent Received* December 20/05 Status: Approve4 Jmwary S/06

This is to notify you that the Faculty of Education Ethical Review Committee, which operates under the authority of The University of Western Ontario Research EtMen Board for Non-Medical Research totrtving Human Subjects, according to the Tri-Council Policy Statement and the applicable laws and regulations of Ontario has granted approval to the above named research study on the date noted above,

No deviations torn, or changes to, the research project as described in this protocol may be initiated without prior written approval, except for minor administrative aspects. Investigators must promptly report to the Chair of the Faculty Ethical Review Committee any adverse or unexpected experiences or events thai are both serious and unexpected, and any new infotmation which may adversely affect the safety of the subjects or the conduct of the study. In the event that any changes require a change in the intonation and consent documentation,, newly revised documents must be submitted to the Commtttee for approval

Dr. Anne Cwmrnings (Chair)

2005-2006 Faculty of Education Ethical Review Committee Dr. Anne dimming* Faculty (Chair) Dr. Alan Edmunds Faculty Dr. EBen Singleton Fatally Dr. Margaret McKay F'acwlty Dr. Jacqueline Specht Faculty i>r, Carat Beynoti Chair of Graduate Education (ex officio) Br, Jerry Paquette University Ethical Review Board (ex officio)

The Faculty of Education Patricia Allison, Institutional Research Officer 1137 Western Rd Room 2031 Faculty of Education Building London, ON N6G 107 661-2111 Appendix B

Letters of Information and Consent form for Principals

WHO CHOOSES ONTARIO INDEPENDENT (PRIVATE) SCHOOLS AND WHY?

LETTER OF INFORMATION for PRINCIPALS

My name is Deani Van Pelt and I am a doctoral candidate at the Faculty of Education at The University of Western Ontario. I am currently conducting research into the reasons why parents choose to send their children to independent (private) schools. Your school has been randomly selected as a potential participating school. I would therefore like to invite your school's participation in the study. Funding to cover the cost of this research has been donated by the Society for Quality' Education.

The aim of this research is to gather information on the characteristics of families who choose independent (private) schools for their children. In addition, the study will collect information on the nature of the program delivered and organizational characteristics of die schools to which these families send their children.

Information for this research will be collected by means of a questionnaire randomly distributed to parents of children currently enrolled in your school. A copy of the questionnaire is included for your review. Should your school agree to participate, questionnaires could be distributed to parents either dirough the school or by mail to their home address. If they are to be disnibuted by mail, I would ask you to provide me with either mailing labels or a list of parent addresses so that I can mail die questionnaires to a random sample of families directly. If they are to be distributed through the school, I would courier a package of questionnaires with instructions to die appropriate contact person. Parents will be asked to place their completed questionnaires into an envelope provided and seal it before returning it to the school. Arrangements would then be made for the collected questionnaires to be delivered to me for analysis at no financial cost to the school.

In addition, I will ask you to complete a very short questionnaire about the school or to respond to a brief telephone interview, as you choose. We will do our best to make sure that this takes no more than 15 to 20 minutes of 3'our time.

The information collected will be used for research purposes only. Neidier you nor any participating parent will be identified by name. Parents will be under no obligation to complete the questionnaire and may decline to respond as they choose. You may withdraw from the study at any time, and should you do so, all data collected from your school will be destroyed. A pseudonym will replace the name of the school in all reports from this research. The completed questionnaires and data taken from them will be stored securely until after the study is complete, at which time they will be destroyed.

On completion of the study I will provide all participating schools with a copy of die final report. I will also provide an individualized report on the responses from your school if at least ten families complete questionnaires. This limit is to protect the anonymity of participating parents.

If you have any questions about this research, or any comments to make now or at a later date, please contact me at , . ; ;i 238 Letter of Information for Governing Units

WHO CHOOSES ONTARIO INDEPENDENT (PRIVATE) SCHOOLS AND WHY?

LETTER OF INFORMATION for GOVERNING UMTS

Information for this research will be collected by means of a questionnaire randomly distributed to parents of children currently enrolled in your school. A copy of the questionnaire is included for your review. Should your school agree to participate, questionnaires could be distributed to parents either through the school or by mail to their home address. If they are to be distributed by mail, I would ask you to provide me with either mailing labels or a list of parent addresses so diat I can mail die questionnaires to a random sample of families directly. If they are to be distributed through the school, I would courier a package of questionnaires with instructions to the appropriate contact person. Parents will be asked to place their completed questionnaires into an envelope provided and seal it before returning it to the school. Arrangements would then be made for the collected questionnaires to be delivered to me for analysis at no financial cost to the school. In addition, I will ask the principal to either complete a short questionnaire about the school or respond to a brief telephone interview, as he or she chooses.

