HRSB Agenda March 30 2011 Meeting

Halifax Regional School Board 33 Spectacle Lake Drive Dartmouth NS B3B 1X7 T 902 464-2000 Ext. 2321 F 902 464-2420

The HRSB would appreciate the support of the public and staff in creating a scent-reduced environment at all meetings. Please turn off your cell phone. Usage is restricted to outside the Board Chambers. Thank you.

AGENDA School Board Meeting

Wednesday, March 30, 2011 6:00 pm Board Chambers

33 Spectacle Lake Drive Dartmouth, NS

1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. AWARDS / PRESENTATIONS (Normally awards and presentations

will be limited to 5 minutes – the Chair may extend the time limit under unique circumstances.)

4. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES/BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES March 2, 2011 (Regular Board) 6. CORRESPONDENCE 7. CHAIR’S REPORT 8. SUPERINTENDENT’S REPORT 9. ITEMS FOR DECISION

9.1 Report #11-03-1290 – School Review Identification Reports –

Charles Clattenburg, Director, Operation Services and Jill McGillicuddy, Planner (See report following agenda)



MOTIONS: 9.2 Board Member David Finlayson:

Whereas Dr. Stanley Kutcher has assembled a project focused on adolescent mental health; whereas the governing Board has recognized the mental disorders are becoming a larger issue for students; we recommend that the Halifax Regional School Board adopt the training and curriculum for the Mental Health Program and become the first Board in the world to fully endorse this program, and spearhead the delivery to all of our staff and students over the next two school years, starting in September 2011.

10. COMMITTEE REPORTS (Committee reports will be limited to 5

minutes – the Chair may extend the time limit under unique circumstances.)

10.1 Audit Committee

10.2 Finance Committee

10.3 Planning, Policy and Priority Committee

10.3.1 Custody and Access Policy

10.4 Nova Scotia School Boards Association

11. INFORMATION ITEMS 11.1 Report #11-01-1282 - Occupational Health & Safety – Quarterly Update – October 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010 – Mike Christie, Director, Human Resource Services, and John Swales, Manager, Occupational Health & Safety

11.2 French Immersion Report – Dr. Jim Gunn, Consultant (See report following agenda)

11.3 Report #11-03-1292 – Capital Plan - 10 Year Facilities Master Plan –

Charles Clattenburg, Director, Operation Services and Jill McGillicuddy, Planner (See report following agenda)

11.4 Report #11-03-1291 – School Calendar 2011-12 – Danielle McNeil-

Hessian, Director, School Administration



12. NOTICE OF MOTION 13. DATE OF NEXT MEETING

• Board Meeting – April 27, 2011 14. IN-CAMERA

15. ADJOURNMENT

1

Public X Report No. 11-03-1290 Private: Date: March 1, 2011

HALIFAX REGIONAL SCHOOL BOARD Potential School Reviews for 2011-2012 School Year

PURPOSE: To provide the Board with an identification list of schools for possible

permanent closure. BACKGROUND: Currently, staff is completing a long term facility master plan which was

initiated in part to address the challenges of aging facilities, declining enrolments, unpredictable regional development, and limited funding. The effects are excess capacity in many of the board’s schools, overcrowding in others, and difficulty in properly providing school programming, modern technology, arts and music opportunities, and physical activity options.

Schools that have been recommended for review will be either consolidated with new or renovated infrastructure that has received capital funding from the Department of Education; identified as part of a capital request in the master plan; or may be accommodated in neighbouring school that has existing capacity.

CONTENT: These schools have been identified for review based on construction of

replacement infrastructure, enrolment patterns, facility program delivery review, and excess space.

The Capital Plan has identified a number of schools that should be considered

for review as part of the ongoing planning process. Catchment areas that are experiencing enrolment decline provide opportunities to consolidate populations into existing infrastructure, renovated or replacement schools.

Staff has identified a number of schools that meet the above referenced criteria for school review; however, due to staffing resource constraints, these schools will not be recommended for review in the 2011-2012 school year. Schools identified for future review as a result of requested capital funding:

Citadel High Family of Schools:

Replacement for Cornwallis and Gorsebrook Junior High Schools • Gorsebrook Junior High • Cornwallis Junior High

North Peninsula Primary-6 • St. Stephen’s Elementary

Replacement of Oxford School • Highland Park Junior High

Duncan MacMillan Family of Schools: Replacement for Duncan MacMillan High School

• Eastern Consolidated Elementary • Lakefront Consolidated

2

Schools have been identified for future consolidation within existing infrastructure. The potential receiving schools would not require capital improvements to accommodate the potential student populations. These schools include: Cole Harbour District High Family of Schools:

• Colonel John Stuart • Robert Kemp Turner

Dartmouth High Family of Schools:

• Shannon Park

Alderney Elementary has been identified as a school that has experienced enrolment decline and is located in an area that has limited residential development. The governing Board has reviewed this school during their mandate and recommended it continue as an operating elementary school. The enrolment pattern has remained static and thus staff recommends the Board not review this school; however, it should be monitored for future review if there is not a significant increase in enrolment. The potential receiving school of Hawthorn could accommodate the Alderney population without receiving capital upgrades. Saint Mary’s Elementary School was reviewed during the mandate of the governing Board and it was recommended that it remain as an operating elementary school. The population of the school has remained static; however, a significant portion of the student enrolment is out-of-area. The existing boundary of Saint Mary’s is not experiencing significant student growth. The provincial government has approved capital funding for an addition and alteration to Inglis Street Elementary School. The anticipated date of completion is during the 2015-2016 school year. Given the close proximity of the Saint Mary’s boundary and the enrolment pattern of each boundary, staff recommends this school should be reviewed for possible closure prior to the completion of the Inglis Street renovations.

Identification reports will be compiled in accordance with the provincial school review regulations. The reports include the following information:

• Historical and projected enrolment patterns • General population patterns • Factors relating to the physical condition of the

public school, including: - delivery of public school program - facility utilization, including excess space - condition of building structure and systems - costs associated with its maintenance and

operation - information about municipal plans - geographical isolation - factors relating to student transportation - proposed development

3

These schools have been identified for review based on renovations and construction of replacement infrastructure, enrolment patterns, facility program delivery review, and excess space.

Schools to be reviewed based on approved capital funding include:

Dartmouth High Family of Schools: Replacement School for Southdale-North Woodside

• South Woodside Elementary Citadel High Family of Schools: Replacement of Joseph Howe

• St. Joseph’s – Alexander McKay

Halifax West High Family of Schools: Addition and Alteration to Atlantic Memorial Site

• Terence Bay Site Schools to be reviewed based on requested funding include: Dartmouth High Family of Schools: Grade reconfiguration and alterations to Bicentennial

• Prince Arthur – student population to be consolidated with Bicentennial

Catchment areas that are experiencing declining enrolment have been identified resulting in a number of potential consolidations. The following schools have been identified for possible consolidation within existing infrastructure. The potential receiving schools would not require capital improvements to accommodate the potential student populations.

Musquodoboit Rural High School Family of Schools:

• Upper Musquodoboit Consolidated Elementary Cole Harbour District High Family of Schools:

• Atlantic View J.L Ilsley Family of Schools:

• Central Spryfield • Sambro Elementary School

Sackville High Family of Schools:

• Sackville Centennial • Gertrude Parker • Caudle Park • Hillside Park

4

The following schools are suggested for grade reconfiguration for September 2012:

• Lockview Family of Schools from P-6, and 7-8 to P-5 and 6-8; • J.L Ilsley Family of Schools from P-6,P-9, 7-9, and 10-12 to P-5, P-8,

6-8, and 9-12; • Ross Road reconfiguration from P-9 to P-6; and • Cavalier Drive reconfiguration from P-9 to P-6

If the Board decides to direct staff to prepare identification reports this will initiate impact assessment reports to be prepared and tabled at a public meeting no later than May 31, 2011.

COST: Facilitator, building assessment reports, public meeting costs, etc. will cost approximately $20,000 per site.

FUNDING: From Board Services and Operations Services Budget TIMELINE: Report has been prepared in time for the mandated April 1, 2011 deadline. APPENDICES: Appendix 1 – Southdale-North Woodside replacement structure Appendix 2 – Joseph Howe replacement structure Appendix 3 – Atlantic Memorial renovations

Appendix 4 – Bicentennial renovations Appendix 5 – Musquodoboit Rural High Family of Schools – possible

consolidations Appendix 6 – Cole Harbour District High Family of Schools – possible

consolidations Appendix 7 – J.L Ilsley High Family of Schools – possible consolidations Appendix 8 – Sackville High Family of Schools – possible consolidations

RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended the Board:

• receive this report for information; • direct staff to prepare identification reports for the schools identified

for review which include: o South Woodside Elementary o St. Joseph’s – Alexander McKay Elementary o Terence Bay Site o Prince Arthur Junior High o Upper Musquodoboit Consolidated Elementary o Atlantic View Elementary o Central Spryfield Elementary o Sambro Elementary o Sackville Centennial Elementary o Gertrude Parker Elementary o Caudle Park Elementary o Hillside Park Elementary

• initiate the review process for the schools identified for review; and • direct staff to prepare an impact assessment report for the schools

identified for review

5

COMMUNICATIONS: From: For further information please contact Charles Clattenburg, Director,

Operations Services by way of e-mail at [email protected] or Jill McGillicuddy by way of e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at 464-2020 ext 2277.

To: Senior Staff: March 1, 2011

Board: March 30, 2011

mailto:[email protected]


Appendix 1 – Existing Southdale - North Woodside Boundary

Source: Halifax Regional School Board and Baragar Demographics

6

Existing Boundary of South Woodside


7

Appendix 2 Existing Joseph Howe Elementary Boundary


8

Existing St. Patrick’s – Alexandra School

Source: Halifax Regional School Board and Baragar Demographic

9

Existing St. Joseph’s – Alexander McKay Elementary


10

Appendix 3 Atlantic Memorial – Terence Bay Boundary – The boundary is currently illustrated as one catchment area as it is one administrative unit


11

Appendix 4 – Renovations to Bicentennial Existing Bicentennial Boundary


12

Existing Prince Arthur Boundary


13

Appendix 5 – Musquodoboit Rural High Family of Schools Existing Boundary Upper Musquodoboit Consolidated


14

15

Existing Musquodoboit Valley Education Centre


Appendix 6 – Cole Harbour Family of Schools Existing Atlantic View


16

Appendix 7 – J.L Ilsley Family of Schools Existing Central Spryfield Elementary Boundary


17

Existing Sambro Elementary Boundary


18

Appendix 8 – Sackville High Family of Schools Existing Cavalier Drive Boundary


19

Existing Sackville Centennial Elementary Boundary


20

Existing Gertrude Parker Elementary Boundary


21

Existing Caudle Park Elementary Boundary


22

23

Existing Hillside Park Boundary


Public X Report No. 11-01-1282 Private Date: March 8th, 2011

HALIFAX REGIONAL SCHOOL BOARD

Occupational Health & Safety – Quarterly Update – Q4 2010

October 1, 2010 to December 30, 2010

PURPOSE: To inform the Board of Occupational Health & Safety (OHS) issues. BUSINESS PLAN GOAL: To continue to improve student achievement and learning for all students. BACKGROUND: Reporting on a quarterly basis is part of a due diligence process so the Board

is aware of HRSB OHS significant statistics and activities. CONTENT: Please see Appendix A - Occupational Health & Safety Quarterly Update,

Q4 2010, October 1, 2010 to December 30, 2010. COST: n/a FUNDING: n/a TIMELINE: n/a APPENDIX: Appendix A - Occupational Health & Safety Quarterly Update, Q4 2010,

October 1, 2010 to December 30, 2010. RECOMMENDATION: The Board accept the report for information. COMMUNICATIONS: n/a From: John Swales, OHS Manager (2204) [email protected] To: Board March 23rd, 2011

OHS Report Q4_2010 Page 1 of 1 Report # 11-01-1282

11-01-1282 - APPENDIX A

Occupational Health & Safety Quarterly Update

Q4 2010 October 1 to December 31, 2010

School Insurance Program (SIP) – Reported Incidents

Incidents

Reporting Quarter Year Before Quarter Preceding Quarter

Group Oct. 1 to Dec. 31, ‘10 Oct. 1 to Dec. 31, ‘09 Jul. 1 to Sep. 31, ‘10

Employees: 77 Not available 41

Other, incl. students: 280 Not available 166

SIP Incident Report forms are submitted by school administrators for incidents occurring to school community members during school related activities.

43% of employee incidents reported to SIP were in relation to the position of Educational Program Assistant.

Group Leading Location Leading Injury Leading Cause Leading Body Part

Employees: Class/Resource Rm (33 %)

Bruise/Abrasion/ Swell (34%) Slip/Trip/Fall (33%) Arm and Hand

related Other, incl. students: Playground Bruise/Abrasion/

Swelling Slip/Trip/Fall Head/Forehead

Incidents resulting in a lost time injury or medical attention are also reported under Workers’ Compensation Board or Injury on Duty below. Nova Scotia Teacher’s Union (NSTU) This group of employees is not covered by WCB.

NSTU Injury On Duty applications received Reporting Quarter Year Before Quarter Preceding Quarter Oct. 1 to Dec. 31, ‘10 Oct. 1 to Dec. 31, ‘09 Jul. 1 to Sep. 31, ‘10

Injuries on Duty 5 3 1

OH&S Division of Department Labour and Workforce Development

Workplaces Inspected: Workplaces with Compliance Orders Issued:

Total Compliance Orders Issued:

0 0 0

Appendix A_OHS Quarterly Update Q4_2010_draft Page 1 of 3

11-01-1282 - APPENDIX A

Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) Claims

33 claims were submitted to the Workers’ Compensation Board. Eight claims had no resulting medical expense or benefits paid. 17 of the claims have lost time. The following graph shows 4th Quarter WCB data.

WCB Q4 Claim Data

40

30

43

38.2

30.1

2225

34

21

33

129

118

17

$32

$13

$21

$17$15

05

10152025

303540

4550

Quarter to Quarter Info

# of

Cla

ims

or W

eeks

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

Thou

sand

s

Bene

fits

Paid

in Q

Weeks of Benefi ts in Q 40 30 43 38.2 30.1

Submitted Cla ims 22 25 34 21 33

Lost Time Cla ims 12 9 11 8 17

Benefi t $'s Paid in Q $32,176 $13,371 $21,279 $17,321 $14,883

Q4_'06 Q4_'07 Q4_'08 Q4_'09 Q4_'10

Note: Q4 ‘06 “Weeks of Benefits in Q” is an estimate only.


11-01-1282 - APPENDIX A


The graph below presents historical quarterly data as annual totals. Weeks of Benefits and Benefit Dollars Paid are trending lower. The trend lines for Submitted Claims and Lost Time Claims do not have a clear trend.

WCB Annual Claim Data(based on per Q totals - not cumulative claim costs)

222.5

183.3167.3

141.3

126117

86

113

54 5038 45

$108

$97$90

$67

0

50

100

150

200

250

Quarter

# of

Cla

ims

or W

eeks

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

Thou

sand

s

Ben

efits

Pai

d

Benefi t WEEKS 222.5 183.3 167.3 141.3

Submitted 126 117 86 113

Lost Time 54 50 38 45

Benefi ts $107,722 $96,715 $89,537 $66,854

'07 '08 '09 '10

Employee Training 95 Educational Program Assistants were recertified in Emergency First Aid. 67 custodians who work alone were Emergency First Aid certified. 41 Principals and Vice Principals were Emergency First Aid certified. 75 Educational Program Assistants were certified in Nonviolent Crisis Intervention. Nonviolent Crisis Intervention courses for some Operations staff, school Administration Assistants and Central Office staff are being offered in the coming quarter. Requests for Action from workplace JOHS Committees (received) Three Request for Action forms were received by the Manager OH&S during the period. They have been addressed. There were no outstanding Requests for Action at the end of the period. Other The basic OHS Audits at 10% of (randomly selected) HRSB schools has been deferred to March and April.

Gunn’s Leadership Consulting Services March, 2011


THE DELIVERY OF FRENCH IMMERSION

Acknowledgements

Many very busy people contributed to this study. With active participation and support from the Superintendent of Schools and the Directors, numerous supervisory staff members and consultants in the regional office provided all the data and shared their professional insights, individually, and during several meetings. School principals and the immersion teachers on their staff made the time in their already full schedules to offer their expertise based on direct experience in the schools with immersion students. The Executive Director of Canadian Parents (CPF) for French for Nova Scotia and the executive members of each of the four regional CPF chapters arranged, publicized and attended local chapter meetings.

The passion of teachers and administrators about the educational value of French immersion and of learning a second language must be acknowledged because it was observed to be such a powerful force behind the advancement of immersion in the schools of the Halifax Regional School Board. In the long experience of this consultant, most teachers exhibit a strong professional passion about teaching and learning. While carrying out this study, it was very obvious that the classroom teachers and principals in the schools and the staff members in the Board’s Program Department, who are responsible for the effective delivery of immersion, are highly committed to ensuring the best possible immersion program. Also, those in the School Administration Department responsible for staffing the schools are committed to ensuring that the classroom teacher positions are allocated to immersion according to the same standards or expectations as those for the English program.

Many have contributed, but several individuals deserve particular acknowledgement. Sheila Christie, the Recruitment and Retention Adviser in the Human Resources Department, coordinated and prepared an analysis of staffing data. Elwin LeRoux, Coordinator, School Administration, and Francis Lefort, Facilitator, Staffing and Resources, logged many hours gathering and checking data and meeting to discuss the consultant’s interpretation of the data. Also, Mr. LeRoux, along with Denise Bell, the Senior Staff Advisor, read at least two drafts of the paper to spot errors and offer suggestions to add clarity.

