The Agenda with Steve Paikin (Audio) - How is School Board Control Changing in Ontario?

Episode Date: April 23, 2026

As the province moves ahead with a proposed education bill, the education minister says trustees will still have a role, but one that will "change significantly." What have trustees done until now, and what could change if the bill passes? TVO Today's John Michael McGrath breaks down the background and the stakes, then joins Cathy Abraham, a long-time trustee and former president of the Ontario Public School Boards' Association, and Weidong Pei, Toronto District School Board trustee for Ward 12–Willowdale, on what these reforms could mean for school governance, classrooms, and students across Ontario.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hi, I'm Nam Kiwanuka, host and producer of mistreated, a podcast on women's health. There just hasn't been a lot of money put into researching women's health issues. If women are in pain, it's hysteria, it's an emotional issue. And this is what we see consistently. Women's health is not taken seriously. How did we get here? Find us wherever you get your podcast and be sure to check out the video version of the show on the TVO Today YouTube channel. Hope to see you then. There is a lot going on with education in Ontario, and it can be hard to stay on top. So let's recap.

Since last year, the province has taken control of eight school boards saying they were existing governance issues. Then, just this month, the Tories introduced new legislation. And according to Education Minister Paul Calandra, will fundamentally transform how education is delivered across Ontario. So here's some of what it does. The legislation would limit discretionary expenses. and honorarians for trustees and allow for a maximum of 12 elected trustees, and it would create two new roles in the English boards, CEO and CEDO. But this isn't about bureaucracy and balance sheets.

High school students will have mandatory written exams and up to 15% of their final grade will be tied to attendance. We look at what this will mean for students, teachers, and trustees in Ontario. This is the rundown. The education minister says that as part of the new proposed education bill, Trustees will continue to play a role, but that role will change significantly. So what role have trustees played up till now? Here's TBO today's John Michael McGrath to break down the background and what's set to change. John Michael, great to have you as always.

How are you doing? Good. All right, before we begin for our viewers and listeners in the interest of full disclosure, TBO falls under the purview of the Ministry of Education. Of course, we have to mention that. All right. What are the main changes introduced in Bill 101? Right. So this is the Putting Student Achievement First Act. And broadly speaking, it does two big things. One, it imposes a lot more financial restraint and oversight on school boards, particularly the public and Catholic English speaking boards. And then it also, it also,

also does make some structural changes to the school boards themselves, particularly in Toronto. All right, when we're talking about the number of trustees as well, we go from, we won't see massive changes across the province, but Toronto will see a big change there. Yeah, this was one area where the government really did single out the Toronto Public School Board, the TDSB. It will be shrunk from 22 to 12 trustees that will match the number of trustees in the Toronto Catholic School Board. the government would say that the TDSB still handles a higher number of students, still has more properties to manage than the Catholic board does. So it's not an apples to apples comparison.

But from the government's perspective, they see, you know, these are two boards serving the same city. They should be the same size. All right. And bargaining changes a little bit as well. School boards will no longer be involved in the collective bargaining process directly when it comes to negotiating with education unions. This is a long, long process that started, in some cases, decades ago of the province really taking more of an active role in labor negotiations. The process now will actually be instead of school board trustees being part of the negotiations, the position of school board chief executive officers, they will, the provinces, both creating that position with Bill.

101 and those CEOs will now be the ones negotiating with education unions. The role of the trustees will simply be ratifying the agreement when it is hammered out. This was fantastic background information. John Michael, sit back because you're going to join us in our next conversation. Absolutely. If the new government bill passes, school is going to look a whole lot different for trustees, teachers and students. And not everyone agrees the change is for better. Kathy Abraham is a longtime trustee and past president of the Ontario Public School Boards Association. Wey Dong Pei is a Toronto District School Board Trustee for Ward 12, Willowdale.