The information collected will be used for research purposes only. Neither the principal nor any participating parent will be asked to identify him or her self by name. Parents will be under no obligation to complete die questionnaire and may decline to respond as they choose. The school may withdraw from the study at any time, and all data collected from the school will be destroyed. A pseudonym will replace the name of the school in all reports from this research. The completed questionnaires and data taken from them will be stored securely until after the study is complete, at which time they will be destroyed.

On completion of the study I will provide all participating schools witii a copy of the final report. I will also provide an individualized report on the responses from your school if at least ten families complete questionnaires. This limit is to protect the anonymity of participating parents.

If you have any questions about this research, or any comments to make now or at a later date, please contact me at Letter accompanying questionnaire bundle

WHO CHOOSES ONTARIO KD1PEDW (PHVATl SCHOOL AND WHY! Thank you. for agreeing to participate in our study. This box contains the following: 1. a Letter of Information, Consent Form and returnenvelop e for the Principal or Head of School, HT The Principal or Head of School should sign the Consent Form and return it as soon as possible, keeping the Letter of Information for future reference. ** Once we have received the completed Consent Form, the Principal or Head of School will be called or e-mailed to arrange a suitable lime for a telephone interview. 2. sufficient parent questionnaire packages to be distributed to all of your families, up to a maximum of 120. Each e^estionnaife is In its own envelope, and each one contains a return envelope, **' Please distribute these questionnaires to ftsrriiltessi n whatever manner you choose, The questionnaire contains a Letter of Information which explains the study to the parents, and there is a return envelope. These envelopes, which should be sealed before they are returned to the school, are to be collected at the school ** In approximately o»c month, wc will contact you to See if the box of questionnsMres is ready to he collected and will arrange a suitable time to collect it, 3. fif the box was delivered by courier] a Purohtor Bill of Lading. «*" Please return the completed questionnaires approximately one month after delivery by calling Pufolator to arrange for them to pick up the box.

If you have any questions, please contact:

EITHER OR Deani Van Pelt Patricia Allison

Once again, many thanks for agreeing to participate in our study. Letter of consent for Principals

WHO CHOOSES ONTARIO INDEPENDENT (PRIVATE) SCHOOLS AND WHY?

PRINCIPAL CONSENT FORM

I have read the Letter of Information relating to the above-tilled project:, I understand the proposed research and my questions have been answered to my satisfaction.

I consent to participate in this study.

Name (please print):

Signature: Date: 241

Appendix C

Questionnaire Questionnaire Cover

WHO CHOOSES ONTARIO INDEPENDENT (PRIVATE) SCHOOLS AND WHY?

A study by Deani Van Pelt, Patricia Allison & Derek Allison Supported by the Society for Quality Education

Parent Questionnaire Questionnaire Inside cover

TO CHOOSES ONTARIO PEPilNT (FEME) SCHOOLS AW M

LETTER OF INFORMATION for PARENTS

My name is Deani Van Felt and I am a doctoral candidate at the Faculty of Education at The University of Western Ontario. I am currently condaering research into the reasons why parents choose to send their children to private and fodepefldatt schools., mil would like to irtvite you to participate m this research. Fumlictg to cover the cost of this research has been donated by the Society for Quality Education.

The aim of this research is to gather information on the characteristics Hid demographics of families who choose private eduction for their children. In addition,, the study will collect information on the schools to which these families send their children, including information m the nature of the program delivered and orgwistational characteristics.

The parent questionnaire, which is included with this letter, should take less, than thirty minutes to complete. If you choose to complete the questionnaire, please place She completed questionnaire into the envelope provided, seal it and return it to the school. The school will collect and send the sealed envelopes to me for analysis. Before taking the completed questionnaire back to the school, please detach this page and keep it for future reference.

The inforroaliori collected will he used for research purpose* only. You are not asked to identify yotineif, and rso information which could identify you will be used. A pseudonym will replace the name of the school ire all reports torn this research. The completed questionnaires and the data taken from them will be retained in my possession and stored securely,

Should you consent to participate in this research, please he aware chat you have the right to decline to answer any specific questions you would prefer not to answer.

If you have any question?; about this research, or any comments to make now or at a later date, please contact me or ray coUcagjuc Patricia Allison, 244 Questionnaire Page 1

# nsn-TT

The first set of questions asks about the structure and circumstances of the family. Most questions require only a check mark (S), and a few questions ask you to write in specific information.