A very sincere “Thank you!” to all who contributed of their time and expertise!

©2011 Dr. James Gunn

Gunn’s Leadership Consulting Services March, 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . aTable of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Preamble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Layout of the Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Immersion Enrolment Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Attrition Rate Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Early Immersion and/or Late Immersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Intensive French (Grade 6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13The Major Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Streaming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Level of Student Services Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Availability of Qualified Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Availability of Suitable Classroom Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Limited Number of Course Options in High School . . . . . . . . . . . 15Equitable Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16A Dilemma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

The Financial Requirements of French Immersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Specific Situations that Need Attention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Bedford South School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Bell Park Academic Centre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Chebucto Heights Elementary School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Eastern Passage Academic Centre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Oyster Pond Academy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

A Model of Delivery for French Immersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Preliminary Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Some Characteristics of a Model for the HRSB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Some Advantages of the Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Suggestions for Further Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Single Program Immersion Schools: Something to Think About . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Final Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

2 Halifax Regional School Board — The Delivery of French Immersion

Preamble

Since it was created by amalgamation in 1996, the Halifax Regional School Board (HRSB) has given high priority to expanding the number and variety of French Immersion programs and to ensuring that the programs are delivered as effectively as possible, taking into account the varied circumstances from one area of the region to another. Whereas French Immersion continues to have high priority, the HRSB commissioned a formal study of how French Immersion is delivered, to be completed during this school year (2010-11).

French was declared one of Canada’s two official languages in the Official Languages Act of 1969. French is very important in Nova Scotia not only because it has this official Canadian language status, but more so because of the strong Acadian presence, history and culture. The importance of making French language instruction accessible to as many students as possible in Nova Scotia was assumed to be a matter of unquestionable fact from the very beginning of this study. In other words, the purpose of this study is not to question the value of French language instruction for students of the HRSB. This is not to say that its effect on English proficiency needs no comment. Families who wish to choose French immersion would like some reassurance that the development of English language skills will not be restricted.

Regarding this reassurance, the Nova Scotia Department of Education’s Program Policy for French Second Language Programs (1998) includes this statement:

Research has shown that learning a second language enhances students’ general cognitive and communicative skills. Other benefits cited by researchers include improved reading and research skills and increased insight not only into the target culture but also one’s own culture.

The three studies cited below seemed to be the most recent reviews of the literature directly related to the question about the effect of immersion on English language skills.

Rehorick et al (2006) cite a report by Bournot-Trites & Tellowitz (2002) who conducted a research review on the effects of a second language on the first. Two of their critical findings are the following:

1. Research shows no evidence of a deficiency in development of English proficiency in early French Immersion programmes; bilingual students often outperform monolinguals, especially for English grammatical usage, punctuation and vocabulary.

2. Reduced time in English has no negative effect on English skills.

Consistent with this finding, Joan Netten (2007) states the following: “It may seem contrary to common sense, but research has shown that strong French literacy skills at the beginning of the immersion experience will result in strong English and French skills later on” (page 2).

And finally, in a 2006 paper prepared for Canadian Parents for French, CPF, the researcher summarizes the benefits this way:

French second-language education, especially French immersion, offers several cognitive and associated academic benefits according to research findings. These benefits include:

• Enhanced literacy through additive bilingualism;

• Strengthened English language skills;

• Mental flexibility, creative thinking and sensitivity;

• Metalinguistic awareness; and

• Communication, cultural, and economic opportunities.

The consistent findings from these recent and often-cited studies should be somewhat reassuring to parents who are considering the immersion option for their children.

HALIFAX REGIONAL SCHOOL BOARD THE DELIVERY OF FRENCH IMMERSION

Halifax Regional School Board — The Delivery of French Immersion 3

Layout of the Report

The next sections on the study’s purpose and methodology precede two relatively long sections on enrolment and attrition rate data analysis and then the layout follows closely the order of the questions set out in the purpose.

Rather than preparing an executive summary, each major section which contains considerable detail ends with a series of numbered observations intended as a summary of the findings in that section. The reader can go directly to the observations to bypass the detail.

The last two sections offer recommendations to address situations that need attention in particular schools and to introduce the basic structure of a delivery model for French immersion that should improve effectiveness and sustainability.

Purpose of the Study

Very generally, the decision to carry out this study is related to the history of French Immersion within the jurisdiction of the Halifax Regional School Board and this history begins prior to the Board’s formation in 1996.

The Halifax Regional School Board was created by the amalgamation of the former Dartmouth District School Board, the Halifax County-Bedford District School Board and the Halifax District School Board. Within these “district” boards, the delivery of French immersion varied in form. Only Early Immersion was offered in both the Dartmouth and Halifax boards and only Late Immersion was offered in the Halifax County board. The other major difference was that transportation was provided for Early Immersion in Dartmouth and less so in Halifax.

Not unexpectedly, after the HRSB was formed, the demand to have Early Immersion added in the former Halifax County schools led to the program’s start in about a dozen elementary schools and these lead classes are being carried now through to Grade 12. Also, a demand for Late Immersion led to its start at two junior high schools in Dartmouth and these have carried through already to Grade 12.

This expansion of the immersion programs since the board amalgamation in 1996 has been progressing for sufficient time to warrant an assessment of the progress and a rationalization of what delivery model has been created. The Board’s decision to take a look at what is in place now and how can it be made better and sustained for the future is timely.

The purpose of this study is to recommend options that should help to ensure the effective, sustainable delivery of French Immersion to the students of the Halifax Regional School Board, options that take into account shifting enrolments and imposing limits on scarce resources.

The following key questions were established to define the purpose more concretely:

1. Would moving to a single-track delivery model—either Early Immersion starting in Grade Primary or Late Immersion starting in Grade 7—address the major issues constructively or should both these programs and Intensive French (Grade 6) remain in place?

2. What are the major issues regarding an effective, sustainable delivery and how may they be addressed constructively?

3. According to the historical data and enrolment projections, which specific situations should be addressed as soon as possible and which ones should be addressed over the next few years?

4. What model of delivery for French Immersion should be more effective and sustainable?

Methodology

Four main steps define the methodology followed to complete this study:

• A limited review of the professional literature on French Immersion relevant to the specific question on Early and/or Late Immersion

• A review of various HRSB and Department of Education documents that explain the history of immersion in the region

• An analysis of immersion enrolments and attrition rates

• Consultations with regional supervisory staff, teachers and administrators of particular schools, the Board, and the regional chapters of Canadian Parents for French (CPF).

The consultant met with various groups between September 15, 2010 and February 11, 2011:

• Two meetings with a French Immersion Study Advisory Committee which included the Superintendent of Schools, three directors and other members of regional administration who have had a particular interest or involvement in immersion;


• One meeting with the provincial Executive Director of Canadian Parents for French;

• One meeting with each of the four regional Chapters of Canadian Parents for French;

• Two meetings with the Director of Program and program supervisory staff who have direct responsibility for immersion;

• Two meetings with the coordinators and supervisors in the School Administration Department;

• Visits to 15 schools to meet with the principal and immersion teachers;

• One meeting with the principals of those junior high schools which provide both Early and Late Immersion;

• One meeting with a School Advisory Council at its request;

• Two meetings with the Board; and

• One meeting with the Superintendent of Schools, the Directors and other members of the senior staff team.

The 15 meetings at individual schools primarily occurred for two reasons. In some cases, the consultant saw reasons to focus on some unique circumstances in particular schools and, in all cases, he wished to gather input from teachers and principals on the specific questions of this study or the major issues which surfaced during the study. In each school visit, the consultant met with the principal and at least two or three members of the French immersion staff. In most cases, all or a majority of the immersion staff attended these sessions.

In addition to the school visits, eight principals were contacted by phone to make particular inquiries about the issues and data considered in this study.

Immersion Enrolment Analysis

The reason for the length and complexity of this analysis is primarily related to the fact that new Early Immersion classes were started in the school system over the past decade and the effect of these new or “lead classes” on the already-established Late Immersion program seemed relevant in any consideration of what to expect in the future.

It would have been beneficial to include an estimate of immersion enrolment projections for next year and beyond, but data from the schools are not normally available until early spring, too late to be included in this study.

Table 1 compares five years of Early and Late Immersion total enrolments to the English program enrolments. The total enrolment (English and French) decreased by 5.2% over the last five years. The English program enrolment declined by 7.8%, while the Early Immersion enrolment increased by 27% and the Late Immersion declined by 12%. From another perspective, Early Immersion as a percent of the total enrolment increased in each of the five years, from 8.4% to 11.2% and Late Immersion decreased from 7.0% to 6.5%.

These data by themselves must be understood in context because they include the addition of new or “lead” classes at various grade levels in each of the five years. To understand this context, Table 1 also provides the data for Grade Primary Early Immersion (EI) and Grade 7 Late Immersion (LI), the entry points for each of these programs. The entry point data over the five years are more telling because no lead classes were started in either of these programs during this period—the lead class enrolments that were “additional” in the total enrolment columns had already been started at either of the two entry points before 2006-07. Thus, any increase in the Grade Primary EI or Grade 7 LI enrolment is the result of a greater proportion of families choosing these programs as their children enter Grade Primary or Grade 7 in the schools where the programs are already established.

Table 1 demonstrates that the Grade Primary Early Immersion enrolment increased by 10.8 % over the past five years. More specifically, it peaked at 893 in 2008-09 and then declined for the last 2 years—this peak of 893 is elevated because 2008-09 was the first year that 4-year-old students could start school in September. The fact that this year’s Grade Primary EI enrolment is lower than the past two years may be the first concrete evidence that the Grade Primary immersion enrolment has already reached a maximum.

According to Table 1, the Grade 7 Late Immersion enrolment declined significantly more than the English program enrolment over the past five years—by 23.6% compared to 7.8%, and the rate of decline steepened over the past three years.

But one question deserves further analysis. Is the decline in the Grade 7 Late Immersion related to the expansion of the Early Immersion?


The students who started LI in Grade 7 in the years from September, 2006, to September, 2010, entered Grade Primary between 1997 and 2001, inclusive. During this same 5-year period, 10 lead classes were started in EI at Grade Primary. Arbitrarily assuming an average of 25 students in each of these Grade Primary lead classes, the total number of students added in EI over the five years would be 250 students. The majority of these same students continued in EI at the Grade 7-12 level from 2006-07 to the present, the same period in which the LI declined by 223 students. Of course, several factors may have collectively caused this decline, but the likelihood that adding ten new classes in Grade Primary EI reduced the number starting LI seven years later is surely one of those factors.

Another piece of numerical evidence adds support. From Table 1, the total Grade 7 LI enrolment of the HRSB in 2006-07 was 945. The enrolments in the previous three years were the following:

• 899 in 2005-06

• 1010 in 2004-05

• 1008 in 2003-04.

These data show that the Grade 7 LI enrolment declined by 111 between 2004-05 and 2005-06. It is likely no coincidence that the class of the students who started LI in 2005-06 was the Grade Primary class in 1997-98, the same year that 2 EI lead classes were added. In other words, the decline in Grade 7 LI was most significant in the year when the addition of two EI lead classes could have a direct impact on Grade 7 LI enrolments.

More specific data add further insights to this comparison of the Early and Late Immersion enrolment 5-year histories. The data from the following families of schools are important to this analysis because no lead classes were added in earlier years that could cause any effect on the enrolments of the last five years: the schools in the families of Dartmouth High School, Prince Andrew High School, J.L. Ilsley High School and Halifax West High School. Each of these school families are addressed separately below with particular attention to the Grade Primary to Grade 9 enrolments.

The high school data are excluded from this analysis, except for Dartmouth High School, because of the normally higher attrition rates from junior high to high school, for both EI and LI, and the complex reasons behind the higher rates.

Year Total Enrolment Early Immersion EI % Total Late Immersion LI % Total English Total Gr. Pr. EI Gr. 7 LI

06-07 53099 4451 8.4% 3724 7.0% 44924 673 945

07-08 52484 4666 8.9% 3635 6.9% 44183 651 942

08-09 51947 5102 9.8% 3691 7.1% 43151 893 932

09-10 51316 5509 10.7% 3493 6.8% 42314 773 810

10-11 50317 5660 11.2% 3267 6.5% 41390 746 722

Diff. -2784 1209 -457 -3534 73 -223

% diff -5.2% 27% -12% -7.8% 10.8% -23.6%

Table 1: French Immersion Enrolments Compared to English Program Enrolments

Table 2: 5-Year Grade P-9 Immersion Enrolments, Halifax West Family of Schools

Year Early Immersion P-9 English Program P-9 % Total Enrolment P-9Late Immersion

(Brookside)English Program

(Brookside)% Total Enrolment

(Brookside)

2006-07 677 2908 23.3% 96 334 22.3%

2010-11 738 2982 24.7% 125 257 32.7%

5-yr. diff. 61 74 29 -77

% diff. 9.0% 2.5% 30.2% -23.1%


The following schools provide Early Immersion and feed into Halifax West High School: Burton Ettinger Elementary School, Grovenor-Wentworth Park Elementary School, Rockingham Elementary School and Fairview Junior High School. Only Brookside Junior High School provides Late Immersion in the Halifax West family. The Grade P-9 enrolment data of these schools and their broader catchment areas for Early Immersion were used to generate Table 2.

It is important to note that several of the catchment areas of the schools in this family for EI expand beyond the English program catchment areas and none of the broader EI catchment areas overlap with the catchment area of Brookside Junior High where LI is offered. In other words, because the parents in the catchment area of Brookside do not have access to EI, there can be no direct impact on the LI enrolment at Brookside.

According to Table 2, the total Grade P-9 Early Immersion enrolment of the 4 EI schools increased by 9.0% over the past five years while the total English program enrolment for the broader EI catchment areas of these schools increased by 2.5%. Another way of measuring this change is to say that the EI enrolment as a percentage of the total enrolment increased from 23.3% to 24.7%.

Also from Table 2, the Late Immersion enrolment at Brookside Junior High School increased by 30.2%, while the English program enrolment in the same school decreased by 23.1% (There are no LI students from beyond the school’s English program catchment area). The LI enrolment as a percentage of the total Grade 7-9 enrolment increased from 22.3% to 32.7%.

The following schools provide the Early Immersion programs, Grade Primary to Grade 9, in the J.L. Ilsley High School family: Chebucto Heights Elementary School, John W. MacLeod-Fleming Tower Elementary School and Elizabeth Sutherland School. The Late Immersion Program, Grade 7-9, is provided at Herring Cove Junior High. As in the Halifax West family, the EI program catchment area does not overlap with that of LI;

the parents in the catchment area of Herring Cove Junior High do not have access to EI.

Table 3 compares the total Grade P-9 EI immersion enrolments in the three schools to the total English program enrolments of the broader EI catchment areas for each of these schools. Also, it compares the Grade 7-9 LI enrolment to the English program total at Herring Cove Junior High School (HCJH). For this comparison, the catchment area of HCJH for Late Immersion is considered to be the same as that for the English program because, this year, only five to seven students of the 128 LI immersion students are from outside the English program catchment area.

Table 3 demonstrates that both the EI and LI enrolments in Grade P-9 increased over the past 5 years and the English program enrolment decreased.

The 5-year increase of 60% for LI at Herring Cove occurred steadily as the annual enrolments demonstrate—80, 105, 121, 122, and 128.

The data in Table 4 are the Early Immersion enrolments, Grade P-9, from the Dartmouth High School (DHS) and Prince Andrew High School (PAHS) families. The data of the two families are combined because the Early Immersion students at Shannon Park Elementary School and Prince Arthur Junior High School come from the combined catchment area of these two families—approximately 40% of the EI immersion students at Shannon Park Elementary come from the PAHS feeder schools. The Late Immersion data for these same families of schools is reported in Table 5 because the analysis is a bit more complicated than in the two previous families.

In Table 4, the English Program total includes enrolments from the elementary and junior high schools which do not offer immersion because the EI students are drawn from their catchment areas, a much broader area in total than in the previous two families analyzed.

Table 3: 5-Year Grade P-9 Immersion Enrolments, J.L. Ilsley Family of Schools

Year Early Immersion P-9 English Program P-9 % Total EnrolmentLate Immersion

(HCJH)English Program

(HCJH)% Total Enrolment

(HCJH)

2006-07 303 2021 15% 80 213 27.3%

2010-11 344 1830 18.8% 128 143 47.2%

5-yr. diff. 41 -191 48 -70

% diff. 13.5% -9.5% 60% -32.9%


Table 4 demonstrates that the EI enrolment in Grade P-9 increased, over the past five years, in the DHS and PAHS families while the English program enrolment decreased.

Table 5 provides confirmation in another way that the EI enrolment in each of the Halifax West, J.L. Ilsley, Dartmouth and Prince Andrew families is increasing. Using the eight consecutive years of data, it compares the 4-year average Grade Primary enrolment from 2003-04 to 2006-07 to the 4-year average from 2007-08 to 2010-11. In all three cases (Shannon Park Elementary takes in Dartmouth High and Prince Andrew High), the average of the most recent four years is greater than the average of the previous four years.

Table 6 presents the combined Grade 7-9 Late Immersion enrolments from Caledonia Junior High School and Ellenvale Junior High School. The English Program data for Table 5 are from the same catchment areas as the LI data, but they do not depict or represent the catchment areas accurately.

The LI enrolment at Ellenvale Junior High includes about 40 to 50 students who are from outside the catchment areas of the school.

Table 6 demonstrates that the LI enrolment in Grade 7-9 increased by 34.3%, over the past five years while the English program enrolment decreased by 18.5%.