And joining us again is TVO today's very own John Michael McGrath. Great to have you all three around the table here at our studios on the rundown. Before we begin, I do want to let our viewers and listeners know that in the interest of full disclosure, TVO falls under the purview of the Ministry of Education. I have to put that on the record. All right, Bill 101 contains a number of changes related to trustees. Let's go through some of them. Kathy, I want to start with you. Capping trustees at 12, which really only impacts the Toronto District School Board, which has 22 trustees and limiting discretionary expenses and capping honorariums at $10,000. A step in the right direction? Well, I believe that it'll make things more difficult for Toronto trustees. They have

they have more students than any other school board in Canada, third highest school board or fourth highest in North America. So limiting the number of people to serve those communities is going to be problematic. It remains to be seen whether it only impacts them because there are boards across this province who would like to add an indigenous trustee, and it may put their number over the 12.

That remains to be seeing. The expenses piece is problematic. Of course, you haven't seen the regulations yet. we haven't seen the nitty-gritty of this. But for instance, if they do limit your mileage expenses and you're not in a remote or rural school board, which would be anything very far north, you may not get reimbursed for coming to actual meetings,

which we have to come to because the previous legislation said we're not allowed to do it remotely. So I have a colleague on my board who lives 100 kilometers away. That one way, 100 kilometers away, that is significant, especially if you're paying over $1.60 a liter. So it is problematic. It will limit the people who can afford to perform public service for kids. All right.

Wea-Don, let's get your thoughts on that. Limiting discretionary expenses on our errands for trustees. Obviously, you're with the Toronto District School Board commuting, not that we're not talking 100 kilometers here, but what do your thoughts there? I do agree with Cassie that, you know, like limiting, you know, especially $12 expenses. for some trustee, Toronto is big.

You know, even the trustee come from, you know, like, you know, Utaba from Scarborough to the board. Sometimes it's being, you know, quite expensive, especially if you're really in terms of the distance. But I do think 22 trustees are too many. And the cutting trustees make sense to me. Over last three years, being a trustee at the Toronto district school board, I have a first-hand experience.

It's become so clear to me the current structure is not working. And too often, the border spend times debating where devices of political issues such as school renaming, caste oppression, or even anti-pilitarism, rather than focus on the core priorities like improving mass scores

and the students' reading and writing skills. A small board really allow us to streamline the governance, and the same time is really focused on what matters most student learning and academic success. There are some people who might argue that 22 might not represent all of the students, Kathy had mentioned. There's a number of students that the school board will represent, that they may not have the access to get to their trustees

to communicate concerns. Do you share any of that? I think the key issue here is really about, you know, what's our focus? See, if we really focus on student achievements, then that means it really limited us, you know, to go overboard to discuss, you know, more political issues. That's not really core priority of the board.

then I really think is reducing the trustee numbers is to make sense to me. Yeah. I could. I think a core priority of any school board is taking care of their students. We achieve student achievement. We get to where we need to be with student achievement

when students feel like they are welcomed in their school. And so some of the issues you've named, I don't see it as straying outside of student achievement. I see it as helping students feel comfortable in their own schools so that they want to be there. And that increases the achievement levels. It's all tied in. This isn't, this isn't, no longer are we in an age where you just sit in a classroom and

do rote mathematics. Like we're not going to do the times tables all day long. We also need to get kids to want to learn. And if you aren't comfortable in your school or you don't want to come to your school because you feel like you're being discriminated against or there's some kind of built-in discrimination against the way the lessons are taught, I'm just giving examples off the top of my head, then you're not going to learn.

You're just not going to learn. We know this about kids. This is why the student census is important, which is a whole other issue with Bill 101. All right, well, let's get John Michael in here. The Bramford Expositor reported on four trustees with a school board there that racked up over $120,000 on a trip to Italy to buy art pieces.

do you think cases like this bolster the government's case to make these cuts? Well, I mean, the government certainly thinks that they do. They have cited that example and others. I think there was a Blue Jays game that some trustees went to. Oh, sorry, it was staff. No, no, senior board officials for that one. And my apology, thank you for the correction. And so those kinds of examples have certainly been cited by the government

as increasing the need for tighter financial over. oversight of these boards. Now, you know, this, to back out just a little bit here, you know, in the context of the many tens of billions of dollars that the government spends on education funding every year, none of these examples amounts to, you know, a rounding error on a rounding error. But they're also very high profile. They are understandable to the public in a way that lots of other examples of spending choices by either the minister or the school board are not. And so I think they have been useful for the government in the sense of, you know, they provide easy ammunition for these kinds of changes that, quite frankly, you know, the government may have been considering for

some time. We know that lots of other provincial governments have considered, frankly, much more radical changes to school boards. Some provinces have done away with school boards entirely. So, you know, these ideas are all floating around there, and I think to some extent these specific cases help the government make an argument. All right. The new bill also proposes two new oversight roles for English language school board specifically. A chief executive officer responsible for financial and operational matters and the chief education officer appointed by the chief executive officer who will focus on student achievement. Do we look at this as a positive development here?