Which of these best describes the A village or rural area (<3,000 people) community in which you live? A small town (3,000 to about 15,000} A town (15,000 to about 100,000) A city (100,000 to about 1,000,000) Close to the centre of a city of 1,000,000 or more Elsewhere in a city of 1,000,000 or more

Please respond to the following questions using the Parent I column for yourself and the Parent 2 column for the second parent in the household, if there is one. Parent / Parent 2 Please check the description which best describes Legally married the marital status of each parent. Never legally married Separated Divorced Widowed

3. Please circle to indicate the gender of each parent. (M = male; F = female) lM/F M / F 4. Please check (/) whichever categories apply to each parent: spent some time attending an independent (private) elementary school spent some time attending an independent (private) secondary school spent some time attending a publicly-funded separate (RC) elementary school spent some time attending a publicly-funded separate (RC) secondary school spent some time attending a regular publicly-funded elementary school spent some time attending a regular publicly-funded secondary school spent some time being home-schooled for elementary education spent some time being home-schooled for secondary education

5. Please enter the highest grade of secondary or elementary education attended for each parent.

6. Please indicate the number of years of education completed at a university.

7. Please indicate the total number of years completed at any institution other than a university or secondary school (e.g., community colleges, CEGEPs, trade schools, private business colleges, etc.).

Page-I- 245 Questionnaire Page 2

8. Please check what certificates, diplomas or degrees each parent has ever attained. (Please check all of which apply.) Parent I Parent 2 Secondary school graduation certificate or equivalent Trade certificate or diploma Other non-university certificate or diploma (from community college, technical institute, etc.) University certificate or diploma below bachelor level Bachelor's / Honours Bachelor's degree (e.g., B.A., B.Sc, LL.B) University certificate / diploma / professional degree above bachelor level Master's degree(s) (e.g., M.A., M.Sc, M£d.) Degree in medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine or optometry (e.g., M.D., D.D.S.) Earned doctorate (e.g., Ph.D., Ed. D., D.Sc.)

9. Please indicate the field of study or training of each parent's highest degree, certificate or diploma (e.g., accounting, carpentry, history; high school).

Parent I: Parent 2:

10. Please check (•) if either parent has ever held a teaching certificate. 11. Please check if either parent has ever taught in a publicly-funded school (K-12/13). 12. Please check if either parent is currently teaching in a publicly-funded school (K-12). 13. Please check if either parent is currently teaching in a private or independent school. 14. Please check if either parent was registered part-time in school/college/university last year. 15. Please check if either parent was registered full-time in school/college/university last year. 16. Please indicate what occupation each parent holds. Please be specific; for example, legal secretary, plumber, restaurant manager, secondary school teacher, etc.

Parent 1: Parent 2:

17. Please indicate the most appropriate ethnic group(s) to which each parent belongs. (Please check as many as applicable.) Parent I Parent 2 North American Indian, Metis or Inuit White Chinese South Asian (e.g., Sri Lankan, East Indian, Pakistani, etc.) Black Filipino Latin American Southeast Asian (e.g., Cambodian, Indonesian, Vietnamese, etc.) Arab West Asian (e.g., Afghan, Iranian, etc.) Japanese Korean

Other (please specify) ___^^___w„____^__^^MMfc^____„^_

Page -2- 246 Questionnaire Page 3

18. Please indicate where each parent was born. If the parent was bom in Canada, please specify the province. If the parent was born outside of Canada, please specify the country.

Parent 1: Parent 2:

19. Please indicate each parent's cm-rent status in Canada. Parent 1 Parent 2 Canadian citizen by birth Canadian citizen by naturalization Landed immigrant

20. Please indicate what language each parent first learned at home and still understands. English French Other (please specify): Parent I: Parent 2:

21. Please indicate what language each parents speaks most often at home. English French Other (please specify): | Parent 1: Parent 2:

22. Please indicate what, if any, is the religious affiliation of each parent (e.g., Roman Catholic, Baptist, Greek Orthodox, Hindu, Jewish, etc.) If neither parent has a religious affiliation, please write "None" and skip to question 26.

Parent I; Parent 2:

Parent I Parent 2 23. Please check how important each parent's religious or spiritual beliefs Very important are to the way that parent lives his/her life. Quite important Slightly important Not very important Not important at all

24. Not counting special occasions such as weddings, funerals or baptisms, how often did each parent attend religious services or meetings, in the last 12 months? At least once a week At least once a month At least 3 times a year Once or twice a year Not at all

25. In the past 12 monms, how often did each parent participate in religious activities at home (e.g., individual or family prayer, meditation, etc.)? At teast once a week Ac least once a month At least 3 times a year Once or twice a year Not at all

Page -3- 247 Questionnaire Page 4

26. Please check from the following list all of the activities in which each parent has participated during the last 12 months. Parent I Parent 2 A political party or group A union or professional organization A sports or recreation organization (hockey league, health club, etc.) A cultural, educational or hobby organization (theatre group, bookclub etc.) A religious-affiliate group (youth group, church choir, mission group, study group etc.) A school group, neighbourhood, civic or community association (e.g., PTA, alumni, block parents) A service club or fraternalorganizatio n (Kiwanis, Knights of Columbus, etc.) Any other type of organization not covered above

27. Considering all of the above, please check the frequency which best describes how often each parent typically spends participating in At least once a week group activities and meetings in these kinds of organizations. A few times a month Once a month Once or twice a year Not in the past year

28. Would you say that each parent's involvement in organizations such as these has, over the past five years, increased? decreased? stayed the same?