The Dartmouth High family data is particularly important in this analysis. The catchment areas of Caledonia Junior High and Ellenvale Junior High lie within the immersion catchment areas of Shannon Park Elementary. This means that the same families who choose Late Immersion at Grade 7 could have chosen Early Immersion when their children started school in Grade Primary. In this area, the continuing growth of LI is not affected by the continuing growth in EI.

Table 4: 5-Year Grade P-9, Early Immersion Enrolments for Shannon Park Elementary and Prince Arthur Junior High

Year Early Immersion English Program % Total Enrolment

2006-07 526 5541 9.5%

2010-11 553 4943 11.2%

5-yr. diff. 27 -598

% diff. 5.1% -10.8%

Halifax West High J.L. Ilsley High Shannon Park Elem.

Gr. P. Av., 2003 to 06 98 42 88

Gr. P. Av., 2007 to10 105 54 93

Table 5: Comparison of Grade Primary 4-year Averages in Halifax West, J.L. Ilsley, and Shannon Park Elem. (Dartmouth and Prince Andrew High Families)

Table 6: 5-Year Grade 7-9 Immersion Enrolments for Caledonia Junior High and Ellenvale Junior High

Year Late Immersion English Program % Total Enrolment

2006-07 201 607 24.9%

2010-11 270 495 35.3%

5-yr. diff. 69 -112

% diff. 34.3% -18.5%


The following observations are intended to summarize the findings of this whole analysis:

Observation 1-1: The total HRSB enrolment (English and French) decreased by 5.2% over the last five years. In the same period, the English program enrolment declined by 7.8%, while the Early Immersion enrolment increased by 27% and the Late Immersion declined by 12%. From another perspective, Early Immersion as a percent of the total enrolment increased in each of the five years, from 8.4% to 11.2% and Late Immersion decreased from 7.0% to 6.5%.

Observation 1-2: The Grade Primary EI enrolment peaked in2008-09, the first year that 4-year old children could start school, and has been slightly lower for the past two years.

Observation 1-3: The decline in the system-wide Grade 7 LI enrolment is related, at least in part, to the fact that lead classes in EI were added earlier in various schools and these lead classes are still progressing through to Grade 12.

Observation 1-4: In the families of schools in which no effectfrom the addition of lead classes is possible, both Early Immersion and Late Immersion enrolments (Grades Primary to Grade 9) increased over the past five years, some quite significantly. In these families and over the same period, the Grade P-9 English Program enrolments decreased, except in one case where it has increased by 2.5%.

Observation 1-5: Based on the evidence from several areas of the school system, once any potential effect on Late Immersion enrolments of new lead classes in Early Immersion has been removed, it is probable that the Early Immersion and Late Immersion enrolments will stabilize in relation to each other and the decline in LI enrolments will lessen or disappear.

Attrition Rate Analysis

As stated in the Department of Education’s Program Policy for French Second Language Programs (page 8), “The aim of French immersion programs is to enable students to become functionally bilingual”. If students do not continue their program to completion, this aim cannot be achieved. Attrition rates measure the number of students who withdraw from their particular immersion program—thus, a negative attrition rate means that students joined the program. This percentage is an important indicator of the level of success of immersion programs in achieving their purpose.

The School Administration Department of the HRSB has kept a detailed file of French immersion enrolments and attrition rates annually since the 2003-04 school year. The fact that only eight years of data are available places a restriction on this analysis because thirteen years of data would give a more accurate calculation of attrition rates in Early Immersion from Grade Primary to Grade 12.

The most common measure of attrition rate is the percentage of students who withdraw from their particular immersion program between one grade and the next. For example, if a class in Early Immersion has an enrolment of 27 in Grade 6 and then an enrolment of 22 in Grade 7, the attrition rate from Grade 6 to Grade 7 is 18.5%. The numerical analysis of attrition rates in this study searched for points in the Grade Primary to Grade 12 continuum where the attrition rates are generally higher and sought to compare how the attrition rates in Early Immersion compare to those in Late Immersion.

Table 7 provides a history of the system-wide Early Immersion attrition rates by grade for the past five years. Two particular columns of data require attention because they contain an attrition rate which is obviously higher than the others in the column. The Grade 7 attrition rate in 2006-07 is 16.9%, much greater than the other four rates for that Grade. Although no explanation for this deviation could be found, the rates for the previous two years can be included in a revised calculation. If the attrition rates (10.8% and 9.9%) for Grade 7 in the two years prior to 2006-07 are included in calculating the average, it becomes 9.4% instead of 8.9%. Similarly, the attrition rate for Grade 11 in 2010-11 is an extreme deviation from the others in the same column. If it is excluded from the calculation, the 4-year average is 3.8% instead of 9.2%.

Generally, the data in Table 7 show that EI attrition rates for Grade 1 and Grade 2 are higher than those for Grade 5 and 6 and they gradually improve from Grade 2 to Grade 6. Then the data show another peak from Grade 6 to Grade 7 when most of the students move to another school.

The attrition rates for both Early Immersion and Late Immersion (Table 7 and Table 8) show a peak from Grade 9 to Grade 10.


A quick glance at Table 7 and Table 8 might lead one to assume that the attrition rates for Late Immersion are higher than those for Early Immersion, but these data by themselves may be too superficial. A more accurate comparison of EI and LI attrition rates calls for a deeper analysis.

An accurate comparison of attrition rates is best measured by determining how many students started Early Immersion in Grade Primary and then, thirteen years later, how many remained in Grade 12. Similarly, to compare rates for Late Immersion, how many started Grade 7 and then, six years later, how many remained in Grade 12 should be determined. Because having only eight years of immersion enrolment data does not allow a comparison from Grade Primary to Grade 12 for the same group or class, other ways must be used to determine EI attrition rates over the thirteen years. Six years of Late Immersion data is available.

The first way to measure the Grade P-12 attrition rate for Early Immersion can be only an estimate because of the limited chronological data. Students who start EI in Grade Primary at Shannon Park Elementary finish EI in Grade 12 at Dartmouth

High School. Although a specific class cannot be followed through the whole thirteen years, average enrolments can be compared. The Grade Primary EI enrolment at Shannon Park ranged from 78 in 2003-04 to 85 in 2010-11 with an 8-year average of 89. Over the same period, the Grade 12 EI enrolment at DHS ranged from 41 to 37 with an average of 41. In other words, the 8-year average enrolment dropped from 89 in Grade Primary to 41 in Grade 12. Using these averages, the EI attrition rate from Grade Primary to Grade 12 is 53.9%.

A different method—also an estimate—can be used to provide another example. The EI data used in this method are those of the Citadel High School family of schools. Within this family, the enrolments for two particular classes could be tracked to calculate the average attrition rate of these two classes from Grade Primary to Grade 6. This P-6 EI average attrition rate is 28.6%. Then, following a similar method, the average attrition rate for two particular classes of EI, Grade 7 to Grade 12 was calculated to be 23.6%. As a rough estimate, these two rates can be added together to give a Grade P-12 EI attrition rate of 52.2% in the Citadel High family of schools. Thus, the rates for the Dartmouth High family and the Citadel High family are very similar, although estimated using different methods.

The Grade 7-12 Late Immersion rates could be determined more accurately because three individual classes could be tracked from Grade 7 to Grade 12. To provide two examples, the LI data from the Auburn Drive High family and the Dartmouth High family were used and the results are summarized in Table 9 and Table 10.

From Table 9, the Grade 7-10 LI attrition rate within the Auburn Drive family, as a 3-year average, is 44.1% and, as expected, the Grade 7-12 rate is 56.8%. From Table 10, the corresponding rates for the Dartmouth High family are 64% and 68%.

Table 7: Early Immersion Percentage Attrition Rates by Grade, 2006-07 to 2010-11

Gr. 1 Gr. 2 Gr. 3 Gr. 4 Gr. 5 Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8 Gr. 9 Gr. 10 Gr. 11 Gr. 12

06-7 7.4 11.0 4.5 8.2 2.7 4.7 16.9 2.3 6.2 10.9 5.7 1.8

07-8 9.2 8.3 6.7 5.5 7.7 5.1 6.7 4.3 5.2 13.3 1.8 4.9

08-9 8.9 8.7 7.4 4.8 3.7 1.8 9.2 7.5 6.0 8.4 7.6 4.3

9-10 6.0 8.9 7.4 4.3 3.5 3.8 4.3 5.2 2.8 8.8 0.0 0.8

10-11 10.5 9.1 5.7 5.9 4.9 2.5 7.5 5.8 4.5 7.5 30.9 16.8

Avg. 8.4 9.2 6.3 5.7 4.5 3.6 8.9 5.0 4.9 9.8 9.2 5.7

Table 8: Late Immersion Percentage Attrition Rates Averaged by Grade, 2006-07 to 2010-11

Gr. 8 Gr. 9 Gr. 10 Gr. 11 Gr. 12

06-7 8.8 13.8 41.7 17.4 12.9

07-8 14.9 12.2 32.3 28.2 22.2

08-9 12.0 10.4 34.6 27.7 0.9

9-10 8.8 12.2 46.7 15.3 13.7

0-11 9.9 12.5 41.8 13.5 21.1

Avg. 10.9 12.2 39.4 20.4 14.2


In summary and based on only two sets of average attrition rates, approximately 52 to 54% of students in Early Immersion do not remain until Grade 12. In comparison, 57% of the LI students in one high school family did not remain until Grade 12 and, in the other, 68% did not remain.

In conjunction with the numerical attrition rate analysis, deliberate attention was given to the attrition rate issues during most of the interviews with school and regional staff. The collective opinion drawn from the interviews was very helpful in interpreting the numerical data. The observations below are intended to integrate the findings of the numerical analysis above with the professional, collective opinion that took shape during the consultations.

This review of attrition rates focused on trying to answer the following questions:

• Are there points in the Grade Primary to Grade 12 continuum where the attrition rates are generally higher?

• If attrition rates are higher between some grade levels than others, why is this so?

• How do the attrition rates in Early Immersion compare to those in Late Immersion?

These questions are answered below, in sequence, with the corresponding observations.

Observation 2-1: In answer to the first question, points are evident in the Grade Primary to Grade 12 continuum at which attrition rates are generally higher. The following points of higher attrition rates are evident in the numerical data and they confirm or are confirmed by the explanations gathered during the consultations with regional and school administrators and immersion teachers:

• The EI rates are higher for Grade 1 and Grade 2 than those for Grade 5 and 6 and they gradually improve from Grade 2 to Grade 6.

• The EI attrition rate takes another jump from Grade 6 to Grade 7 and then another from Grade 9 to Grade 10.

• In Late Immersion, the highest attrition rate occurs from Grade 9 to Grade 10.

Observations 8 to 11 provide explanations for these points of higher attrition rates.

Observation 2-2: The reasons for the various peaks in Early Immersion attrition rates become more complex or they are cumulative from Grade Primary to Grade 12. Parents and teachers of students in early elementary learn in the first two or three years that some students have particular learning needs or challenges and, consequently, perhaps should not remain in immersion. Students enter Grade Primary immersion with no assessment of their abilities or competencies to learn in English or French. Within the first few years, sufficient assessment occurs to identify special needs or barriers to learning. In fact, Grade Primary teachers quickly

Table 9: Grade 7-10 and Grade 7-12 Attrition Rates, Auburn Drive High Family

Grade 7 Grade 10 Gr. 7-10 Attr. Grade 12 Gr 7-12 Attr.

Class 1 130 83 36.2% 67 48.5%

Class 2 131 58 55.7% 49 62.6%

Class 3 131 78 40.5% 64 59.3%

Av. Attr. Rate 44.1% 56.8%

Table 10: Grade 7-10 and Grade 7-12 Attrition Rates, Dartmouth High Family

Grade 7 Grade 10 Gr. 7-10 Attr. Grade 12 Gr 7-12 Attr.

Class 1 86 40 53.5% 38 55.8%

Class 2 68 18 73.5% 17 75.0%

Class 3 60 21 65.0% 16 73.3%

Av. Attr. Rate 64% 68%


develop a fairly good understanding of the individual needs of their students and this understanding is confirmed through Grade 1 and Grade 2. For a variety of reasons, parents decide, in consultation with teachers and the principal, that remaining in immersion may not be the best option for their child. Thus, the attrition rates are generally higher at the end of Grade 1 and Grade 2.

Observation 2-3: The reasons behind the jump in EI attrition from Grade 6 to Grade 7 are varied and more complex. Some parents of students who have identifiable and unique learning needs decide to withdraw their child from immersion to remove what they perceive as an added pressure or learning challenge as they enter junior high, but other reasons are apparent. By the end of Grade 6, students have more say in whether or not they will continue immersion and “social” issues are more of a critical factor. The reasons for not taking immersion in junior high school may have little or nothing to do with wanting to learn French. Student motives or interests influence the decision and parents may have changed their opinion about the value of French Immersion since their child enrolled in Grade Primary.

One of the bigger issues for Grade 6 immersion students, and their parents, is whether or not they will have to attend a different junior high school than their friends from their neighborhood. Because of where immersion programs are offered, some students have to choose between proceeding to Grade 7 with their immersion classmates in a particular junior high school and attending the junior high school that serves their local community. Ultimately, parents make the choice about what junior high school their child will attend in Grade 7, if they have a choice to make. Based on needs and desires of their child and their perceptions about the various junior high schools available, they may choose the school that does not offer Early Immersion.

A particular concern of parents and teachers was expressed quite often which may be viewed as a variable to contributes to higher attrition rates in Early Immersion. When the EI enrolment is not sufficient to have more than one class in Grade Primary, students can spend the first seven years of their public school together as a class and even through junior high school—less often into high school because EI and LI are combined. Yes, this has always been the case in the English program in small schools, but it is not desirable. If problems of a social nature or unhealthy relationships arise in the early elementary years, they may cause families to withdraw their child from EI, whether before Grade 6 or as they enter junior high school.

Observation 2-4: The opinions gathered in staff interviews also support or explain the fact that attrition rates in Early Immersion are generally higher from Grade 9 to Grade 10. The reasons for not remaining in immersion become more complex at this stage. Unique learning needs and having to choose between one school and another continue to be critical factors, but other high school factors come into play. Mainly these high school factors are related to the students’ course preferences. Students are often forced to choose between immersion and other courses or programs. Although the options offered to students vary from school to school, generally, students may have to withdraw from immersion to take other options according to their preferences. (This last factor is addressed in more detail in the section on “major issues”.)

Observation 2-5: As with Early Immersion, the attrition rate forLate Immersion is higher from Grade 9 to Grade 10. Understandably, the reasons for this peak between Grade 7 and 12 are the same as those put forward to explain why EI students do not continue in Grade 10. Having to choose one high school or another, the immersion course options available, and course selection preferences are three important factors.

Observation 2-6: Two “exit interviews” or surveys of families whose children have not remained in immersion were carried out since 2008-09. Families were invited to complete a questionnaire designed to gather information about the reasons students do not complete the immersion program. The response rates for these two surveys were quite low, so definite or statistically significant conclusions should not be drawn. Nevertheless, one can say that the strongest factors identified from surveys contributing to the attrition rates are consistent with the opinions gathered during this study. Students left immersion because they were frustrated by their level of achievement, an insufficient number of course offerings in high schools and no resource teacher support in Early Immersion.

Observation 2-7: The third question about comparing attrition rates in EI and LI could not be answered accurately because EI rates could only be estimated. A rough estimate is that approximately 52 to 54% of students in Early Immersion did not remain until Grade 12. In comparison and using a sampling of two high school families, 62.5% of the students in Late Immersion (the average of 57% and 68%) did not remain until Grade 12.


Early Immersion and/or Late Immersion

The first question is to be given particular attention in this study is the following:

Would moving to a single-track delivery model—either Early Immersion starting in Grade Primary or Late Immersion starting in Grade 7—address the major issues constructively or should both these programs and Intensive French (Grade 6) remain in place?

Some conclusions from the educational research on immersion are relevant in addressing this question.

Joan Netten’s (2007) recent study was referenced in a previous section. Her work is specific to the question at hand, as evident in the title of her study, “Optimal Entry Point for French Immersion”. She takes the following position on the question:

From my considerable experience with immersion programs, I would suggest that early French immersion appears to me to be the most practical entry point for the widest variety of learners to experience academic success, and develop both oral and written competence in French. Primarily, this decision is based on the congruence between the learning outcomes of immersion and the primary curriculum. The premise of immersion programs is that the child will develop competence in the second language while achieving the learning outcomes of the grade. This premise works at the primary level where the emphasis is on developing literacy skills, not on academic content learning (page 7).

Then Netten makes the following comparison between Early Immersion and the other two entry points:

Early French immersion is also the program which is open to the widest variety of students. Because of the congruence of the curriculum and learning outcomes, that is the development of literacy skills, children of a wide variety of academic abilities can profit from the program. Both middle and late immersion require much more ability on the part of the students to learn both language and content at the same time. (page 7).

But she qualifies her conclusion with this final comment:

When discussing an optimal entry point for French immersion, it needs to be said that this decision includes parents, too. Parents must be happy with the entry point which they have chosen... To conclude, it is not really possible to determine an optimal entry point for French immersion programs which will apply to all children and their parents. The optimal entry point is really when both parent and child are ready to try the immersion experience. (page 8).

In other words, Netten chooses Grade Primary as the entry point if characteristics of the learners and the nature of the program are the only factors to consider. From a broader perspective, she chooses later entry points because they may be better and timely for some students and their families.