Well, I have an issue with the person who's in charge of everything being a financial person. You know, we have to stop looking at education as an expense. It is an investment in our future. And the Conference Board of Canada, I think, came out a number of years ago and said, for every dollar we put into education, you get $1.40 back. But if we're only looking at how do we not spend money, which would be in first glance the role of the CEO, the finance person, I don't think that's good for education.

We already have somebody who's in charge of the education piece, the director of education that trustees hire to represent what we feel is important in our communities. And in our senior administrative staff, we have a person who does finances. So this switching of the order of the role, to me, is problematic. What you're saying is money is more important than education. And I would argue that if you don't have good education, that's going to have a detrimental effect to the economy, and then it will become really differently important. All right.

Wait on? Okay, I think the key issue here really about, you know, how we can utilize, you know, people's expertise in certain areas, especially when we have a CEO in the public education setting. The CEO is going to look after the management and the operational issues. That's their expertise. What I have witnessed is over the last three years during our award meeting, we can never balance our budget.

That's not entirely the fault of, you know, the, you know, the, associate director of finance. I think at end of the day, it really, the director makes the decision. Sometime had to be tough decision to make, or hard to cut. You know, I give me an example, like a TDSB. We have 49 senior staffs.

But 4.5 positions are not even funded by the province. That's over $1 million. Then we have 50 central principles with the budget $8 million. When I ask the director, the role that those are, the answer are not clear. So if we don't really have a person who's really in charge such a big corporation overseeing 240,000 students,

over 40,000 staffs, and with budget $3.7 billion, how can I make sure we can really balance the budget? I think we don't really own our duty, not only the ministry, but most importantly, two taxpayers. I'm taxpayer, I'm a parent. I want every dollar I paid for tax will be utilized in the classroom. So I think that's very important. And the chief education officer also can really focus on about student outcome and success.

That's our core priorities. So let the people really exercise the expertise do their job. I think that's a message I want to get out. John Michael, you note in a recent TBO op-ed about, about Bill 101, not necessarily about expertise, but about control. About Bill 101 further centralizing control in the Ministry of Education with the new positions that I mentioned. Why do you think so? Well, let's stick with the CEO rule for a moment.

It will be the CEO's job now to put together the budget for the board. The trustees will essentially be told that they can agree to it, or if there's an impasse between the CEO and the trustees, the Minister of Education will be called upon to resolve the impasse. Strictly speaking, that doesn't determine how that impasse would be resolved, but I think under the current government, you can imagine that a, for example, if the dispute is between a CEO who wants to pare back spending and a board that has different priorities, this government might side with the CEO as a for example.

And, you know, this is part of a very long tradition that you you know, you could go back to, frankly, like the 1960s, where the province has really taken a much more active role in managing education policy and has really sidelined both school boards in general. You know, like important curriculum development is done at the provincial level now as another example. And what we see with Bill 101 is it's not just sidelining school boards generally, but trustees in particular. Kathy, I'll get you in there, and then we'll move on to students. Well, it is true.

The centralization, to me, is the biggest part of the problem. I actually don't even have any issue with centralizing curriculum. I think it makes a whole lot of sense that no matter where I live in Ontario, grade three is grade three. I can move, you know, and my child isn't going to suffer because of that. What I do have a problem is this issue of priorities. You know, there are school boards in this province who have a very, very high indigenous student population, for instance. And along the lines, along the time they have decided they're going to have

indigenous grad coaches. That is not funded. That is something that they have made a priority. Or I know that there are school boards around the Toronto area that have grad coaches for black students, because we know the data about graduation and achievement for those students. So we found ways to find some funding to support them. And it doesn't mean, it means things like helping them socially, emotionally. For some kids in the north, it might mean finding them a winter jacket. And we have funded those things because we have those priorities. But we know from looking at what's happening with the supervised boards that sometimes this government doesn't share our priorities about inclusion. And so this will be a problem for us. All right. Well, let's move on to students.