29. Please check if either parent voted in each of the following types of elections within the last 5 years. federal election provincial election municipal election

30. Thinking about the total household income, please check all of the sources from which your household received income during the last 12 months.

Wages and salaries (including commissions, tips, and bonuses) Income from self-employment Interest, dividends, capital gains, or other investment income Employment Insurance (EI benefits) Worker's compensation Benefits from Canada/Quebec Pension Plan, Old Age Security, Guaranteed Income Supplement, etc. Retirement pensions (RRSP annuities or withdrawals, RRIF and RRSP) Child Tax Benefit Provincial or municipal social assistance or welfare Child support Alimony Other

31. Please check your household's major source of income last year. Wages and/or salaries Self-employment income Government transfer payments Investment income No income

Page-4- 248 Questionnaire Page 5

32. Please gi ve your best estimate of your total household income, before taxes and deductions, from all sources, for the last 12 months.

The following questions ask for information on the children living in the household. Please use the columns to enter information for each child. For additional children, please attach an extra sheet.

Child 1 Child 2 ChUd 3 Child 4 Child 5 33. Please indicate each child's year of birth.

34. Please circle to indicate the gender of each child. M/ F M/F Ml F M/ F Ml F

35. Using die following codes, please Kindergarten describe the educational history of Grade 1 each child by indicating the type of Grade 2 school attended or education received each year Grade 3 Grade 4 PS = public school; Grades RC = funded RC (separate) school; Grade 6 HS = homeschool; IN = private or independent school. Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9 Grade 10 Grade 11 Grade 12

36. Please indicate how tuition charges are calculated at your independent (private) school (e.g., by child, by family, sliding scale, etc.):

37. Please indicate the total amount of tuition you paid for your For how many children? $ child(ren) for the current school year. 38. Please indicate die total amount of residence fees (if any) you For how many children? $ were charged for your child(ren) for the current year. 39. Please estimate how much you spent on your child(ten) on $ For how many children? additional costs (uniforms, activity fees, etc.)

40. Do you receive a bursary or other financial support or assistance from the school? No s Yes (please specify source and amount). 41. Do you receive any financial support or assistance from any other source? No B Yes (please specify source and amount).

Page-5- Questionnaire Page 6

42. This question asks about characteristics of the school and how important they are to your family.

•tent to if Aich Hi >w im\ On the left, please indicate the extent to which you agree you to your •e with each of the fallowing statements about your school. * s On the right, please indicate how important these features 11 SI II are/were to your family when choosing a school. agree £ 5 1 if If r 4 3 2 This school emphasizes academic quality. £. 3 - 4 -> 1 This school has dedicated teachers. 1 2 3 4 4 ** 1 This school offers individualized attention. 1 2 3 :

'j .: I This school reinforces our religion. 1 2 <. -t

? •',. 4 This school values parent-teacher collaboration. t 3 4 4 This is a safe school. 1 2 3 4 A 2 2 ! This school is small 1 2 4 -I 3 o This school motivates students. 1 •i 3 4 4 3 i This school is well administered. 1 2 ;; 4 3 7 i This school has additional activities before and/or after regular classes. 1 2 4 4 3 ^ i This school has enrichment programs before and/or after regular classes. I 2 3

-'i 4 3 This school has extended day activities that suit our family's needs. i 2 3 4 i This school offers a broad appreciation of the arts and culture. i -> 3 4 3 7 i This school serves families from a variety of social backgrounds. 1 o J

4 4 '3 i This school frequently evaluates student progress. 1 •i 3

4 3 •) : This school offers frequent, detailed and open reporting to parents. 1 2 3 4 2 1 Other members of our family typically attend this school or one like it. 1 - 3 4 2 1. Graduates are typically accepted at the universities of their choice. 1 ;i 4 -3 2 1 This school educates the whole child. 1 3 4

4 7 The school offers a supportive community. i 2 3 •i 4 2 I This school is conducive to character development. 1 2 3 4 • 3 2 1 This school has good student discipline. ! o 4 4 4 2 This school has children from diverse backgrounds. 3 4

j .£. 3 4 J i This school offers a unique educational focus. •• 1 "1 3 •• 3 :?. 1 This school supports our family's values. ..., 4 •) .1 This school offers opportunities unavailable in local public schools. ; - 4 •I I This school offers outstanding classroom instruction. i - ': 2 I Part of our family's identity is embedded in this school. I - 4 : "> ! This school offers a supportive, nurturing, educational environment. 2 4 4 i This school offers a sense of being special. - 4

Page -6- 250 Questionnaire Page 7

Ex•tent to whick Hi iwintj tortaitt On the left, please indicate the extent to which you agree you agre, to your eholc e with each of the following statements about your school I On the right, please indicate how important these features 8 are/were to your family when choosing a school. t! n I h I n if JI #! 4 3 2 In this school parents participate in decision making. 1 12! 3 4 o .4 3 •2 This school caters to the particular needs of our child(ren). I 3 4