Another fairly recent review of the research comes at the question of preferred entry points from a somewhat different perspective related to how much time students spend in a second language program. In her paper entitled, “The Relationship of Starting Time and Cumulative Time to Second Language Acquisition and Proficiency”, Elizabeth Murphy (2001) drew the following conclusion at the end of her very thorough analysis:

We are forced to conclude, therefore, that based on the review of the studies cited in this paper, we cannot clearly or definitively conclude that there is a linear relationship between the amount of cumulative time and level of proficiency or whether the amount of cumulative time can predict the level of proficiency.

Murphy’s overall conclusion is noteworthy, in its entirety, as being relevant to the question at hand:

The relationship of time to achievement is an essential issue which needs to be clearly understood in order to establish a foundation on which to base policy, programs and curriculum. Research has provided many answers to questions on this topic and has shown that starting age is not in itself an accurate predictor of level of achievement. It now seems that the optimum or critical age hypothesis favouring young children is not valid and that older children require less cumulative learning time because they are more efficient learners. Cumulative time does not appear to be an accurate predictor of achievement.

These findings from the research do not contradict opinions and beliefs gathered during the consultation sessions with professional staff. The question about the entry point for immersion was discussed in every session. It was given more deliberate attention in those meetings with principals and teachers of schools where both programs are offered in the school or even in the same classroom, in other words, in junior and senior high schools.

It seems relevant to point out that most of the immersion staff who participated in the sessions came through either Early Immersion or Late Immersion in public school and many of them quite recently—the immersion teachers in most school systems are younger, on average, because immersion programs have been expanding. In most of the consultations with school staffs, there was a mix of language development experience, including Francophone, Core French, EI and LI.


Given the varied backgrounds of the immersion staff, their opinions or beliefs were mixed and generally covered the range of possibilities, as one would expect. But overall, only a few individuals spoke passionately or strongly that one of the two programs was clearly superior to the other or that only one entry point was obviously the best way to go. The conversations were much more about the relative advantages and disadvantages of one program compared to the other and the impact of having only one immersion program in the system.

The three conclusions below answer the question about offering only Early Immersion or Late Immersion, or continuing to offer both. They are based on the review of the literature and, especially, on the consultations with teachers, administrators and parents (CPF Chapters) during this study.

Conclusion 3-1: In terms of educational benefit to students,there is no reason to conclude that either Early Immersion or Late Immersion is clearly superior to the other to the point that one should replace the other.

Conclusion 3-2: One of the expectations of effective program delivery is equitable access. Offering two entry points (Grade Primary and Grade 7), in areas where programs can be sustained, provides greater access for students.

Conclusion 3-3: Moving to a single-track delivery model across the entire school system, to offer only Early Immersion or Late Immersion, would not address the major issues so constructively as to justify such an extreme measure.

Conclusion 3-4: There are areas of the school system where it is unreasonable to expect that both programs can be sustained efficiently if the enrolments continue to decline.

The reasons behind the third and fourth conclusions are embedded, directly and indirectly, in the subsequent sections of this paper, as the major issues are explained, possible solutions are offered for consideration, and a preferred delivery model is described.

Intensive French (Grade 6)

The question addressed in this section included a reference to the possible future of Intensive French which is offered in two of the most rural schools in the HRSB system. Intensive French in Grade 6 and Extended Core in Grade 7 to 12 were initiated in the rural schools which do not have sufficient adult populations and student enrolments to sustain immersion. These programs should be continued because they add to or enhance the Core French program for those students who wish to study French in greater depth.

The Major Issues

The second question set out in the study’s purpose asks for the major issues in regard to an effective, sustainable delivery of immersion and how they may they be addressed constructively.

The issues addressed in this section are those under which most other more specific problems may be categorized and discussed. The financial requirements of French immersion are discussed in a subsequent section because they are of such importance in trying to solve most of the issues raised throughout the report.

“Streaming”

This has always been an issue in public education, particularly in high schools, when families and students have to choose from a variety of program or course options. The common understanding of the term, among educators, is that students are streamed into classes or groups by their program choices according to such criteria as level of achievement, motivation, ability, and family support in the home. For example, high school students who focus on science, including physics and advanced math, are somewhat streamed, as are those who wish to focus on music, band and fine arts.

Streaming has been a matter of concern in French immersion from the very beginning. Families have viewed immersion as a means to ensure greater short-term and long-term advantages for their children, to have their child in classes of what they perceive to be higher achieving students, or even to have their child in a school that they perceive to be more successful than their own community school. Generally and historically, parents and teachers of students in the English program have viewed immersion as a program that draws the higher achieving students away from the English program classes.

Little can be said here to propose a solution to the problem of streaming. As long as families and students have choices of program or course options, streaming will be a reality—at least this has been the case in high schools for many decades. It is mentioned in this report more to acknowledge its existence, but also to say that it may not be the serious concern that it was in the early years of immersion.

This consultant, who has been dealing with the issues of immersion for over 20 years, was a bit surprised that streaming was mentioned rather infrequently in the consultation sessions and that a few of the comments were positive in the sense that it has become less of a problem. Admittedly, most of these positive comments came more from principals and teachers of the Early Immersion schools and less from those of the


Late Immersion schools. It should also be said that the concern about streaming might have been expressed more frequently if teachers of the English program were consulted directly.

Although concrete, measurable data is unavailable to support what is being said here about streaming, this consultant gained the sense that immersion classes, especially EI, are more representative of students who display a normal range of abilities and achievement levels than they were in the early years of immersion. This may be due to the facts that French immersion has been in place for quite some time, more is generally known or understood about it, and, consequently, more families are choosing it for their children. It may be due also to the fact that students no longer have to be assessed and accepted into immersion programs.

Perhaps the most telling evidence that the degree of streaming is less lies in the fact that the number of immersion students in need of additional support as learners is increasing. This suggests that immersion classes may not be that much different in their makeup than English classes. This issue is addressed in the next section.

Level of Student Services Support

Students with various learning difficulties, including behavioral problems, should have support to help them achieve as learners. In the mandatory English program, this student services support comes primarily from resource teachers, Reading Recovery teachers, speech language pathologists, autism specialists, and educational program assistants. Except in a very few instances, students in the optional French immersion program do not have support from persons in these same roles who speak French. Even if the financial resources were not so severely limited, there are very few immersion teachers who have the experience and training to serve as resource or Reading Recovery teachers and there are very few of the other specialists who are bilingual.

The following message was clear and consistent throughout the consultation sessions: One of the best single ways to add educational value for students, especially for the younger children in Early Immersion, but also for those in EI and LI in junior high, is to provide the same level and type of students services support as those provided for students in the English program.

Those responsible for French immersion in the Program Department are fully aware of the need for student services for immersion students. A plan of action has been implemented already to have experienced immersion teachers become qualified as resource teachers. One cohort of teachers (8) has completed the training program, a second cohort is participating in the program, and another is prepared to start.

However, only a few of the eight teachers in the first cohort have gained an immersion resource position because the hiring procedure in the collective agreement does not allow complete flexibility in the placement of teachers.

Availability of Qualified Teachers

The annual search for suitably qualified teachers to cover the expanding immersion programs has been a major challenge for school boards in Nova Scotia since immersion was introduced about 30 years ago. Although the teacher shortage continues to be a challenge for the Halifax Regional School Board, there are definite signs that the steps taken by the Board’s Human Resources and Program Departments are paying off. These departments have collaborated closely to recruit and retain qualified teachers, provide professional development for teachers already on staff who wish to become qualified to teach immersion, and define higher standards for hiring new teachers and filling positions from within.

The most telling numerical evidence that the situation is improving lies in the number of 3-year, conditional, probationary or permanent contracts offered over each of the past five years to attract and retain new teachers. In early spring, school boards must compete to hire immersion teachers as they complete their university preparation for teacher certification. Because this is prior to the normal hiring season, the Human Resources Department cannot access sufficient information to be certain about what immersion positions will be open at the end of the hiring process, so assumptions must be made to estimate the number of immersion teachers required. During a teacher shortage when boards are competing, the risk of assuming that probationary/permanent contract positions will be open for new immersion teachers toward the end of the process is too high. The HRSB removes this risk by offering 3-year, conditional, probationary or permanent contracts to teachers, early in the process, who have become qualified to teach immersion, on the condition that they teach immersion for at least three years.

Over each of the past five years, the HRSB hired the following numbers of immersion teachers on a 3-year, conditional contract: 31, 71, 22, 7 and 11. These numbers show that the Human Resources Department has grown more confident that it is able to fill immersion positions during the normal hiring process without having to offer as many conditional contracts before the process begins.

The numbers do not show another important fact. In the early years of immersion hiring, a teacher shortage caused problems in all immersion program areas—language arts,


social studies, science and mathematics, in both Early and Late Immersion. More recently, the shortage existed only in science and mathematics. Most recently, the seven, 3-year conditional contract positions filled in 2009-10 and the eleven positions in 2010-11 were mathematics positions. All other immersion positions were filled during the normal hiring process.

The fact that the teacher shortage is limited to mathematics now, especially in the secondary grades, was confirmed by principals during the consultations. Only a few principals raised concerns about being able to hire teachers who meet the new qualifications standard for mathematics. Most of the input from principals indicated that the teacher shortage is no longer the serious problem that it was just a few years ago.

In the interest of fairness and accuracy, another comment about the input on the teacher shortage seems important. As indicated, a shortage of science teachers existed until 2009-10. One of the concerns in at least a couple of high schools is that physics and chemistry are not offered as immersion courses—this program decision has been in effect for almost ten years. Some argue that the decision was made because the enrolments in these courses were too low; others argue that the enrolments would be greater if additional qualified immersion, science teachers could be hired.

There is at least one reason to anticipate that teacher shortage in French immersion will continue to be less of a problem. As indicated earlier in this paper, the startup of lead classes each year will come to an end in 2014-15. If the enrolment growth slows down or levels out as more teachers become qualified, then the supply of teachers should be able to match the demand more closely each year.

There is other good news related to teacher hiring. The Program Department staff members responsible for immersion have persevered in clarifying and raising the language competency standards for teachers and then assessing all applicants to determine if they meet the minimum standards. A higher level of competency and greater stability will result as those who aspire to teach immersion become more aware of and meet the standards, and as more qualified teachers become permanent members of the HRSB teaching staff.

Availability of Suitable Classroom Materials

When immersion classes were introduced in Nova Scotia, classroom materials or supplies for students and teachers were simply not available in sufficient quantity and quality. Suitable materials for Core French in the English Program were readily available because the program had been in place for

decades, but these were not suitable for immersion. The supply of materials could neither match nor keep up with the demand because immersion was expanding so quickly across the province and the country and because it takes several years to get new curriculum materials to market.

The most obvious consequence of this shortage of classroom materials was that immersion teachers had to find and even purchase their own resources and they had to spend far too much time translating English materials into French or developing resources.

Fortunately, time has taken care of this problem and will continue to do so. During all the consultation sessions with regional and school staffs, the message was consistent: The problem of not having suitable immersion materials and supplies for students and teachers is no longer an impediment and the situation is improving every year.

Limited Number of Course Options in High School

This matter is singled out in this section as a major issue, but two other issues specific to high schools—immersion attrition rates and financial cost—are raised in the corresponding sections under those headings.

The Nova Scotia Department of Education requires that nine courses (half of the total high school credits required for graduation) be taught in French for students who wish to receive a French Immersion Certificate upon graduation. All twelve HRSB high schools offering immersion provide at least the minimum nine credits and seven offer 10 to 13 credits. In those schools offering only the minimum, the concern is that students have no choice in the courses they can take to receive the French Immersion Certificate.

Being able to offer students a wide range of course options has always been a complex issue in the high school English program, long before immersion was introduced as yet another heavy demand on the student and teacher schedule. The limitations to being able to offer more than 9 immersion credits, in most ways, are the same as those in being able to offer choices in the language arts, Core French, mathematics, sciences, music, art, social studies, studies of minority cultures, alternative programs such as Options and Opportunities or Cooperative Education, Advanced Placement, and the International Baccalaureate program. The complexity is increased by the variety and range of program or course options, especially when many of them can only be offered as single sections because of low student subscription.


This complexity can cause more serious problems in scheduling high schools with smaller enrolments.

Although the limited number of course options surfaced in this study is an issue in high schools, viable solutions did not. It seems important to acknowledge and explain the concern at least. As long as high schools continue to offer so many choices to students, including immersion, the difficulties of trying to add even more options will remain. The fact that twelve of the fifteen high schools in the HRSB are able to offer nine or more additional credits (likely most are single-section courses) should be viewed very positively as a benefit to students.

One barrier is unique to being able to increase the number of immersion credits, or at least it has been perceived as a barrier. The shortage of teachers qualified to teach immersion in high school, particularly for science and mathematics, has been a serious problem, but some school and regional administrators have questioned whether or not the limited number of credits is solely a consequence of this shortage. If the number of immersion course options was greater, not only would the scheduling complications be increased, but also the same number of immersion students would be spread among more courses creating the situation where some enrolments would not be sufficient to justify offering the course.

Equitable Access

Equitable access is a serious issue in the delivery of immersion and other optional programs in Nova Scotia’s schools because the financial resources are insufficient to support additional student transportation where its provision could overcome the barriers of distance.

The location of French immersion programs, as with optional programs such as the International Baccalaureate, Advanced Placement, and Options and Opportunities (O2) programs, has to be such that a sufficient enrolment can be sustained to operate the program effectively with the very limited financial resources. The barriers of small community populations and long travel distances are greatest in the more rural areas of any school system, often to the point that only a small number of optional programs can be offered; in most cases, the provision of options requires additional resources. This is the case for the HRSB in its rural areas along the eastern shore and through the Musquodoboit Valley.

In the opinion of this consultant, which is based on experience in four other school systems in Nova Scotia, the HRSB has done as well as any and better than some in improving the access to immersion in the more densely populated areas of the

school system, especially since the board was formed through amalgamation in 1996. Nevertheless, one issue of equitable access provides an opportunity to make more improvements. The problem is related to how access is defined.

This can be and is said about equitable access to immersion under the jurisdiction of the HRSB: Families have access to immersion, except in the rural areas with less concentrated populations. In other words, families in the more heavily populated areas, including and surrounding Halifax, Dartmouth and Bedford, have access to immersion. What this means, really, is that families in some areas have access to either Early Immersion or Late Immersion but not both, while in other areas, families have access to both programs.

Concern was expressed particularly with respect to two areas during the consultations with Canadian Parents for French. Families do not have access to both EI and LI in the Citadel High School family of schools and in the Dartmouth High School family of schools. (There may be other school families or communities where this might be raised as an issue, but they were not brought to the attention of the consultant during this study.)

The concern expressed is that only Early Immersion is offered within the Citadel High School family of schools although these schools serve one of the most densely populated areas of the school system. Three elementary schools and two junior high schools offer EI and feed into Citadel High. The perceived inequity in this area can be expressed in this question: If both immersion programs are offered in other areas in the school system, why is Late Immersion not offered here?

The question of equitable access is less pronounced in the situation of the Dartmouth High family. Shannon Park Elementary School and Prince Arthur Junior High School provide Early Immersion, with busing guaranteed, and feed into Dartmouth High—these schools also provide EI, with busing, for the families in the catchment area of Prince Andrew High School. This is not the case for all students in Late Immersion. It is offered only at two junior high schools which lie within the catchment area of Prince Andrew High—Caledonia Junior High and Ellenvale Junior High. Transportation is not provided for the out-of-area transfer students who are accepted to immersion in either of these schools. The specific question expressed by representatives of a small group of families, during this study, was about having Late Immersion offered at Bicentennial School which is a feeder school into Dartmouth High.


The fact that this question about access to both EI and LI has been raised here should not be interpreted to mean that a major concern has been expressed and must be given immediate attention. The concern was expressed but a strong demand for Late Immersion from a sufficiently large number of families to justify and sustain an additional program was not evident. It has been simply noted here as a matter of record to be kept in mind over the next few years.

A Dilemma

Dilemmas are problems which have several solutions, none of which are really satisfactory, and one has to be selected. A particular dilemma, raised once during this study, is very familiar to the HRSB administrators and board members and is a frustration in other school boards also.

Families under the jurisdiction of the HRSB have access to Early or Late Immersion, but not necessarily in the school of their preference. In a few situations each year, the number of families applying for immersion in a particular school is greater than the number of seats available, so there has to be a selection process to determine who gets the seats and who has to go to another school. Of course everyone wants a fair process.

Until last spring, a precise time was set for families to submit their application and selection was made on a “first come-first serve” basis. The stories abound about moms and dads lining up in the pre-dawn hours, in the worst March weather, to be first in line when the doors of the school open. Last spring, applications could be submitted by e-mail and those were accepted in order of time received after a precise, preset time. Some parents who expressed a lack of confidence in this electronic method indicated that they would still wait in a pre-dawn lineup to ensure that their application is acknowledged as early as possible.

Fortunately, all applications were accepted last spring because the number matched the seats available. Hopefully, this will be the case this spring.

The purpose of raising the issue here is simply to acknowledge that it was raised passionately during one of the meetings and to advise that this consultant has no better solution to offer. From personal experience, the consultant learned that another method, which was agreed to by parents before it was applied, became unacceptable to those who were unsuccessful. The method was to draw names from a hat. The challenge is to find a method that accepts some applications and rejects others while trying to make all participants happy.

The Financial Requirements of French Immersion

As an optional program, French immersion is distinct from Core French, a mandatory program in elementary and junior high school—Early Immersion replaces Core French and Late Immersion replaces it after Grade 6. If immersion was not offered as an option by the HRSB, the immersion students would be enrolled in the English program, including Core French, in their own community school.

The primary financial question considered in this study asks if immersion adds any net cost, taking into account that the federal and provincial governments provide additional revenue to promote and support French immersion programs.