Attendance and participation. That's been a big one. It's going to be worth 15% of the final mark in grades 9 and 10 and 10% in grades 11 and 12. Don, what's your take on this? Okay, I think the simple truth here is really a student learn best when they're in class. It's also a tendency is that one's the strongest indicator for academic success. Absenteeism has been really a critical issue plagued all entire schools since the pandemic. The percentage of students who attend at least 90% classes dropped from 60% to 40% to 40% to 40% 40% today. And I would see that, you know, setting up a clear expectation for the

assentancy really allow school to identify who are the student missing class early. And provide support that truly needed, whether there's mental health challenges, social environment issues, family issues. By all means, attendance policy should be always applied. with compassion. You had mentioned that you are a parent. Yes. Is your child seeing this in the classroom as well? Yes.

To be honest, my child had a tendency and problem as well. When he really enjoys a class and do our best in the class, he would go to that class. If he doesn't like the teacher, he doesn't like subject, he escaped the classes. And then I got a phone calls.

from the school. But he would be subject to 15 or 10% deduction in markets? I think if that's a case, I think it's a fire. I think it really teaches his license that we're not trying to make his life easier today, but we really want to prepare him to succeed tomorrow. All right. I should mention that we did reach out to the Ministry of Education for comment on mandatory attendance,

but didn't hear back in time for recording. I do want to mention, though, the minister did speak with reporters at Queen's Park, and he did say that he had heard about mandatory attendance from educators themselves, that this was not on his radar originally, and then he further went on to say that this will prepare them for the real world. Your take? A couple of things.

Always curious as to actually the people he's consulting with. I really don't know. Like if you're walking down the hallway of a school and two or three teachers say something, that's not really consultation. But it's not wrong. I mean, we do have an attendance problem, but what's the reason why? And if, you know, you said it yourself, we need to supply the supports they need to come to school. Some kids, believe it or not, really just don't like academics.

And we have lost so much funding over the years that we can no longer provide programming for the music and for the arts, for those things that for some kids keep them coming back. So they may not come for that reason. Is it a mental health challenge? Well, we've lost enough funding that we no longer have. have enough social workers or psychologist or to do some of that work. It is a problem. But I'm not sure that a punitive, like if you don't come to school, we're going to punish you

by taking your marks away is the way to do it. I'm also concerned that adding 10 to 15% to some students' mark, and I've heard this from, I actually did hear this from a student I know who's in high school, that is concerned that it just jacks up somebody's marks in his words because they show up. Right. Does that really mean they earned that mark or do they just show up? So it's a problem. I can imagine truant officers is not in your exact office.

Nobody really has true officers anymore. We have attendance officials, but we don't have truant officers. All right. Jammem, how does one balance high absentee rates that the government says have been super high since COVID? And then some of those concerns that Kathy has raised as well about mental health, financial constraints, you know, helping family, whatever it may be. Well, so, you know, Ontario is not an island where we're not operating in a vacuum here. Lots of other school boards around North America have reported broadly similar themes, some much more severe than we're seeing in Ontario. But the question I keep coming back to, and I would say this is also similar to the policy that the government has announced around cell phones, right, like no smartphones in classes.

You know, when I speak to teachers or I speak to teachers unions, for example, you know, the question comes back to. to, okay, fine, but like, who's going to back us up when we have to be the ones in the class saying, like, no, put your phone down, right? The question of attendance, super important as somebody who had a checkered attendance when I was in high school, I will say I should have made better choices. But extremely important, but again, the question that you mentioned about, like, supports for students, supports for educators, supports for the school boards, so that it's not just that punishment, but also you're giving somebody a pathway for them to actually take advantage of the opportunity provided.