4 3 2 This school values collegial relationships amongst staff members. -j 2 3 4 4 3 ^ The teachers in this school regularly assign homework. ; 2 3 4 4 3 2 This school has a good reputation. ! '> 3 4 4 3 *> This school is flexible and responsive. 1 *> 3 4 4 3 "! The class sizes in this school are small. ! 2 3 4 4 3 T Our child(ren)'s friend(s) attend(s) this school. 1 2 3 4 4 3 2 The students at this school seem happy. i 2 3 4 4 .*» 2 This school has high achievement standards. 1 ;, 3 i 3 2 This school has clear admission standards. 1 n 3 >. •-* This school serves specific students (e.g., gifted, athletes, etc.) 1 -* 3 4 4. 1 ;. .• ^ There is no danger of teachers at this school going on strike. 4. 3 4 4 3 2 This school has outstanding, quality teachers. *"> 3 4 4 3 2 This school is less expensive than others we considered. 2 3 4 4 3 This school is one of the closest to our home. 2 3 •4 4 3 This school instills confidence in the students. 4

4 .;> ••) This school teaches students to think for themselves. i. ••> 4

4 3 2 This school community brings meaning to our lives. 1 4. 4

i 2 i This school encourages understanding and tolerance. 1 O 3 4 J. 3 '* This school has a long tradition of success. 1 2 3 -C 4 3 2 This school gives us a sense of belonging. ! 2 3 4 3 2 This school provides valuable networks to our family and children. 1 - 3

4 3 ••> This school teaches right from wrong. 1 I 3 4 4 3 i The principal of this school provides strong leadership. ? 3 1

4 3 This school sets high expectations for students. • •: 3 4

.1 J This school has high expectations for teachers. i 3 4 4 3 2 The staff at this school has a collaborative approach to problem solving. 2 3 4 4 3 "> This school recognizes student success. 2 4 4 3 2 This school emphasizes basic skills. 1 2 4 4 3 2 This school has clear goals. ^ 2 4

Page -7- 251 Questionnaire Page 8

"a § 43. Please indicate the importance of each of die following in choosing this school. important it It Not really !I il We know many other parents with children at this school. :• .:\ i 1 4 Ourchild(ren) wanted to attend this school. "•4. i 2 4 We were disappointed with our home schooling experience. > A i 2 4 We were disappointed with Roman Catholic separate schools. NA * •2 4 We were disappointed with public schools. \'\ 2 4

T A family member works (worked) at this school. N •''» i 4

44. Please describe, in one sentence, your most important reason for sending your child(ren) to an independent (private) school rather than choosing other options.

45. Please describe, in one sentence, your most important reason for sending your child(ren) to this particular independent (private) school.

Thank you for your help!

Page-8- 252 Questionnaire Page 9

Is there a particular story about yourfamUy 's experience with this school, or reasons for choosing and staying with this school, that you would like to share with us? We may use your story in publications from this study or future research to help others better understand why you choose an independent (private) school Please be assured that all identifying information will be removed before publication.

Page -9- Table D.l Types of statements included in categories for statement analysis

Major Secondary No. of % of all %of total %of Includes any reference in the statement to: Category Category all state in this total state ments category from ments that that were RDS that ment from parents men ioned this ADS tioned parents this 1. ACADEMICS 44.6 66.1 33.2

Academics General 130 15.2 46.9 53.1 Academic quality, Focus on academics, Academic excellence, Academic focus, High academic quality, Quality of education, Quality education, Quality of curriculum and instruction, Good education, Educational way, Better education, Best education, > Much better education, Excellent education, High quality education, Simple, basic grade 8 education (i Academics Individualized 121 14.1 68.6 31.4 Special Programs, Special needs of child, Individualized attention, Individualized education, Personal attention, Detailed attention to individual, Learner Centred, Builds on child's strengths, Enrichment, Enriching, Gifted student, needed attention, Assists students to achieve personal potential, Ability to flourish, Reach potential Academics Extension 86 10 76.1 20.9 Higher level of education, Learn more, Better educational achievement, Higher standards, Best private school, Best possible education, More rigorous Achievement, Head start, Curriculum covers more, Excellence encouraged, University acceptance more likely, Oriented to future success, Broad curriculum, Broader curriculum, Challenging, Extra-curriculars, High expectations, Montessori curriculum, Curriculum is multi-sensory based, Solid basic skills taught Solid education, Extra offerings, IB program, IB orientation, Balanced education, both academic and social Academics Environment 46 5.3 78.3 21.7 Stimulation, Best environment, Better learning environment, Better learning opportunity, Good learning environment, Motivating, Inspiring, Thriving, Flourishing, Instil confidence, Fosters creative thinking, Encourages student to enjoy learning, Character building, Well-rounded, Wholeness encouraged, Sense of accomplishment, Sense of satisfaction, Sense of confidence, Sense of well-being Solid foundation, Instil love of learning, High self esteem, Encourages self-directed education, Encourages independence, Positive environment, More opportunities Receive much more here, More than basics taught