The additional revenue to support immersion comes to school boards in Nova Scotia in the form of “French Special Projects” grants and “Minority Language Funding” approved annually by the Department of Education. Table 11 provides both these amounts for each of the past five years and Table 12 provides the breakdown of federal, provincial and school board contributions to cover the French Special Project grant, using this school-year’s total as an example.

As evident in Table 11, the total amounts approved for French Special Projects declined for 2007-08 and then remained constant for the past four years. The Minority Language Funding increased by $20,666. The ML Funding covers the cost of classroom materials for the lead classes which start up each year and the Grade 7 Immersion Summer Camp at the Universite` Ste-Anne.

The total FSP grant approved is not the amount of revenue received annually by the HRSB because the board has to cover 30% of the total approved. Table 12 gives the actual revenue received by the HRSB for this school-year, which would be the same for the previous three years. The board received a total of $431,480 from the federal and provincial governments and had to cover $184,920 of the total $616,400 from within its own general operating revenue.

The major portion of the French Special Project Grants has been approved historically for immersion teacher positions to support new or “lead” immersion classes in schools. Five years ago, twelve lead classes and three regional immersion support staff positions were funded along with some professional development support for immersion and Core French. Because the number of lead classes has decreased since then, ten classes and four regional positions are being funded for this school-year, along with more support for the professional development of a growing number of immersion teachers.


The additional expenditures required to deliver immersion may be categorized under classroom materials, professional development, student services support, transportation and staffing. As just explained above, 70% of the professional development costs are covered from the French Special Projects grant, annually. Each of the other categories of expenditures is addressed below.

Classroom materials are purchased by the Department of Education through the “textbook” allocation, in the same way that English program resources are purchased. This allocation for textbooks and other classroom materials or supplies is covered from within the budget of the Department of Education so, in one sense, it is not a direct expenditure for the HRSB—and the Minority Language Funding helps to cover the cost of materials for both immersion and Core French. Nevertheless, there is an added cost against the textbook allocation, in another sense, because not all materials which must be purchased are for lead classes and immersion materials generally cost about 10% more than the comparable items for the English program. The additional costs may not be comparatively significant now, but what will happen when lead classes no longer exist and materials need to be replaced?

Relative to other immersion costs and to the system-wide cost of busing, transportation for immersion students does not add a major expenditure. Except in the catchment areas of Dartmouth High School and Prince Andrew High School and to a lesser degree on the Halifax peninsula, parents are responsible to get their children to the immersion program if it is not offered in their own community school. In the Dartmouth situation, all Early Immersion students are bused to Shannon Park Elementary School, Prince Arthur Junior High School and Dartmouth High School—a decision that was made many years ago, prior to the board amalgamation.

According to Stock Transportation, the high concentration of buses and bus runs required to transport students in the English program in the Dartmouth area is such that transporting the EI students requires very little additional resources. Quite a number of additional bus runs are necessary, but only one, or perhaps two, additional buses had to be added. The average cost to the HRSB of adding a bus and driver to the fleet is about $50,000. Adding bus runs to buses that are already operating costs the price of extra fuel and extra hours for the driver if the runs cannot be completed within the allotted schedule.

The additional expenditures generated by immersion, described to this point, are small compared to the overall operational expenditure for the HRSB. The additional expenditure for additional classroom immersion teachers in the 59 schools is not. This observation calls for an explanation because one would think that the number of teaching positions should be the same whether the students are in immersion or the English program.

The possibility that additional teachers are required in some immersion schools while not in others is strictly related to having to offer two or three programs instead of one to the same group of students and to the specific grade level enrolments in each school year. This is best explained with a couple of examples.

Assume that an elementary school, this year, has 17 students in Grade 2 Early Immersion and 31 students in Grade 2 English and these students cannot be accommodated in other combined grade classrooms with Grade 1 or Grade 3. The maximum class size for Grade 2 in Nova Scotia is 25. Thus, three classroom teachers are required to staff Grade 2—an EI class with 17 and 2 English classes with 15 and 16. If no immersion program was offered, these same 48 students could be accommodated in two classrooms of 24 each.

Table 11: French Special Projects (FSP) Grants and Minority Language Funding (ML)

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

FSP Approved $644,780 $616,400 $616,400 $616,400 $616,400

ML Funding $259,054 $259,054 $273,244 $288,757 $279,720

Table 12: Federal, Provincial and HRSB Contributions to French Special Projects Grants, 2010-11

2010-11 Total FSP Approved Federal Contribution 50% Provincial Contribution 20% HRSB Contribution 30%

Contribution $616,400 $308,200 $123,280 $184,920


As the second example, assume that a junior high school has 41 students in Grade 8 Late Immersion and 53 students in the Grade 8 English program. Although no maximum class size is mandated, the general rule of thumb is that classes over 35 should be avoided in junior high. Thus, four classroom teachers are required to staff Grade 8—two immersion classes of 20 and 21 and two English classes of 26 and 27. If no immersion program was offered, these same 94 students could be accommodated in three classes with 31, 31 and 32 students.

In each of the examples—which are very common situations, one additional classroom teacher is required to offer immersion. Obviously, the total number could be very significant in any particular year. The examples apply only to a single grade. In the HRSB system, 25 schools have immersion in Grade P-6 and 31 schools have immersion in Grade 7-9. This means that, each year, there is a total of 268 possibilities (175+93) in which one or more additional teachers might be necessary to offer immersion, depending on the enrolment in each grade. Even if only half of these grades required one additional classroom teacher, 134 positions still creates a very large additional expenditure.

Another factor adds teaching positions in elementary and junior high schools. For every elementary classroom position, an allocation of 0.2 full-time-equivalent (FTE) positions is necessary for the specialist programs—for example, Physical Education and Music, and the corresponding figure is 0.3 FTE positions for each junior high classroom position. The general rule of thumb is that 1.2 FTE positions are required for every elementary classroom and 1.3 for every junior high classroom.

It can be seen from these examples that the number of additional classroom teachers required each year can vary greatly from year to year as the enrolments fluctuate even by a few. In the case of the junior high example, in another year,

the same junior high school could have 32 students in immersion and 61 in English so that only three teachers would be required.

It should be noted that the method for staffing high schools is different because high schools are on the credit system and students receive individualized course schedules—they are not scheduled by classes. Offering immersion may require additional teaching positions if the enrolments are very low and the commitment to offer immersion courses has been made, but the method explained above does not apply in staffing high schools.

To estimate the number of additional classroom teacher positions necessary for immersion, the supervisory staff in the School Administration Department looked at the number of classes in each immersion school for the present school year and then determined how many teachers would be necessary if no immersion was offered in the school. For a few of these schools, the total enrolment for only the English program would not be valid because of out-of-area transfers into immersion—in reality, these students would have to return to their own community school. Because the enrolments and, therefore, every school staff allocation could not be determined precisely, a very conservative approach was taken in determining the total estimate.

The estimated total number of additional classroom teacher positions to offer Early Immersion and Late Immersion in Grade Primary to Grade 9, for the present school year, is 107 classroom positions and 29 specialist positions.

Consequently, the additional cost of 136 teaching positions to support immersion is $7,115,000, using an average salary of $55,000, including benefits.

Table 13 provides data to fill in some detail about this estimate of 107 classroom teacher positions.

Table 13: Distribution of Additional Immersion Classroom Teachers, Gr. P-9, 2010-11

Immersion Program No. of Schools No. of Schools Where Positions Added Total Positions Added Average No. of Positions/School

Gr. P-6 EI 19 15 30 2.0

Gr. 7-9 EI 5 5 10 2.0

Gr. 7-9 LI 14 14 33 2.5

Both EI and LI 9 9 34 3.8

Totals 47 43 107*

* A total of 29 additional specialist positions correspond to these classroom positions.


Table 13 shows that 43 of the 47 elementary or junior high schools offering immersion required additional classroom teachers and that the junior high schools offering both Early and Late Immersion required the greatest number of positions per school on average.

The fact that 91% of the schools offering the Grade P-9 immersion option required additional classroom positions may be surprising, but it coincides with another fact which has been well known in the operation of schools for decades. It is commonly understood that greater efficiencies of operation are gained when students within a school system are housed in a small number of schools with larger enrolments rather than having them housed in a large number of schools with smaller enrolments. And one of the greatest efficiencies in larger schools is the number of teachers required in each school to offer the programs.

This understanding of how staffing allocation efficiencies are gained when student body enrolments are larger can be explained by speaking of “schools under one roof”.This expression was used by used by several principals during the consultations as was the expression, “schools within a school”. In a very real sense, when a school is offering Early Immersion or Late Immersion, that school is operating two schools under one roof. When a junior high school is offering both EI and LI, that school is operating three schools under one roof.

The point of introducing this understanding can be stated explicitly. If immersion programs can be offered to the same number of students in a smaller number of schools, then the cost of additional classroom teacher and specialist teachers should be less.

The following observations summarize this section and set out what seem to be major issues regarding the immersion funding support and the additional cost of immersion as an optional program.

Observation 4-1: While the normal operating costs of the HRSB have increased in each of the past five years and while the immersion programs have continued to expand, the revenue support committed by the federal government and provincial government declined for 2007-08 and then remained constant; it is $431,480 for this school year. Thus, a greater portion of the cost of immersion is being covered by the Board’s general revenue.

Observation 4-2: Under the present operational arrangement for delivering immersion, the financial cost of Early and Late Immersion is very significant because of the number of additional teaching positions required. In comparison, the cost of additional busing is much less. For this school year, the estimated additional cost of

teaching positions is over $7 million compared to an estimated range of $75,000 to $125,000 for additional busing.

Observation 4-3: The necessity of adding teaching positions to offer immersion in a school is directly related to the fact that, in reality, the English program and immersion programs are being delivered to two or even three different student bodies. Especially in terms of staffing and scheduling, two or three schools are being administered under one roof. From this perspective, the potential to reduce the financial cost is directly related to finding ways to offer immersion to the same students in fewer schools.

Observation 4-4: Over the next five years, the number of lead classes will diminish to zero because all immersion classes in the school system will be in place after completing their first year of operation. For the first time since immersion started over 25 years ago, no lead classes will exist. In other words, all immersion classes will be funded completely by the Board through its general operating fund, unless applications for French Special Project Grants and the Minority Language Funding to be spent in new ways are approved by the Department of Education. The Department is reviewing French Second Language Funding this year.

Specific Situations that Need Attention

The third question defining this study’s purpose asks the following: According to the historical data and enrolment projections, which specific situations should be addressed as soon as possible and which ones should be addressed over the next few years? The approach taken in answering this question is to identify the situations in particular schools that need attention, based only on the historical enrolment data, and to explain why they have been singled out. As noted early in the paper, new data to calculate practical enrolment projections is not available until later this spring.

Rather than proposing concrete solutions for the situations identified, questions are raised that can be considered in open consultation processes which include opportunities for public input on specific board staff proposals—processes perhaps similar to the “school review” process defined in legislation. To go beyond the simple identification of situations would be contrary to the purpose of this study and would be inappropriate given the fact that families and communities were not consulted in the development of particular solutions.


Bedford South School

This school house Grade Primary to Grade 9 and offers Late Immersion. Table 14 provides its 5-year enrolment history.

Bedford South School has been singled out for one reason which may prove to be an anomaly: There are no students in Grade 7 Late Immersion this year. Last spring, only eight students registered for Grade 7 LI, so the decision was made to transport them to the LI program at Bedford Junior High and three families accepted this option.

As demonstrated in Table 14, the LI enrolment increased from 2006-07 to 2009-10, as did the LI enrolment as a percent of the total enrolment. The reason behind the very low registration last year is believed to be related to a unique circumstance which no longer exists. Although the registration process for September has not been completed yet, there is reason for optimism that the Grade 7 enrolment will be sufficient to support a class in September.

This situation at Bedford South School may stabilize, especially if the staffing concerns can be addressed positively. For now, it seems that every effort is being made to ensure that the stability evident in the enrolment history can be restored.

Bell Park Academic Centre

The EI enrolment history at Bell Park Academic Centre (BPAC) is reported in Table 15.

As indicated in the table, the enrolment increases until 2008-09 because a lead class was added each year since the program began in 2002-03. The decline after 2008-09 is the concern because that is the first year when immersion was offered from Gr. Primary to Grade 6. The concern about the EI enrolment decline of 14.5% in the past three years is reinforced by the decline in the Grade Primary enrolment in the past two years and the steady decline (34%) in the English program enrolment since 2006-07. There is no numerical evidence to suggest that the EI enrolment will increase.

The data in Table 16 is further evidence that the sustainability of the immersion program at BPAC must be questioned. Not only are the enrolments low this year and the attrition rates high from last year, but also the enrolments of 17 and 9 in Grade Primary and Grade 1 can only be expected to drop to unsustainable numbers over the next 5 years.

The following recommendation is based on the fact that the sustainability of immersion at Bell Park needs to be given full attention by the Board as a matter of some urgency.

Table 14: 5-Year Enrolment History at Bedford South School

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

LI 60 61 68 74 43

English Prog 505 540 542 565 623

% LI of Ttl. 10.6% 10.1% 11.1% 11.6% 6.5%

Gr. 7 LI 25 19 29 29 0

Table 15: 5-Year Enrolment History at Bell Park Academic Centre

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

EI 76 97 110 101 94

English Prog. 268 229 191 181 176

% EI of Ttl. 22.1% 29.8% 36.5% 35.8% 34.8%

Gr. Pr. EI 22 26 25 12 17


Recommendation: Through consultation with the school and its community, the potential for the immersion enrolment to increase and stabilize should be assessed during the next school year. If no reasons for optimism are found, the Early Immersion program should not be continued in Grade Primary and the classes already being provided should be phased out.

Chebucto Heights Elementary School

The Early Immersion enrolment at Chebucto Heights Elementary School (CHES) and the location of the school relative to the other schools offering EI in the Halifax West High School family of schools give reason to ask if there is a better arrangement to ensure sustainability. This school and the John W. MacLeod-Fleming Tower Elementary School (JWM-FT) offer the P-6 EI program that feeds into the Grade 7-9 program at Elizabeth Sutherland School and then Grade 10-12 at J. L. Illsley School.

According to Table 17, the EI enrolment is 87 this year compared to 96 five years ago and the enrolment temporarily dropped to 70 in 2008-09. The English program enrolment decreased steadily from 225 to 181 (-19.6%). The EI enrolment as percentage of the total increased from 29.9% to 32.5%, but this is due to the more significant decline in the English enrolment.

Table 18 provides similar data for John W. MacLeod-Fleming Tower Elementary School for the purpose of comparing the two schools.

The EI enrolment of John W. MacLeod increased from 153 to 195 (27.5%) over the past 5 years while the English program enrolment decreased steadily from 187 to 168 (-10.2%). The EI enrolment as percentage of the total increased from 45.0% to 53.7%.

Table 19 and Table 20 add more detail in comparing the enrolments of the two schools.

Table 16: EI Enrolments and Attrition Rates, 2010-01, at BPAC

Gr. P. Gr. 1 Gr. 2 Gr. 3 Gr. 4 Gr. 5 Gr. 6

EI 17 9 21 14 16 13 4

Attrition — 25.0% 12.5% 12.5% 5.9% 13.3% 50.0%

Table 17: 5-Year Enrolment History, Chebucto Heights Elementary School

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

EI 96 76 70 87 87

English Prog 225 205 193 184 181

% EI of Ttl. 29.9% 27.0% 26.6% 32.1% 32.5%

Gr. Pr. EI 23 6 18 22 20

Table 18: 5-Year Enrolment History, John W. MacLeod-Fleming Tower Elementary

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

EI 153 148 156 161 195

English Prog 187 175 183 174 168

% EI of Ttl. 45.0% 45.8% 46.0% 48.1% 53.7%

Gr. Pr. EI 25 30 37 33 47


The following observations drawn from the four tables summarize the numerical evidence behind the concern about the sustainability of EI at Chebucto Heights:

• The EI enrolments this year are too low at CHES—yes, one student was gained in Grade 6 (attrition rate of -6.7%), but there are no students in Grade 3 and starting with only 20 in Grade Primary and Grade 1 could lead to very low enrolments over the next few years.

• The 5-year history of Grade Primary enrolments for CHES shows no growth while that of JWM-FT shows steady, significant growth.

• This year’s high attrition rates for CHES, if continued, will cause serious declines in enrolments which are already too low; the attrition rates for JWM-FT are low, in fact two are negative which means that these enrolments actually increased since last year.

The numerical data and the circumstances of the three schools also suggest possible solutions. Seeking answers to the following questions may lead to ways to deliver a more sustainable EI program in this family of schools:

1. The combined EI enrolments of Chebucto Heights and John W. MacLeod are more than sufficient to be sustainable. Can these classes be combined in one of the two elementary schools?

2. Elizabeth Sutherland School houses Grade P-9, including the Grade 7-9 Early Immersion program. Since the EI students from Chebucto Heights and John W. MacLeod come to this school in Grade 7, could they come at an earlier grade?

The solution seems to lie in finding a way to combine some or all of the Grade P-6 EI classes. Of course there are many factors to be evaluated in open consultation with the schools and their respective communities. Any change in the present arrangement will surely cause difficulty for some families, but if nothing is done in the next few years, the EI program at Chebucto Heights may be at greater and greater risk and this can only be to the detriment of the EI program in Elizabeth Sutherland School and then Halifax West High School; thus, the following recommendation.

Recommendation: Through consultation with the schools and their respective communities, the options for combining the Early Immersion classes of Chebucto Heights Elementary School and John W. MacLeod-Fleming Tower Elementary School in one school should be assessed within the next two or three years.