This government has making a declaration for something like 15% of your mark is an easy declaration to make. There's a lot of hard work that needs to follow from that. And I think the government's critics would certainly say they haven't always followed through. All right. If we're going to talk about marks, then let's talk about mandatory exams, then. Mandatory written exams for some high school students were discontinued during the pandemic, but the government would like to bring those back. Kathy, is it time to bring back final exams?

I'm not. I'm not going to go look at your report card to go back. Let me just say, I was not like that. I went to school. But I went to school because I was in the band. And I liked to go to school. Did you play? I played cello.

Okay. Yeah, so I was in the orchestra more than a minute. I was never in band, so maybe that was my family. I had to go to school if I wanted to be in the noon hour orchestra, so I was in school. The exam piece, okay, kids are writing exams. They just don't, the final result of your school year isn't about can you sit in a gymnasium. Like when I went to high school, you sat in the giant gymnasium with rows on rows on rows, and you regurgitated what you memorized,

but did you learn it? Wrote until your hand cramped. You wrote until your hand cramped. And at the end, you kind of went, uh, yeah. It's like exam writing isn't the be all and end all of whether you know a subject. Sometimes to be able to sit here and talk to you about what I know about this subject

makes it very clear to a teacher whether the student has learned. Yes, there should be, I do think it's not a blanket, get rid of them all, no way. There should be some exams, but I think we need to be a little bit more flexible. What would you like to say? Well, I just think that, like there are some exams that I think, I think, well, I'm not a math kid, but I think that math is a different thing than, say, English.

Like, and I talk to you about why this book is important and the themes and all the pieces. It's a little bit different than formulas. You know, to me it is. I don't know. I'm not, I will admit to not being the math kid. But I don't think that it can be a blanket, thou shalt for everybody. I think this is a big problem. We aren't dealing with widgets.

We are dealing with small human beings that we need to meet them where they are to help them find success. And we want, there isn't a trustee in this province who doesn't want every school to have every child that walks through that door to be a successful, human being when they walk out the door in grade 12. And it might not mean sitting in row after row writing an exam. Wei Dong is the final exam seen as a fair assessment in your eyes. First thing I want to say is final exam is not a new concept.

It's been practiced years in other provinces, like Alberta, Quebec, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan. And also, I really have equity in our education system. But equity really means that having a fair and consistent academic standard to be held for all students. I once spoke a computer science professor at a University of Toronto. She told me that half of her students fail the first midterm test. Some cases even came to her office with tears, seeing that they haven't done a proper exam like this for two years. And this is a not-weak student. They're top of students in our system, 98-99% average.

I really think a final exam is a way, probably not the only way. I agree with Cassie. Some of the staffers should not really have final exam at all, like cooking class. Okay. But I think it's a way to bring back a fair, consistent academic standard to our back to our system to ensure the student can succeed in their life after high schools. Like I said before, we're not trying to make their life easier today,

but we want to prepare them to meet the real challenge tomorrow. I think one thing that will be very interesting to see in the future that I think we're already saying in a lot of cases is I think some teachers are bringing back in-class exams by default because of the rise of AI, right? The at-home, like the take-home essay, or the take-home exam is just a dead letter. Like, kids are cheating.

Just assume that as a given. And so for a lot of, certainly when I, you know, talk to teachers or university professors, you know, the idea, like what I did for my undergraduate of like, you know, the eight to 12 page paper that you, you know, spend two weeks writing or maybe the last one. The last minute.

That's just not happening anymore. that in-class exams are the way that teachers are doing things increasingly because of the changes in technology. So in one sense, I mean, the government might actually be behind the times already. Well, we are going to have to leave it there. Kathy, Wade-on, John Michael McGrath, always a pleasure. Not the last time we'll be talking about education. So we welcome you back in the future. But thank you so much for this. It's been great. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. I'm Jan. Thanks for spending some time with us on The Rundown. We want this show to reflect you

and what you care about. So what should we cover next? Let us know at rundown at tbO.org or drop us a comment on YouTube. Until then, I will see you tomorrow. If you're enjoying this series, please consider supporting TVO with a donation to make more insightful and thought-provoking podcast possible.

TVO is a registered charity and you will receive a tax receipt for your gift. Visit tv0.org slash give TVO to make your donation today.