to 2. HERITAGE 38.7 1.2 98.8

Heritage Religion 210 24.4 1.9 98.1 Religious beliefs, Religious setting, Religious perspective, Religious values, General Devotional activity Faith, Stimulates student's personal faith, Spiritual growth, Christian perspective, Christian background Christian atmosphere, Christian environment, Christian worldview, Christian principles, Christian values, Christ-centred education, Lutheran religious education, Jewish tradition, Mennonite, Mennonite beliefs, Catholic Faith, Muslim/islam, Curriculum is Christian Solid foundation, Strong base for life Heritage Religion 72 8.4 0 100 Reinforces home beliefs, Reinforces church beliefs, Religious and cultural Consistency education, Circle of learning—home, school, church, Triangle of learning— home, school, church Heritage Religion 32 3.7 0 100 Integration of living and learning, Incorporating knowledge in life, Faith in Integration of combination with academics, living with Christian outlook in all subjects, Integrate faith with learning, Faith intertwined learning with academics, Inside and outside classroom, Incorporating Christian world and life view in all of Education, Instils Christian faith into every subject, All day long Heritage Culture 9 1 0 100 To teach children their heritage, tradition, Community

Heritage Language 10 1.2 0 100 Language instruction available, Italian, Arabic, French 3. STRUCTURAL 29.0 62.1 37.9

Structural Sjze 156 18.2 66J 33^ Small class sizes, small school size Structural Discipline 44 5.1 59.1 40.9 Discipline, Disciplined environment, Well-supervised Controlled environment Structural Partnership 24 2.8 45.8 54.2 Regular reporting to parents, Communication with parents, Communication with principal, Communication with leadership, Parental participation, Parental control Parental commitment, Feeling of belonging Structural Stability 16 1.9 62.5 37.5 Consistency, Continuity, Uniformity, Strong school identity, Strong school goals, Structured Stable, Secure, Clarity, Reputation, Good reputation of school, Good track record of school Structural Autonomy 4 0.5 50 50 Good leadership, Good leader, Lack of government interference, More accountability, Flexible, Gender specific (Girls-only school; Boys-only school) Structural Location 4 .05 25 75 Close to home, Good location 4. WITHDRAWAL 16.7 58.3 42.7

Withdrawal Negative 93 10.8 60.2 39.8 Negative experience in publicly funded school Experience Withdrawal Negative 51 5.9 54.9 45.1 Negative attitude / belief/ perception towards what publicly funded schools can Perception offer, Poor public school reputation 5. VALUES 1Z3 25J5 74J[ Values Environment 30 3.5 43.3 56.7 Nurturing environment, Caring, Loving, Warm, Concerned, Friendly, Happy, of care Supportive, Compassion for our children, Wholesome environment, Healthier environment, Sense of well-being Values Specific Values 30 3.5 23.3 76.7 Tolerant, Accepting, Non-discriminating, Respect, Responsibility, Citizenship focus, Work ethic, Encouraged strong work ethic, Good working habits, Mannered, polite, Character development, Family orientation Values Morals 25 Z9 16 84 Morals, Teaching right from wrong, Ethics Values Consistency 21 14 143 85^ Values, Values same as home 6. TEACHERS 6.5 66.1 33.9

Teachers Teachers 35 4J 60 40_ Outstanding teachers, Quality Teachers, Accountable Teachers Teachers Teachers not 21 2.4 76.2 23.8 Teachers not unionized, Teachers not likely to strike likely to strike

7. SAFETY 5.2 42.2 57.8

Safety 45 5.2 4Z2 57J[ Safety.Bullied elsewhere 8. OTHER 65 7.5 46.2 53.8 Child wanted this school, Child's preference to attend here, Our child asked for this We could afford it, Price was right, In a financial position to do so, We had the money Good friends, Peers are the same, Peers have same values, Peer influence, Diversity of peers, diversified Filter for families with university orientation Uniforms, Dresscode Sheltered environment, Buffered environment, Limited exposure, Buffer from popular culture Live abroad, No choice, We've always done so We've always been involved with this school, Based on parents own experience, Matches parents' memories of what their school was like, We've both had private education, Family reasons Superior over entire range of options, Other options were poor Attended good public school in other country; could Find nothing comparable in Ontario public system Clean facilities, Clean bathrooms, Convenience 256