Eastern Passage Education Centre

Both Early and Late Immersion are offered in Grade 7-9 at Eastern Passage Education Centre (EPEC). The sustainability of offering both programs comes into question because of the effect on the Late Immersion enrolment of starting Early Immersion. The initial impact is evident in the tables below.

Over the past five years, according to Table 21, the LI enrolment decreased from 70 to 37 (by 47%) and the EI enrolment increased very significantly. The first or lead EI class in Grade 9 was added in 2007-08, making this the first year that the school had EI in all grades; thus, it is more reasonable to look at the EI

Table 19: EI Enrolments, 2010-11, at CHES and JWM-FT


CHES 20 20 16 0 10 5 16

JWM-FT 47 31 34 26 22 14 21

Total EI 67 51 50 26 32 19 37

Table 20: EI Attrition rates into 2010-11, CHES and JWM-FT


CHES — 9.1% 15.8% 100% 28.6% 37.5% -6.7%*

JWM-FT — 6.1% 2.9% -4.0%* -10.0%* 0.0% 0.0%

* A negative attrition rate means that the enrolment increased from one grade to the next.


enrolment increase since that year. It increased from 49 to 85 (by 93%) over the past four years.

The impact of starting Early Immersion on the Late Immersion enrolment in Grade 7 first took effect seven years later in 2005-06. Likely, it is not a coincidence that no students enrolled in LI that year, as shown in Table 22. But in the following year, 34 started the program and the figure remained stable for the next three years. The enrolment of zero in Grade 7 this year, due to very few families expressing interest, is a reason to be concerned.

The following points summarize the reasons to question the sustainability of Late Immersion at EPEC:

• The total enrolment of the school decreased from 543 to 453 (by 16.6%) over the past five years.

• The English program enrolment decreased by 23.8%, although it did not decrease since last year.

• If the Early Immersion enrolment continues to increase while the total enrolment of the school decreases, the Late Immersion enrolments will not rise to levels that are more consistent and sustainable.

• Even if the EI and LI enrolments stabilize relative to each other, being able to sustain both programs will depend what happens to the total school enrolment.

Recommendation: Through consultation with the school and its community, the potential for the immersion enrolment to increase and stabilize should be assessed, within the next five years. Given the variances and instability in the enrolment data and the fact that Early Immersion is still relatively new in this area, the enrolment patterns may become clearer and more consistent over the next five years.

Oyster Pond Academy

In 2007-08, Oyster Pond Academy (OPA) opened as a new Grade P-9 school with Late Immersion offered in Grade 7. Table 23 provides the 4-year enrolment data since the school opened.

The following notes explain the concern about the sustainability of Late Immersion at OPA:

Table 21: 5-Year Enrolment History, Eastern Passage Education Centre

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

EI 39 49 66 71 85

LI 70 44 63 61 37

Eng. Prog. 434 415 379 330 331

% Imm/Ttl. 20.1% 18.3% 25.4% 28.6% 27.4%

Table 22: Enrolment History of Grade 7 Early and Late Immersion, EPEC

03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11

Gr. 7 EI — — 19 19 18 34 20 36

Gr. 7 LI 29 54 0 34 20 20 24 0

Table 23: 4-Year Enrolment History, Oyster Pond Academy

2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

Late Immersion 72 68 54 54

English Prog. 453 452 460 433

% Imm./Ttl. 13.7% 13.1% 10.5% 11.1%


• As evident in Table 23, the LI enrolment decreased since the school opened, that of the English program increased and the percentage of students decreased.

• The percentage of students in LI is quite low in comparison to most other schools in the school system and most others are increasing where they are not affected by the startup of Early Immersion.

• In addition to the data in Table 23, the Grade 7 LI enrolments for each of the four years are 27, 26, 11 and 24; no increase and one very low enrolment last year.

It must be acknowledged that OPA has been open for only four years, thus more time should be taken to watch for greater stability and, hopefully, growth in the interest level of families and students in Late Immersion.

Recommendation: The principal and staff of Oyster Pond Academy should continue their efforts to promote Late Immersion with families and students and assess the potential for increasing the enrolment over the next five years or so.

A Model of Delivery for French Immersion

The last question defining this study’s purpose asks what model of delivery for French Immersion should be more effective and sustainable. A few preliminary comments are necessary to place the response in context.

Preliminary Comments

In proposing a model, it is recognized that immersion programs have already been established in the HRSB school system, in various forms of delivery, and that it would be very difficult to completely dismantle what has been implemented. If immersion was to be implemented for the first time, then the proposed model might be different. No reasons were found to conclude that a major dismantling would be in the best interest of students and families.

Along the same vein, the reader must understand that the primary purpose of this study is to suggest a model that would fit best the circumstances unique to the HRSB. The purpose is not to suggest a generic model that might fit the circumstances of other school systems.

This proposal assumes that the progress already evident in staffing and acquisition of suitable instructional materials and resources will continue. Whatever the preferred model, the

programs will be delivered by highly qualified professionals who have the necessary resources in sufficient quantity.

The following premise, which underlies this whole study, is fundamental to this characterization of an effective, sustainable model of delivery: To add educational value for students and families is of primary importance and to gain financial benefits is secondary. To propose a model based on this premise is not to diminish the importance of finding operational or financial efficiencies. The HRSB has a major responsibility to make the most efficient use of its very scarce resources.

This previous comment seems necessary under the very immediate and urgent circumstances in which all school boards have found themselves, over the past few months, while this study was being carried out. The Department of Education has asked all boards to make some major expenditure reductions to match lower revenues for this next fiscal year. The HRSB decided last year that this study should be completed. It was not initiated this year to find ways to reduce expenditures. One can say now, in hindsight, because of the unexpected expectation from the Department of Education, that the timing of this study is less than desirable—an understatement really.

This characterization of a model is put forward as a suggestion for critical analysis and debate, rather than a formal, recommendation which has been solidly constructed and tested. The sketch is very preliminary, components are missing, and some connections are weak. Careful thought and frank discussion must occur to move from rough sketch to final blueprint.

The model described below, implicitly if not explicitly, should reflect the results of the previous analyses or sections in this paper. In other words, there should be no surprises at this point.

Some Characteristics of a Model for the HRSB

The model of delivery for French Immersion in the HRSB school system should take on the following characteristics as schools are reorganized, reconfigured or newly constructed in the years to come, in the long term of course, but perhaps to some degree in the short term:

1. From a system perspective and where enrolments are sustainable, both Early Immersion and Late Immersion should continue so as to provide more than one access point to start immersion.


2. The immersion enrolments at individual schools or sites should be generally higher than they are now to create optimal, grade-level enrolments. In Grade P to Grade 9, there should be at least two classes per grade.

3. There should be a smaller number of “schools under one roof”. In other words, the present or expanding “student bodies” in the immersion programs will be housed in fewer schools of higher enrolments.

4. Where possible, the present practice of housing both Early and Late Immersion, along with the English program, in junior high schools should be avoided because this arrangement is the least effective in terms of financial cost and flexibility in scheduling for students and teachers.

5. Busing should be provided from a few strategically located pickup points to transport students to more centrally located immersion schools which serve larger catchment areas, either within particular families of schools or across boundaries to link with the catchment areas of a neighboring family of schools.

6. Most, if not all, programs and student services for immersion classes should be delivered in French by teachers and specialists who are qualified to do so.

7. In all schools that offer both English and immersion programs, the principal should be bilingual and/or have professional experience as an immersion teacher.

8. The level of student services support—e.g., the number of resource teachers—for students in immersion programs should match the level of support for students in English programs.

9. A more comprehensive, mandatory orientation program for families who are considering immersion should be given high priority to make them more aware of the implications, possible scenarios and potential pitfalls, from Grade Primary or Grade 7 to Grade 12, of starting an immersion program—some schools are doing this already.

10. DELF (diplôme d’études en langue française) is a program in which official French language diplomas are awarded by the National Ministry of Education of France. The diplomas are recognized around the world (in 165 countries) and are valid for life. Presently this program is available in at least two HRSB high schools and is being considered by others. DELF should be made available to all Grade 12 immersion students.

Some Advantages of the Model

The following list highlights the advantages of the model outlined above:

• In the schools with larger immersion enrolments, there will be greater opportunity for immersion teachers to collaborate and greater flexibility to match teacher qualifications and preferences to teaching assignments.

• Larger immersion enrolments will increase the potential to overcome some of the “social” concerns of teachers and families for children in Early Immersion; i.e., there should be less single classes of students who remain together from Grade Primary to Grade 9 or even Grade 12.

• The attrition rates in Early Immersion and Late Immersion should be reduced because families will be better informed before they decide to enroll their child in immersion and because students who experience difficulties will have student services support.

• Having a smaller number of schools in which immersion is offered, with more optimal enrolments, will lessen the potential for negative impact on the delivery of the English program.

• One potential financial advantage of this model is related to the fact that less “additional” classroom teacher positions should be required to support immersion programs in fewer schools with greater enrolments. Reducing the number of immersion sites to gain this potential financial advantage is directly related to the fact that adding a few buses and more bus runs to centralize the delivery of immersion is less expensive than adding classroom positions in numerous sites.

One observation which came into focus during the writing of this list of advantages seems noteworthy. The characteristics of the optimal model of delivery for immersion programs are, in most respects if not all, those of the optimal model for the delivery of the English program. In the simplest of terms, the organizational effectiveness in the delivery of the traditional English program is very closely related to the size of the school enrolment. Schools with optimal enrolments can deliver their programs with greater effectiveness and operational efficiency.

Suggestions for Further Consideration

Two ideas surfaced during the consultations sessions which deserve further attention. They are introduced here in the form of suggestions for further consideration in developing a better model.


Suggestion 1: Early Immersion should begin in Grade 1, instead of Grade Primary.

When students enter Grade Primary, whether in immersion or the English program, little or nothing is known about any learning difficulties or special needs which may show up within their first year. Grade Primary teachers learn much about the abilities of their students, often within the first few months.

If families did not have to choose immersion until Grade 1, the likelihood of parents being better prepared to make the best choice would be greater. With better choices made on a more informed information base, the attrition rates later on should be reduced.

This option is in place or is being discussed in several jurisdictions in Canada. The HRSB should check with those jurisdictions.

Suggestion 2: The separate classes for Grade 9 students inEarly Immersion and Late Immersion could be combined in Grade 9 instead of Grade 10, as they are now.

In their infancy as programs, Early Immersion and Late Immersion were combined in the same classroom with the same teachers when the students entered Grade 10. In those early years of development with little research to back up decisions, this was likely the most obvious point to combine the programs. Furthermore, the decision was likely quite arbitrary because “best practices” had not been established.

Now that combined classes of EI and LI have been in place in high school for quite a few years, what do the expertise and experience of teachers say about combining the programs in Grade 10?

This consultant was very deliberate in seeking out teachers and administrators in high schools where the two programs are combined and in junior high schools where both are offered independently of each other. Early in the discussions, the suggestion surfaced that EI and LI could be combined in Grade 9. As this suggestion was discussed at subsequent meetings this consultant gained sufficient confidence to put the suggestion forward in this paper for further consideration. Although some participants in the discussions were uncertain about the idea, none raised strong opposition and most concluded, “Not a problem”.

Single Program Immersion Schools: Something to Think About

This characterization of a model of delivery prompts a question about a possible model in the distant future. The possibility is introduced in the form of a question because it can be no more than a question at this point. It is a question, not a prediction or a recommendation and it is put to paper only as something to think about.

Whereas:

a) Almost 9,000 students (18%) of the HRSB students are enrolled in immersion this year in 59 schools (43%);

b) The total HRSB immersion enrolment is increasing, as are many of the school immersion enrolments as a percentage of the total enrolment;

c) The number of qualified immersion classroom, specialist and resource teachers will increase;

d) The number of immersion administrators can be expected to increase in direct proportion to the number of immersion teachers;

e) The problem of insufficient teaching materials and resources is being addressed positively;

f ) The number of immersion sites may be reduced to increase enrolments;

g) New generations of families in HRSB will have achieved success in the immersion programs during their public schooling; and

h) More regional administrators and school board members in positions of leadership will have a professional experience and/or public education in immersion;

The question is:

Will a single program immersion school become a viable option both in terms of educational advantage for students and operational efficiency for the school system?

This question is left for thoughtful and careful consideration.


Final Comments

As noted previously, the timing for the release of this report is not great because of the financial challenges facing school boards in Nova Scotia this spring. The purpose of this study was to find ways to ensure that the delivery of French immersion is effective and sustainable, not to find ways to solve the HRSB’s financial problems. Because of these conflicting purposes, it seems important to put one figure in context. That figure is the estimated additional cost of $7.1 million for immersion classes this year in Grade Primary to Grade 9. Not understood in context, the figure seems large.

Presently, the HRSB is providing 1990 classroom teacher and specialist positions for all programs in Grade P-9. The annual cost of these positions is about $110 million. This means that the estimated additional cost of P-9 immersion is 6.5% of the total cost. Presented in this context, the figure of $7.1 million doesn’t seem so large.

The second comment is about the future of immersion in the HRSB. Nine thousand or 18% of the HRSB’s 50,000 students are in immersion this year in 59 schools. They are in a program which is growing and this growth can be expected to continue while the total system enrolment declines. The magnitude and significance of this program needs to be acknowledged and appreciated. Yes, immersion is an optional program, but it is here to stay. The challenge is to make its delivery more sustainable during this time of very scarce financial resources.

The very final comment is to say directly what may have been only implied. Immersion expanded to what it is now by starting new or lead classes in individual schools where and when the demand was sufficient. This practice stopped almost a decade ago and, based on the model just introduced, it should not start up again. Expansion in the future should occur only as larger enrolments of immersion students are housed in a smaller number of schools with some new type of transportation service where necessary to improve accessibility.

References

Bournot-Trites, M. & Tellowitz, U. (2002). In The Atlantic Provinces Educational Foundation (Ed.), Report of Current Research on the Effects of Second Language Learning on First Language Literacy Skills. Halifax, NS: The Printing House.

Murphy, Elizabeth, (2001). “The Relationship of Starting Time and Cumulative Time to Second Language Acquisition and Proficiency”, The Morning Watch: Education and Social Analysis.

Netten, Joan, (2007). “Optimal Entry Point for French Immersion”, Revue de l’Université de Moncton, Numéro hors série, 2007, p. 5-22.

Program Policy for French Second Language Programs, Department of Education, Nova Scotia, June, 1998.

Rehorick, Sally; Dicks, Joseph; Kristmanson, Paula; and Cogsell, Fiona, (2006). “Quality Learning in French Second Language in Now Brunswick”, A Brief Presented to the Department of Education.


Gunn’s Leadership Consulting Services

Public x Report No. 11-03-1292 Private Date: March1, 2011


Senior Staff Report on the Facility Master Plan PURPOSE: To provide the Board with information related to the Facility Master

Plan. BACKGROUND: Traditionally, capital planning for the school facilities in the HRSB has

been completed through school closure and boundary review processes resulting in capital requests to the Department of Education (DOE) on an annual or bi-annual basis. The capital requests often consisted of a list of new school construction, alterations and additions.

In December 2004, the Halifax Regional School Board (HRSB)

approved and forwarded a capital construction submission as requested by the DOE which outlined capital requests for new construction and additions/alterations. The board was requested to appear before the provincial School Capital Construction Committee in January 2005 to clarify and elaborate on the capital requests. The Deputy Minister’s Office sent a request to the HRSB in July 2005 for additional information before considering the HRSB capital requests. A detailed submission was prepared, titled “Capital Project – Submission draft 08/03/05” which was approved by the Board on September 28, 2005 (http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/files/Downloads/pdf/reports/2005-2006/September/05-09-883.pdf).

It was indicated through a request to the Superintendent from the Deputy Minister in May 2007 that:

“…it would be timely and helpful if the Halifax Regional School Board undertook a review of proposed projects, underutilized space and changing demographics for the Dartmouth/Eastern Passage area and Halifax Peninsula prior to the Department of Education and provincial Cabinet considering the most recent School Capital Construction Report.”

In June 2007, the Superintendent built on this request and, with staff

assistance, initiated a public consultation process titled “Imagine Our Schools.” The intention was to engage the communities of each HRSB Family of Schools in a constructive dialogue around how to achieve school facilities that can best provide the educational program. The results of the consultations with numerous stakeholders, along with the expertise of the consultant team, were to become the basis of a 10-Year Facility Master Plan.

CONTENT: Phase 1 including Citadel High, Dartmouth High, Prince Andrew High,

Cole Harbour High, and Auburn High Families of Schools was completed with a Board decision in April 2008

1

http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/files/Downloads/pdf/reports/2005-2006/September/05-09-883.pdf

http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/files/Downloads/pdf/reports/2005-2006/September/05-09-883.pdf

(http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/files/Downloads/pdf/imagine/10-year-plan-phase1.pdf).

Phase 2 was completed during the 2008-2009 school years with a staff report presented to the Board in February 2010 (http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/files/Downloads/pdf/reports/2009-2010/February/10-01-1236.pdf). The governing board requested the facility master plan be prepared and presented in smaller components.

It was moved and seconded (Conrod/Finlayson) that the Board request staff to develop an approach or process that would divide the capital construction master plan into more manageable components---for example, area-by-area or family-by-family, and that staff review this approach or process, including a timeline, with the Board before it begins. (CARRIED)

During the 2010-2011 school year, staff prepared a facility master plan that is divided by family of schools. The plan outlines the historical information, demographics, school feeder system – existing and proposed, and requested capital project for each area. The facility master plan is attached as appendix 1 for the Board’s review and recommendation.

COST: Funding for capital investments in schools is entirely under the control of

the Provincial Government and the outcomes from the Imagine Our Schools process are entirely dependent on new funding from the Department of Education.

