The PDSB is Back Under the Control of the Democratically Elected Trustees

But they are still chained to the Minister’s directions which came from the PDSB Review nearly 3 years ago

By Igor Stravinsky (anonymous Canadian high school teacher)

Following the PDSB Review which took place nearly three years ago, the Minister of Education issued a series of directives. These were not recommendations for the board to consider. They were essentially orders which must be followed. The senior administration was fired and the trustees’ authority was suspended as a result of the accusation by local self-appointed, woke, community “leaders” (activists) that the directives were not being followed quickly enough. 

In the PDSB Supervisor’s Final Report he outlines the Progress the board has made so far in complying with these directives. It is fair for us to ask the question as to whether, 2-and-a-half years in, these directives represent what is best for the students, the parents, and the general population of Peel Region. 

Progress on Minister’s Binding Directions- Background

The Minister’s Binding Directions emanate from the PDSB review. Who actually undertook the review of the PDSB?

• Ena Chadha: Human Rights Lawyer 

• Suzanne Herbert: Government Administrator

• Anthony (Shawn) Richard: Lawyer, Past President of the Canadian Association of Black Lawyers (CABL).

All three of these people have impressive resumes but looking them over, one quickly realizes they have no experience in schools, either as education workers, teachers, or school administrators. That should have been a red flag right off the bat. It makes sense to include a range of people in a review of this scope but at least half of the people conducting it should have had direct experience in the education system. 

In fact, the conclusions and ensuing directives of the PDSB review were really a foregone conclusion. The Minister of Education had already decided, for political reasons, to bunk with the race-obsessed community activists, and made sure the people chosen to review the board would come to the “correct” conclusion- that the board's administration and teachers were racist and the prescription needed was to adopt Critical Theory as a governing model.

Such a review should issue recommendations. It should be up to the elected leaders (the trustees) in consultation with the administrators, teachers, parents, and a wide range of local community members (not just one small group of woke activists!) to decide which recommendations should be implemented right away, which should be delayed, and which should be discarded. But rather than issue recommendations, the Ministry handed down directives. They all have to be followed even if the people in the schools who understand what is happening and how kids learn know many will make things worse.

Comments on some of Rodrigues’ Reported Progress on Minister’s Binding Directions:

Direction 1 – Conflict resolution

The Board retained an independent mediator and conflict resolution expert, Kim Bernhardt to conduct mediation with the members of the Board and the Director of Education and Associate Directors. A mediator’s report was submitted in June 2020, though not all the members of the Board participated in the mediation. Since then a new board has been constituted and there remains hope that this new board will be more collaborative.

This directive misrepresents the impasse that led the board to request supervision (believing it would be short-lived). It presents the situation as having resulted from an inability to collaborate by board members who were lacking in collaboration skills. So, the remedy was to provide them with training to obtain such skills. But the actual problem was that two board members, Cathy McDonald and Nokha Dakrub, were aligned with the community activists who wanted the board to adopt Critical Theory as its operating principle, while the rest had major reservations about that course of action. 

There should have been a democratic and transparent way to resolve this issue. Public debate on the topic, with a wide range of viewpoints expressed, should have taken place, and the board should have based its policies and actions going forward on the feedback it received from that process. That is the leadership that was needed from the Ministry- to create and support this process. But the government opted instead to simply align with the activists, close down any public debate, and shut most of the trustees out for the rest of their term of office.

Direction 2 – Cease board member involvement in hiring/ promotion/ appointment panels

The Board approved a policy in May 2020 outlining that its members no longer participate in the hiring, promotion, and appointment, including for temporary or acting positions, of any employee of the Board with the sole exception of the Director of Education.

The board is elected by the voters to run the school system. By deferring senior administration hiring policy to the Director of Education and her subordinates, this policy ensures that cronyism, nepotism, and corruption will be the rule as unqualified senior team members are hired for ideology and loyalty rather than competence. 

Direction 3 – Suspend all Code of Conduct related complaints and investigations

In March 2020, the Board confirmed that complaints were not to be considered again until the minister is satisfied the Board can work together and with the Director and Associate Directors. In February 23, 2021, the PDSB’s Integrity Commissioner began developing a plan for the adjudication of all pre-existing matters once the new code of conduct and complaint protocol was approved which was now slated to be tabled with the new board.

Frivolous, spurious, and vexatious complaints created a climate of dysfunction at the board leading to the takeover by the Ministry, which played into the hands of the activists who were, and still are, pulling all the strings.

Direction 6 – Implement an Annual Learning Plan (ALP) for School Board Members

The Board has adopted an ALP for trustees. Training on all topics required under this Direction has been completed except for Code of Conduct training, as the new draft policy is currently under review. In addition, a new trustee orientation program and Trustee Portal is available for the new board.

Which other elected officials or private sector boards of directors do you know that have a learning plan (mandatory training) set up for them by the people working for them? Is there an annual learning plan for Doug Ford or Steven Lecce written by the civil servants under them? First the board is stripped of its ability to hire these people, then must do what they say. This is completely upside down and ensures perpetual cronyism, nepotism, and incompetence. The inmates are running the asylum. 

Direction 7 – Ensure racial diversity of standing and ad hoc committee membership

All board members have completed a voluntary self-identification process, which the supervisor used in determining the composition of board committees. In a July 8, 2022, letter from the ministry, it was confirmed that when the self-identification process and requirement of a three-quarters majority vote for composition of committees is incorporated into board bylaw, this Direction will be considered complete.

Straight out of Critical Theory, this directive considers identity paramount when it comes to committee composition or any other position of power or authority. Not experience, knowledge, skill, or merit, but identity in a racial or other “oppressed” group. 

This policy is in effect board wide. The first thing teachers are asked when interviewing for a permanent position is “with which race do you identify”? Any white applicant better be fluent in woke edu-speak and confess to (and express regret for) their white privilege while acknowledging that Canada is a white supremacist country. East Asians would do well to acknowledge their “white adjacency” while South Asians must of course accept their “complicity” in white supremacy. It is possible that at some point during the interview the prospective teacher’s subject knowledge and teaching skills might come up (but don’t count on it).    

Direction 8 – Retain and expert to assist in development of a Director Performance Review Process

Supervisor working with Director Swarup on establishing an appraisal process to be in place once supervision ends. Also of note is that the supervisor did complete an appraisal of the Director this past year and an external firm was included in the process to support a modified 3600 assessment.

The director establishes her own appraisal process? Who is “the external firm”? We are not told. What confidence can we, the citizens of Peel Region, have, that the director is doing everything in her power to improve the academic achievement of all students?  

As the PDSB senior administration continues to focus on entrenching Critical Theory, academic achievement has been dropping in tandem. Schools have become toxic environments where students and staff alike are pigeon-holed into groups based on race and virtually any kind of behavioral expectations have been dropped in the interest of “decolonizing”. The vast majority of the citizens of Peel, or all of Canada, for that matter, would be appalled. 

In my next article I will turn to this “Annual Equity Accountability Report Card” and consider the extent to which this report card is in fact a useful tool for parents and members of the public to determine the quality of the education the PDSB is providing for our young people.  

___

Thanks for reading. There is a third essay from this author which analyzes the PDSB Directors final report, read the next one here -PDSB Director of Education Presents Second Annual Equity Accountability Report Card

Please support Woke Watch Canada by becoming a paid subscriber.