Appendix E Table E.l

Types and numbers of statements from stories in each category 1. Community

Teachers # % % Students % % Staff % % Leadership % % RD AD RD AD RD AD RD AD Teachers are caring, 39 21 18 Enthusiastic, 7 4 3 Caring 19 10 9 Creates 6 2 4 loving, empathetic, firm, 54% 46% welcoming, happy 57% 43% 53% 47% supportive, 33% 67% consistent, attentive positive, responsive environment Teachers recognize and 37 13 24 Students assist peers 5 3 2 Dedicated, get involved 5 1 4 Strong, 3 2 respect student learning 35% 65% academically, socially 60% 40% 20% 80% thoughtful, 33% 66% needs deliberative Teachers recognize and 20 8 12 Friendships with peers 4 3 1 Meet child 's emotional 4 1 3 respect student talents and 40% 60% 75% 25% needs 25% 75% abilities Teachers connect with 17 9 8 Peers with similar 4 4 0 Closely supervise activities 2 0 2 students, viewed fondly by 53% 47% morals 100% 100 students, available beyond % class hours Teachers are dedicated 13 4 9 Students value 3 1 2 31% 69% childhood, wholesome, 33% 67% innocence Teachers provide 12 7 5 Students are self- 2 1 1 exemplary model, are 58% 42% disciplined 50% 50% respected Teachers communicate 6 2 4 Students become 2 2 0 with parents 33% 67% respectful, caring, hard 100% working Preferred teacher gender 3 0 3 Well-adjusted, make 2 1 1 0% 100 positive choices 50% 50% % No concerns about teacher 2 1 1 Peer pressure at pubic 1 1 0 strikes 50% 50% high school 100% Students are accountable 1 1 0 100% Students develop 1 1 0 spiritually 100% Totals 149 65 84 Totals 32 22 10 Totals 30 12 18 Totals 9 3 6 44% 56% 69% 31% 40% 60% 33% 67%

-4 2. Curricula

Program Variety Atmosphere/ Academics Size / Indi- Orientation vidualiz- ation Arts, culture, music, drama 12 1 11 Character trait 23 9 14 Academics superior 17 8 9 School is 4 1 3 8% 92% development, manners, 39% 61% 47% 53% small 25% 75% respect, equality, work ethic, selflessness, responsibility Athletics, clubs, activities 10 1 9 Community, family 20 11 9 Good academic 10 6 4 Smaller 22 6 16 10% 90% atmosphere 55% 45% program 60% 40% class size 27% 73% Montessori, Waldorf 6 1 5 Environment excellent 19 7 12 Early skills learning 7 1 6 17% 83% 37% 63% 14% 6%

Second language and cross 3 1 2 Loving, caring, 19 10 9 High expectations 5 1 4 cultural options 33% 67% accepting, nurturing 53% 47% for students 20% 80%

Resources better 3 0 3 Collaborations btwn 15 7 8 Individualized 5 1 4 100% teachers, parents, 47% 53% learning program 20% 80% students Childcare arrangements meet 2 0 2 Reinforces family's 13 11 2 our needs 100% values 85% 1% International Baccalaureate 2 0 2 Responsive to individual 12 4 8 100% student learning, 33% 67% learning style needs Gender specific 2 0 2 Community support 10 7 3 100% experienced 70% 30% Basics only 1 1 0 Parental involvement 9 6 3 100% 67% 33% Three year age groupings (not 1 0 1 Appreciation for life and 6 2 4 by grade) 100% learning 33% 67% Flexible 4 1 3 25% 75%