FUNDING: Capital costs to the Department of Education TIMELINE: Subject to funding availability from the Department of Education APPENDICES: Appendix 1: Facility Master Plan RECOMMENDATIONS:

• The Board receive this report for information. COMMUNICATIONS:

AUDIENCE RESPONSIBLE TIMELINE Community via Web

Doug Hadley Following Board meeting

School Administration

Charles Clattenburg

Following the Board meeting

Halifax Regional Municipality

Jill McGillicuddy Following Board meeting

2

http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/files/Downloads/pdf/imagine/10-year-plan-phase1.pdf

http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/files/Downloads/pdf/imagine/10-year-plan-phase1.pdf

http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/files/Downloads/pdf/reports/2009-2010/February/10-01-1236.pdf

http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/files/Downloads/pdf/reports/2009-2010/February/10-01-1236.pdf

3

From: For further information please contact Charles Clattenburg, Director of Operations at 464-2000 Ext. 2144 or email [email protected] or Jill McGillicuddy, Planner, Operations Services at [email protected] or by phone at 464-2000 ext 2277.

To: Senior Staff: March 7, 2011

Board: March 30, 2011



Halifax Regional School Board – Facility Master Plan Page 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction p. 2 Background p. 4 Overview p. 5 HRM Demographics p. 6 Implementation p.9 Review Areas p.10 Citadel High Family of Schools p. 15 Dartmouth High Family of Schools p. 21 Prince Andrew High Family of Schools p. 27 Auburn Drive High Family of Schools p. 33 Cole Harbour District High Family of Schools p. 38 Lockview High Family of Schools p. 45 Millwood High Family of Schools p. 50 Sackville High Family of Schools P. 55 Eastern Shore District High Family of Schools p. 61 Duncan Macmillan High Family of Schools p. 67 Musquodoboit Rural High Family of Schools p. 73 Charles P Allen High Family of Schools p. 78 Proposed Ravines Family of Schools p. 85 Halifax West High Family of Schools p. 90 J.L Ilsley High Family of Schools p. 96 Sir John A. Macdonald High Family of Schools p.104


INTRODUCTION Traditionally, capital planning for the school facilities in the HRSB has been completed through school closure and boundary review processes resulting in capital requests to the Department of Education (DOE) on an annual or bi‐annual basis. The capital requests often consisted of a list of new school construction, alterations and additions.

In December 2004, the HRSB approved and forwarded a capital construction submission as requested by the DOE which outlined capital requests for new construction and additions/alterations. The board was requested to appear before the provincial School Capital Construction Committee in January 2005 to clarify and elaborate on the capital requests. The Deputy Minister’s Office sent a request to the HRSB in July 2005 for additional information before considering the HRSB capital requests. A detailed submission was prepared, titled “Capital Project – Submission draft 08/03/05” which was approved by the Board on September 28, 2005

(http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/files/Downloads/pdf/reports/2005‐2006/September/05 09883.pdf).

It was indicated through a request to the Superintendent from the Deputy Minister in

May 2007 that:

“…it would be timely and helpful if the Halifax Regional School Board undertook a review of proposed projects, underutilized space and changing demographics for the Dartmouth/Eastern Passage area and Halifax Peninsula prior to the Department of Education and provincial Cabinet considering the most recent School Capital Construction Report”.

In June 2007, the Superintendent built on this request and, with staff assistance,

initiated a public consultation process titled “Imagine Our Schools.” The intention was to engage the communities of each HRSB Family of Schools in a constructive dialogue around how to achieve school facilities that can best provide the educational program. The results of the consultations with numerous stakeholders, along with the expertise of the consultant team, were to become the basis of a 10‐Year Facility Master Plan. Phase 1 including Citadel High, Dartmouth High, Prince Andrew High, Cole Harbour High, and Auburn High Families of Schools was completed with a Board decision in April 2008 (http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/files/Downloads/pdf/imagine/10‐year‐plan‐phase1.pdf).


Phase 2 was completed during the 2008‐2009 school years with a staff report presented to the Board in February 2010 (http://www.hrsb.ns.ca/files/Downloads/pdf/reports/2009‐2010/February/10‐01‐1236.pdf). The elected board requested the facility master plan be prepared and presented in smaller components.

It was moved and seconded (Conrod/Finlayson) that the Board request staff to develop an approach or process that would divide the capital construction master plan into more manageable components‐‐‐for example, area‐by‐area or family‐by‐family, and that staff review this approach or process, including a timeline, with the Board before it begins. (CARRIED)

During the 2010‐2011 school years staff prepared a facility master plan that is divided by family of schools. The plan outlines the historical information, demographics, feeder system – existing and proposed, and requested capital project for each area.


BACKGROUND The Halifax Regional School Board believes in making every school a great school. To achieve this goal, HRSB has outlined seven strategies to make every school a great school; strong vision, effective planning, student voices, active partnerships, genuine equity, exceptional employees and adequate funding. As a result of the dedication to create great schools, the HRSB has undertaken a facility master plan. In 2007, the Halifax Regional School Board retained CS&P Architects to prepare baseline information regarding the state of the Board’s school facilities including a demographic profile of the region, historical and projected enrolment, capacity information, utilization rates and facility program delivery reviews for each school. The consultants carried out extensive community consultation which provided an open forum for the public to actively participate in determining the vision and direction of the consultant’s recommendation. Halifax Regional School Board and staff would like to thank the school communities for their extensive amount of volunteered time, knowledge, and ideas.

HRSB staff has confidence in the consultant’s findings and have utilized the vast amount of information that was gathered. Staff have applied the consultant’s information as well as applied our programming expertise, local knowledge, historical knowledge, and business planning pressures in preparing the facility master plan.


OVERVIEW The Halifax Regional School Board is experiencing the challenges of aging infrastructure, declining enrolments, unpredictable regional development and limited funding. The effects include:

excess capacity in many of the board’s schools while overcrowding others and;

difficulty delivering school programming including, modern technology, arts, and music opportunities and physical activity options

Surplus Capacity A number of high schools have been identified as having surplus capacity and are located in areas that do not provide an easy opportunity for consolidation with neighbouring schools. Currently, the HRSB has a three ‐ tier grade system; elementary level P‐6, junior high 7‐9, and high school 10‐12. There are some areas which have a blended form of this system which works well for these communities. During the public consultation, many communities voiced their preference for the three ‐ tiered system and existing grade configuration; however, some communities (specifically the ones who have it) preferred a two ‐ tiered system (P‐8, and 9‐12) while others preferred a grade configuration of P‐5, 6‐8, and 9‐12 or some variation from the existing system. There is limited opportunity for growth in many areas. This results in programming pressures. Senior staff believes there is an opportunity and significant benefit in placing the grade 9 students in these high schools. Declining enrolments at the high school level results from a declining population within the feeder system. The surplus capacity this creates results in a necessary reorganization of the feeder system. Senior staff recognizes this type of restructuring is occurring throughout the Province and is supported by the Department of Education. As a result, senior staff is recommending through the master planning process, the grade configuration evolve from that which presently exists to a predominately P‐5, 6‐8, and 9‐12 system with exceptions where school populations warrant an alternative (rural, natural or infrastructure barrier). Overcrowding In growth areas, a grade structure of P‐5, 6‐8, and 9‐12 provides opportunity in allowing for adjustments to be made in some schools to alleviate overcrowding pressure (Bedford South, Ash Lee Jefferson, Grosvenor – Wentworth Park). Additional infrastructure is required within some families of schools such as C.P Allen and senior staff believes the model of P‐5, 6‐8, and 9‐12 should be applied.


HRM DEMOGRAPHICS The overall population of Halifax Regional Municipality has increased by 30,000 between 1996 and 2006; however, during that same time frame the age cohorts of 0‐4, 5‐9, 10‐14, and 15‐19 have declined. Additionally, the age cohorts of 25‐29, 30‐34, and 35‐39 which are traditionally the years of child bearing have decreased. This demographic pattern is projected to continue through 2021. Halifax Regional Municipality Historical and Projected Population

Age Cohort 1996 2001 2006 2011 2016 2021

0 to 4 22,460 19,925 18,205 18,104 18,311 18,368

5 to 9 23,675 22,365 19,645 17,957 17,873 18,080

10 to 14 22,040 23,685 22,325 19,608 17,924 17,842

15 to 19 21,190 22,905 24,340 23,025 20,274 18,510

20 to 24 25,570 26,560 28,120 29,842 28,868 25,938

25 to 29 27,950 26,440 26,015 27,578 29,262 28,261

30 to 34 33,195 27,600 25,850 25,461 27,025 28,676

35 to 39 31,980 32,850 27,405 25,677 25,294 26,852

40 to 44 28,080 31,645 32,745 27,336 25,601 25,214

45 to 49 25,765 28,070 31,565 32,675 27,327 25,569

50 to 54 19,075 25,525 28,235 31,741 32,913 27,674

55 to 59 14,155 18,335 25,065 27,778 31,229 32,402

60 to 64 12,305 13,670 18,235 24,898 27,819 31,262

65 to 69 10,595 11,840 13,210 17,525 23,918 26,896

70 to 74 9,415 9,715 11,010 12,327 16,254 22,172

75 to 79 7,055 8,060 8,560 9,677 10,854 14,197

80 to 84 4,610 5,535 6,475 6,924 7,771 8,719

85 to 89 2,325 2,880 3,735 4,420 4,758 5,301

90 and over 1,230 1,505 1,935 2,476 3,014 3,400

Total Population

342,670 359,110 372,675 385,029 396,289 405,333

Source: Statistics Canada (historical), Environmental Design and Management Ltd (projected). Figures do not include Census under‐count Projections – Paradigm Shift Inc Currently, the Board has the advantage of reviewing projections as prepared by two demographic systems. The consultants submitted projected demographics as prepared by Paradigm Shift Inc. The methodology that was applied included the cohort‐survival method combined with the residual method.


Methodology The cohort survival method applies historical census data and projects future population based on assumptions about births, deaths and migration. The residual method is derived from a calculation of population between two points in time for which population data is available using the Cohort Survival Method. Additionally, the consultants worked closely with the Halifax Regional Municipality in determining approved/potential development areas. Projections – Baragar Demoghics The Halifax Regional School Board has purchased planning software from Baragar Demographics and as part of the licensing agreement, the company provides the Board with projections for each school on a yearly basis. Methodology Baragar Demographics applies a similar method in providing projections. Their data analysis includes:

analysis on yearly birth records;

determining the number of children who reside in a boundary by accessing the Universal Child Care Benefit tax records and Canada Child Tax Benefit records on a yearly basis;

applying census information such as women of child bearing years, generally in the age cohorts of 25‐29, 30‐34, and 35‐39; and

applying a historical migration rate (+/‐) of the boundary. The projections as prepared by each company are relatively close and depict a decline over the next few years.

Historical and Projected Enrolment of HRSB

Paradigm Shift Baragar Demographics

2007 52348 52348

2008 51948 51948

2009 51063 51063

2010 50169 50169

2011 49481 49518

2012 48772 49137

2013 47975 48883

2014 47429 48626

2015 46959 48459

2016 46445 48495

2017 45985 48557

2018 45754 48862

Source: Halifax Regional School Board; Paradigm Shift; and Baragar Demographics


In 2018, there is a 10% difference in the projections; however, Paradigm Shift has not been asked for updated projections since 2009, resulting in stale ‐ dated data in the later years. As illustrated the projections are very similar through 2013 and remain within a 10% variable through 2018.


IMPLEMENTATION This Master Plan sets concepts and visions for the overall development of the Board’s facility needs and utilization over the medium term (7‐12 years). To ensure successful implementation of this Plan, funding from the Department of Education is required. This Plan will need to be reviewed periodically to determine the degree of success in achieving its intent, and changes in underlying assumptions To ensure the overall vision of this Plan is met, a number of community ‐ based decisions will be required. These decisions will be difficult as they involve potential school closures and school consolidations. It is the intent of the Board to involve these communities in active public participation while educating the overall population of the potential impact these decisions have on the Halifax Regional School Board as a whole. Public participation will be carried out through boundary reviews, school reviews, school advisory council meetings, school steering teams. New school infrastructure and additions and alterations will be required. Community consultation will be initiated through a site selection team, school steering team, and school advisory committees. To successfully implement the vision of new and improved infrastructure, the cooperation of these stakeholders will be required and pursued. Additionally, HRSB will continue to work will the HRM to ensure community facility needs are considered as well as continuing to build partnerships. HRSB will partner with other government departments such as but not limited to Community Services, and Health to foster positive partnerships. This Plan will have an overall effect on the budgeting and staffing allocations for many schools. Directors and Coordinators of all departments will ensure HRSB staff members are familiar with the concepts and visions of the Plan.


Overview of Review Areas



Overview of Review Area Citadel High Family of Schools Prince Andrew High Family of Schools Citadel 10‐12 Admiral Westphal P‐6 Cornwallis 7‐9 Alderney P‐6 Gorsebrook 7‐9 Bel Ayr P‐6 Highland Park 7‐9 Brookhouse P‐6 Inglis Street P‐6 Caledonia 7‐9 Joseph Howe P‐6 Ellenvale 7‐9 LeMarchant – St. Thomas P‐6 Eric Graves 7‐9 Oxford P‐9 Ian Forsyth P‐6 Sir Charles Tupper P‐6 Michael Wallace P‐6 Springvale P‐6 Mount Edward P‐6 St. Agnes 7‐9 Portland Estates P‐6 St. Catherine’s P‐6 Prince Andrew 10‐12 St. Joseph’s – Alexander McKay P‐6 St. Mary’s P‐6 Auburn Drive High Family of Schools St. Patrick’s‐Alexander P‐9 Astral Drive Elementary P‐6 St. Stephen’s P‐6 Astral Drive JH 7‐9 Westmount P‐6 Auburn Drive 10‐12 Bell Park P‐6 Dartmouth High Family of Schools Caldwell Road P‐6 Bicentennial P‐9 Colby Village P‐6 Crichton Park P‐6 Graham Creighton 7‐9 Dartmouth High 10‐12 Humber Park P‐6 Harbour View P‐6 Joseph Giles P‐6 Hawthorn P‐6 John MacNeil P‐6 John Martin 7‐9 Prince Arthur 7‐9 Shannon Park P‐6 South Woodside P‐6 Southdale – North Woodside P‐6


Cole Harbour District High Family of Schools Atlantic View P‐6 Cole Harbour District High 10‐12 Colonel John Stuart P‐6 Eastern Passage Education Centre 7‐9 George Bissett P‐6 Nelson Whynder P‐6 Ocean View P‐4 Robert K Turner P‐6 Ross Road P‐9 Seaside Elementary 4‐6 Sir Robert Borden 7‐9 Tallahassee Community P‐4


Lockview High Family Eastern Shore District High Family Ash Lee Jefferson P‐6 Eastern Shore District HS 10‐12 Beaver Bank – Kinsac P‐6 Gaetz Brook 7‐9 Beaver Bank – Monarch P‐6 O’Connell Drive P‐6 George P Vanier 7‐8 Oyster Pond Academy P‐9 Harold T Barrett 7‐8 Holland Road 7‐8 Duncan MacMillan High Family Lockview High 9‐12 Duncan MacMillan High 7‐12 Oldfield P‐6 Eastern Consolidated P‐5 Waverley Memorial P‐6 Lakefront Consolidated P‐6 Sheet Harbour P‐6 Millwood High Family Harry R Hamilton P‐6 Musquodoboit Rural High Family Millwood Elementary P‐6 Dutch Settlement P‐6 Millwood HS 10‐12 Musquodoboit Rural High 7‐12 Sackville Heights P‐6 Musquodoboit Valley Education P‐6 Sackville Heights JHS 7‐9 Upper Musquodoboit Consolidated P‐6 Sackville High Family Charles P Allen High Family AJ Smeltzer 7‐9 Basinview Drive P‐6 Caudle Park P‐6 Bedford Junior High 7‐9 Cavalier P‐9 Bedford South P‐9 Gertrude Parker P‐6 Charles P Allen High 10‐12 Hillside Park P‐6 Hammonds Plains P‐5 Leslie Thomas 7‐9 Kingswood P‐6 Sackville Centennial P‐6 Madeline Symonds 5‐9 Sackville HS 10‐12 Sunnyside – Eaglewood 2‐6 Smokey Drive P‐6 Sunnyside – Fort Sackville P‐1 Sycamore Lane P‐6 Sunnyside – Waverley P‐3


Halifax West High Family Sir John A Macdonald High Family Atlantic Memorial – Terence Bay P‐5 Beechville‐Lakeside‐Timberlea P‐5 Brookside 6‐9 East St. Margaret’s P‐6 Burton Ettinger P‐6 Five Bridges 7‐9 Clayton Park 7‐9 Ridgecliff Middle 6‐9 Duc D’Anville P‐6 Shatford Memorial P‐6 Fairview 7‐9 Sir John A Macdonald 10‐12 Fairview Heights P‐6 St. Margaret’s Bay P‐6 Grosvenor Wentworth P‐6 Tantallon P‐6 Halifax West High 10‐12 Park West P‐9 Prospect Road P‐5 Rockingham P‐6 J.L Ilsley High Family Central Spryfield P‐6 Chebucto Heights P‐6 Cunard 7‐9 Elizabeth Sutherland P‐9 Harrietsfield P‐6 Herring Cove 7‐9 J.L Ilsley HS 10‐12 J.W MacLeod –Fleming Tower P‐6 Rockingstone Heights P‐9 Sambro P‐6 William King P‐6


CITADEL HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Citadel High Family of Schools Proposed Plan Currently, the Halifax Peninsula has twelve schools offering grades P‐6 programming: ten P‐6 schools and two P‐9 schools. There are six sites that offer 7‐9 programming: four junior high schools and two P‐9 schools. Citadel High School offers 10‐12 programming. The challenge for the Citadel High Family of Schools is one of deferred optimization which means there is excess capacity within the system. The enrolment is stabilizing and may marginally increase over the next few years; however, the population decline over the past 10 – 15 years has not been facilitated and thus there is significant surplus within the feeder system. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 2672 with a utilization rate of 55%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 2682. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 1070 with a utilization rate of 58%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 1261. Currently, Citadel High School has an enrolment of 1287 and has a projected enrolment of 1202. In April 2009, the Province of Nova Scotia allocated capital funding to Nova Scotia school boards and included the following new construction projects and renovations:

Joseph Howe Elementary replacement;

Le‐Marchant – St Thomas Elementary replacement; and

Additions and alterations to Inglis Street Elementary The proposed capital plan for the Citadel High Family of Schools reflects this infrastructure investment by proposing a review of St. Joseph’s – Alexander McKay and a potential review of St. Mary’s to ensure there is a viable student population at these sites. Additionally, the Plan addresses the surplus capacity by identifying possible consolidations of schools. Much of the existing infrastructure on the peninsula is dated, and as such, capital investment is required. The proposed capital investment would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the Halifax peninsula school inventory.