School is clean 2 1 1 50% 50% Reputation good, 2 1 1 graduates respected 50% 50% Community and service 2 1 1 involvement 50% 50% Totals 42 5 37 Totals 156 78 78 Totals 44 17 27 Totals 26 7 19 12% 88% 50% 50% 39% 61% 27% 73% 3. Culture Religion Culture Reinforces Christian and 25 25 0 Culturally diverse 4 1 3 biblical values, beliefs, 100% school 25% 75% perspectives Religious training 12 10 2 Maintenance of inherent 1 0 1 83% 17% Canadian traditions 100 • % Freedom to hold beliefs or 7 7 0 Our parents helped 1 1 0 engage in religious practices 100% found this school 100% Reinforces "our" beliefs 5 4 1 Cultural heritage- 1 1 0 80% 20% Jewish 100% Moral instruction 2 2 0 100% Helps children hold firm in 2 2 0 their faith 100% Counsel of pastor or spiritual 2 2 0 leader 100% Catholic schools have to 1 1 0 compromise ideals due to 100% funding Jewish literacy 1 1 0 100% Totals 57 54 3 Totals 7 3 4 95% 5% 43% 57% 4. Climate and Change Trauma Improvements and Safety Changes Serious illness in family 5 2 3 Gained confidence, 25 5 20 Safe school 13 6 7 40% 60% improved self-worth 20% 80% 46% 54% Death 4 3 1 Joy, happiness 24 13 11 Bullying 7 4 3 75% 25% 54% 46% 57% 43% Supportive through illness 4 0 4 Looks forward to 23 13 10 Social difficulties 5 4 1 100% school, loves school 57% 43% dealt with 80% 20% immediately Academic improvements 18 6 12 Lack of swearing, 3 1 2 33% 67% bullying, 33% 67% mistreatment Disposition, 15 4 11 Well-disciplined 3 0 3 behavioural, social 27% 73% students 100 improvement % Thriving, flourishing 12 3 9 Afraid 1 1 0 25% 75% 100% Totals 13 5 8 117 44 73 32 16 16 38% 62% 38% 62% 50% 50% 5. Concerns Financial Cautions and concerns Withdrawal from publicly- about private schools funded schools Financial struggle, 33 20 13 Distance of commute, 8 6 2 Could not imagine sending 10 7 3 compromises to pay private 61% 39% other transportation 75% 25% children to public or separate 70% 30% school tuition concerns school Financially worth it 18 8 10 Limited programs and 7 0 7 Poor discipline, poor 9 4 5 44% 56% extras 100 behaviour, foul language, lack 44% 56% % of respect, drugs, alcohol, smoking Financially unable to sustain 6 2 4 Not meeting or did not 6 2 4 Public school took emotional 5 2 3 private school attendance 33% 67% meet expectations 33% 67% toll on child 40% 60% Government should finance 6 6 0 Ultimately prefer public 6 1 5 Teachers are powerless, weak, 11 3 8 private schools or the parents 100% schools 17% 83% overwhelmed, uncaring, of 27% 73% inconsistent quality, disregard learning style needs, or have poor attitude Can afford it 3 1 2 Limited facilities and 4 0 4 We saw (see) what went on 6 4 2 33% 67% resources 100 (goes on) there 67% 33% % School provides financial 3 2 1 Rigour, not enough or 3 0 3 Weak leadership or principal 2 1 1 assistance 67% 33% too much 100 50% 50% i % Finances insufficient in 1 0 1 Insular, not the real 2 1 1 Wish all of our kids could 3 1 2 publicly-funded schools 100% world 50% 50% have gone to private school 33% 67% Director has too much 2 0 2 Difficulties in other system 10 2 8 control 100 20% 80% % Not all teachers meet 2 0 2 Dissatisfaction with public 27 9 18 expectations 100 schools 33% 67% % Focus on ESL students 1 0 1 Dissatisfaction with separate 11 6 5 100 schools 55% 45% % Feels unsafe, unhappy 1 0 1 Ignored my child's abilities, 13 2 11 due to gangs, rivalry 100 potential, needs 5% 85% % Public school offers 1 1 0 Lack of confidence in public 7 5 2 something private 100% schools 71% 29% schools cannot afford Lack of confidence in separate 4 4 0 schools 100 % Parent(s) had negative public 2 1 1 school experience 50% 50% Poor academic achievement 5 2 3 40% 60% Totals 70 39 31 Totals 43 11 32 Totals 125 53 72 56% 44% 26% 74% 42% 58% VITA

Name: Deani A. Neven Van Pelt

Post secondary McMaster University education and Hamilton, Ontario degrees: 1983-1987, B.Comm.

University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario 1987-1988, B.Ed.

The University of Western Ontario London, Ontario 1999-2002, M.Ed.

The University of Western Ontario London, Ontario 2004-2008, Ph.D.

Awards, grants W.A. Townshend Gold Medal Award and scholarships: for Excellence in Graduate Studies, 2002

Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) International Opportunities Fund Project Grant April 2009-March 2010

Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) International Opportunities Fund Development Grant April 2008 - March 2009

Ontario Graduate Research Scholarships 2005-2006 (accepted); 2006-2007 (declined)

Western Graduate Research Scholarships 2004-2005; 2005-2006; 2006-2007; 2007-2008 262

Related Assistant Professor, Department of Education experience: Redeemer University College, Hamilton, Ontario 2006 - present

Teaching Assistant, Faculty of Education Social Foundations of Education University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario 2005-2006

Expert Witness, Mary Ann Bell and Christian Brudlo. Superior Court of Justice, before Justice Lally, Belleville, Ontario May 26, 2005 (Date of Judgment)

Selected Van Pelt, M., Pennings, R., and Van Pelt, D.A. (November publications: 2007). Faithful and fruitless in Ontario: Status quo in education policy. Policy Options, 25(10), 25-26.

Van Pelt, D.A., Allison, P.A. and Allison D. J. (2007). Ontario's private schools: Who chooses them and why? An occasional education policy paper (May). Toronto, ON: The Fraser Institute.

Van Pelt, D. A. and Allison, D. J. (2006). Raising Ontario's compulsory school attendance age, Fraser Forum (October), 11-13.

Van Pelt, D.A. (2004). Home education in Canada: Report of the pan-Canadian study on home education 2003. Medicine Hat, Alberta: Canadian Centre for Home Education.