Citadel High School

Highland Park Junior High School

St. Stephen’sSt. Joseph’s –Alexander McKay

St. Agnes Junior High

St. Catherine’s Elementary

Westmount Springvale

Cornwallis Junior High School

Le‐Marchant –St. Thomas

Sir Charles Tupper

Gorsebrook Junior High School

Inglis Street St. Mary’s

LeMarchant –St. Thomas (FI)

Oxford School

Joseph Howe St.

Catherine’s (FI)

St. Joseph’s –Alexander McKay (FI)

St. Patrick’s –Alexandra

Existing Citadel High Feeder System


Citadel High School

South Peninsula Junior High School

Le‐Marchant –St. Thomas

Sir Charles Tupper

Inglis Street St. Mary’s

Portion of Western Halifax Peninsula

directed to Halifax West High Family

North Peninsula (7‐9)

North Peninsula P‐6

(St.Stephen’s, portion of St. Joseph’s A McKay)

North Central (Joe Howe, St.

Pat’s – A, portion of Oxford,

portion of St. Joseph's – A McKay)

St. Agnes Jr. High

Portion of St. Catherine's Elementary

Westmount Elementary

Proposed Citadel High Feeder System


Citadel High Feeder System

School Project Scope Time Line

Funding Time Line

Project Cost Potential Reviews

Schools to Monitor

All Schools Grade Reconfiguration from existing P‐6, 7‐9, and 10‐12 to P‐5, 6‐8, and 9‐12

2018

North Central P‐6 Peninsula

Replacement school for St. Patrick’s – Alexandra, Joseph Howe, and a portion of St. Joseph’s – Alexander McKay

2013 Funding allocation of $24 million approved in 2010

$12‐14 million

North Peninsula P‐6

Replacement school for a portion of St. Joseph’s – Alexander McKay, St. Stephens, and a portion of Oxford elementary students.

2015 2013 $12‐14 million

North End Junior High

Replacement school for Highland Park and a portion of Oxford junior high students

2016 2012 $20‐24 million Review of Highland Park

LeMarchant – St Thomas

Replacement school for LeMarchant ‐ St. Thomas

2014 Approved ‐ 2010

Funding allocated in April 2010

South End Junior High

Replacement school for Cornwallis Jr. High and Gorsebrook Jr. High and a portion of Oxford Jr. High

2016 2012 $20‐24 million Review Cornwallis or Gorsebrook


Citadel High Feeder System


Funding Time Line

Project Cost Potential Reviews

Schools to Monitor

St. Mary’s Potential for consolidation with Inglis Street upon completion of renovations

Portion of Western Citadel and redirect to Halifax West

Redirect student population to Halifax West Family of Schools

Definitions: School – Existing or proposed facilities Potential Reviews – Subject to consolidation or declining enrolments, these schools will be reviewed for in accordance with the Education Act. Schools to Monitor – (a) Potential infrastructure or program upgrades may be required if capital funds are available

(b) Future consolidations, declining enrolments may be negatively impacting programming opportunities Time Line – Anticipated approximate opening date Funding Time Line ‐ Funding commitment required from DOE to meet anticipated opening date Project Scope – Type and scale of work to be completed with the final scope of work will be determined by the School Capital Construction Committee. Project Cost –approximate costs based on 2010 costing


DARTMOUTH HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Dartmouth High Family of Schools Proposed Plan The Dartmouth High Feeder system has seven schools offering grades P‐6 programming: six P‐6 schools and one P‐9 schools. There are three sites that offer 7‐9 programming: two junior high schools and one P‐9 school. Dartmouth High School offers 10‐12 programming. Dartmouth High Family of Schools has experienced a significant decline in enrolment over the past 10‐15 years and it is anticipated to continue to decline over the next few years. This has created significant under‐utilized capacity within the feeder system. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 2000 with a utilization rate of 53%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 2018. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 755 with a utilization rate of 58%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 732. Currently, Dartmouth High School has an enrolment of 978 and has a projected enrolment of 781 in 2016. In April 2009, the Province of Nova Scotia allocated capital funding to Nova Scotia school boards and included the following new construction projects and renovations:

Prince Arthur/Southdale – North Woodside replacement; and

Dartmouth High renovations The proposed capital plan for the Dartmouth High Family of Schools reflects this infrastructure investment; however, the plan recommends the construction project for Prince Arthur/Southdale – North Woodside be amended. The revised project would include a replacement school for South Woodside and Southdale – North Woodside and alterations to Bicentennial to accommodate junior high students from Prince Arthur Junior and Bicentennial Schools. Additionally, the Plan addresses the surplus capacity by identifying possible consolidations of schools. The proposed capital investment would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the Dartmouth High Family of Schools inventory.


Dartmouth High School

(10‐12)

John Martin Jr. High (7‐9)

John MacNeil

(P‐6)

Shannon Park (P‐6)

(English )Harbour View (P‐6)

Bicentennial Jr High (P‐9)

Crichton Park (P‐6) Hawthorn (P‐6)

Prince Arthur Jr. High (7‐9)

Shannon Park – (P‐6)

(FI only)

Hawthorn (P‐6)Southdale – North Woodside (P‐6)

South Woodside

(P‐6)

Existing Dartmouth High Feeder System


1. Alderney Elementary to be re‐directed to Hawthorn Elementary 2. Potential review for closure with English students being redirected to Harbour View and French Immersion students being

relocated.

Dartmouth High School

(9‐12)

John Martin Jr. High (6‐8)

John MacNeil

(P‐5)

Shannon Park (P‐5) (English)

Harbour View

(P‐5)

Bicentennial Jr High (6‐8)

Crichton Park (P‐5)

(including portion of Bicentennial Elementary)

Hawthorn (P‐5)

(including portion of Bicentennial

Elementary and Alderney Elementary)

1. New school (Southdale‐North

Woodside, Alderney Elementary, and South

Woodside

2. Shannon Park

(P‐5)

FI only

Proposed Dartmouth Feeder System


Dartmouth High Feeder System


Funding Time Line

Project Cost Potential Reviews Schools to Monitor


2015

1. New School to replace Southdale‐North Woodside and South Woodside

Amend the approved project of a P‐9 to a P‐5. Funding approval for this project was 24.3 million. The anticipated cost of an elementary is $14‐18 million. The net savings may be applied to Bicentennial renovations as a receiving school for Prince Arthur Jr. High

2014 Approved in 2010

Southdale‐North Woodside and/or South Woodside and/or Alderney Elementary

Bicentennial Grade reconfiguration form P‐9 to 6‐8. Alterations to improve aging infrastructure and address program

2015 2011 $10 million Prince Arthur Jr. High


Dartmouth High Feeder System


Funding Time Line


needs. Boundary review to realign elementary students

John MacNeil Monitor for potential review if the enrolment continues to decline

1. Projected enrolment for Prince Arthur Jr. High regular program in 2014 is 235 and French immersion is 119




PRINCE ANDREW HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Prince Andrew High Family of Schools Proposed Plan The Prince Andrew High Feeder system has eight schools offering grades P‐6 programming, three sites that offer 7‐9 programming, and Prince Andrew High School offers 10‐12 programming. Prince Andrew Family of Schools has experienced a decline in enrolment over the past 10‐15 years and it is anticipated to have a slight decline over the next few years. This has created significant under‐utilized capacity within the feeder system. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 1900 with a utilization rate of 67%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 1927. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 977 with a utilization rate of 72%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 870. Currently, Prince Andrew High School has an enrolment of 1260 and has a projected enrolment of 960 in 2016. The Plan addresses the surplus capacity by identifying possible consolidations of schools. The proposed capital investment would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the Prince Andrew school inventory.


Prince Andrew High School

(10‐12)

Ellenvale Jr High

(7‐9)

(Including Late FI)

Alderney Elementary

(P‐6)

Brookhouse Elementary

(P‐6)

Mount Edward Elementary

(P‐6)

Portland Estates Elementary

(P‐6)

Eric Graves Jr High

(7‐9)

Bel Ayr Elementary

(P‐6)


(P‐6)

Caledonia

Jr. High

(7‐9)

(Including Late FI)

Admiral Westphal Elementary

(P‐6)

Ian Forsyth Elementary (P‐6)

Michael Wallace Elementary (P‐6)

Existing Prince Andrew High Feeder System


1. Redirection of students from Alderney Elementary to Hawthorn and New Southdale‐North Woodside Elementary (Dartmouth High Feeder System) 2. Review Admiral Westphal for potential realignment with Ian Forsyth and Michael Wallace


(9‐12)

Ellenvale Jr High

(6‐8)

(Including Late FI)

1. Alderney Elementary

(P‐5)

Brookhouse Elementary (P‐5)


(P‐5)Portland Estates Elementary (P‐5)

Eric Graves Jr High

(6‐8)

Bel Ayr Elementary (P‐5)

Mount Edward Elementary (P‐5)

Caledonia

Jr. High

(6‐8)

(Including Late FI)

2. Admiral Westphal

Elementary (P‐5)

Ian Forsyth Elementary (P‐5)

Michael Wallace Elementary (P‐5)

Proposed Prince Andrew Feeder System


Prince Andrew High Feeder System

School Project Scope Time Line Funding Time Line

Project Costs

Potential Reviews Schools to Monitor


2015


Alterations to enhance program delivery.

Presently under construction with anticipated end date of 2013


Potential declining enrolment may provide an opportunity for consolidation

Review demographics in 2016

Alderney Elementary

Proposed realignment of students to Hawthorn Elementary School

Review in 2013 for potential closure in 2015




Admiral Westphal

Review for possible closure with students being redirected to Ian Forsyth and Michael Wallace

Review in 2013 for potential closure in 2015


AUBURN DRIVE HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Auburn Drive High Family of Schools Proposed Plan The Auburn Drive High Feeder system has six schools offering grades P‐6 programming, two junior highs, and Auburn Drive High School offers 10‐12 programming. Auburn Drive High Family of Schools has experienced a decline in enrolment over the past 10 years and it is anticipated to have significant decline over the next few years. This decline will alleviate overcrowding in some schools while creating some capacity in others. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 1769 with a utilization rate of 77%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 1560. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 884 with a utilization rate of 72%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 737. Currently, Auburn Drive High School has an enrolment of 1022 and has a projected enrolment of 868 in 2016. The Plan addresses the potential surplus capacity by identifying possible consolidations of schools. The proposed capital investment would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the Auburn school inventory.


Auburn Drive High School

(10‐12)

(Late & Early FI)

Astral Drive Jr. High

(7‐9)

(Early FI)

Astral Drive Elementary

(P‐6)

(Early FI)

Colby Village Elementary

(P‐6)

Caldwell Road

(P‐6)

Graham Creighton Jr. High

(7‐9)

(Early FI)

Bell Park

(P‐6)

(Early FI)

Humber Park

(P‐6)

Joseph Giles Elementary

(P‐6)

Existing Auburn Drive Feeder System


Auburn Drive High School

(9‐12)

Astral Drive Jr. High

(6‐8)

Astral Drive Elementary

(P‐5)


(P‐5)

Caldwell Road

(P‐5)

Graham Creighton Jr. High

(6‐8)

Bell Park

(P‐5)Humber Park

(P‐5)

Joseph Giles Elementary

(P‐5)

Proposed Auburn Drive Feeder System


Auburn Drive Feeder System


Project Costs


All Schools Grade reconfiguration from existing P‐6, 7‐9, 10‐12 to P‐5, 6‐8, 9‐12.

2015


Consolidation and Boundary review with a portion of Colonel John Stuart




COLE HARBOUR DISTRICT HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Cole Harbour District High Proposed Plan The Cole Harbour District High Feeder system has nine schools offering grades P‐6: eight schools offer P‐6 and one school offers P‐9 programming. There are three sites that offer 7‐9 programming: two school offer 7‐9 and one school offers P‐9. Cole Harbour District High School offers 10‐12 programming. Cole Harbour District High Family of Schools has experienced a decline in enrolment over the past 10 years and it is anticipated to have significant decline over the next few years. This decline will alleviate overcrowding in some schools while creating some capacity in others. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 1944 with a utilization rate of 64%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 2073. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 870 with a utilization rate of 57%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 573. Currently, Cole Harbour District High School has an enrolment of 969 and has a projected enrolment of 795 in 2016. The Plan addresses the potential surplus capacity by identifying possible consolidations of schools. The proposed capital investment would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the Cole Harbour school inventory.


Cole Harbour District High School

(10‐12)

(Late & Early FI)


(7‐9)

(Late & Early FI)

Seaside Elementary

(Early FI)

Ocean View Elementary

Tallahassee Community

School

(Early FI)

Ross Road

(P‐9)

(Late FI)

Nelson Whynder Elementary

(P‐6)

Atlantic View Elementary

(P‐6)

Sir Robert Borden

(7‐9)

(Late FI)

Colonel John Stuart Elementary

(P‐6)

George Bissett Elementary

(P‐6)

Robert Kemp Turner

Elementary

(P‐6)

Existing Cole Harbour District High Feeder System



(9‐12)


(6‐8)

Seaside Elementary

Ocean View Elementary

Tallahassee Community

School

Sir Robert Borden

(6‐8)

Colonel John Stuart

Elementary

(P‐5)

George Bissett Elementary

(P‐5)

Robert Kemp Turner

Elementary

(P‐5)

Nelson Whynder Elementary

(P‐5)

Ross Road

(P‐5)


(P‐5)

Proposed Cole Harbour District High Feeder System


Cole Harbour District Feeder System


Project Costs

Potential Reviews

Schools to Monitor


2015


Addition and alterations to enhance program delivery and aging infrastructure

2013 2012 $10 million

Ross Road Grade Reconfiguration from P‐9 to P‐6.

2012

Robert K Turner

Review for possible permanent closure in 2013‐2014 school year with students being redirected to Bel Ayr in 2015


Cole Harbour District Feeder System


Project Costs

Potential Reviews

Schools to Monitor

Colonel John Stuart

Review for possible permanent closure in 2013‐2014 school year with students being redirected to George Bissett, and Colby Village in 2015


Review for possible permanent closure in 2011‐2012 school year with students being redirected to Ross Road, Porters Lake, and O’Connell Drive





LOCKVIEW HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Lockview High Family of Schools Proposed Plan The Lockview High Feeder system has six schools offering grades P‐6, two sites that offer 7‐8 programming, and Lockview High School offers 9‐12 programming. Lockview Family of Schools has experienced a steady enrolment which is projected to continue. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 1944 with a utilization rate of 90%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 2042. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐8 is 571 with a utilization rate of 58%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 563. Currently, Lockview High School has an enrolment of 1249 and has a projected enrolment of 1096 in 2016. The Plan addresses the surplus capacity at the junior high level and the over‐crowding at the elementary school level by recommending a grade re‐configuration of P‐5, 6‐8, and 9‐12. The proposed capital investment would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the Lockview school inventory.


Lockview

High School

(9‐12)

(Late & Early FI)

Georges P Vanier Jr. High

(7‐8)

(Late & Early FI)

Ash Lee Jefferson

(P‐6)

(Early FI)

Holland Road Elementary

(P‐6)

Oldfield Consolidated

(P‐6)

Waverley Memorial

(P‐6)

Harold T. Barrett Jr. High

(7‐8)

(Late FI)

Beaver Bank – Kinsac Elementary

(P‐6)

Beaver Bank – Monarch

(P‐6)

Existing Lockview High Feeder System


Lockview

High School

(9‐12)

(Late & Early FI)

Georges P Vanier Jr. High

(6‐8)

Ash Lee Jefferson

(P‐5)Holland Road Elementary

(P‐5)


(P‐5)

Waverley Memorial

(P‐5)

Harold T. Barrett Jr. High

(6‐8)

Beaver Bank – Kinsac Elementary

(P‐5)

Beaver Bank – Monarch

(P‐5)

Proposed Lockview High Feeder System


Lockview Feeder System


Project Costs


All Schools Grade Reconfiguration – Elementary – P‐5, Middle School 6‐8, High School – maintain 9‐12.

Review should happen in 2011 for implementation in 2012‐2013 school year


Monitor enrolment. Possible consolidation with neighbouring schools.




MILLWOOD HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Millwood High Family of Schools Proposed Plan The Millwood High Feeder system has three schools offering grades P‐6, two sites that offer 7‐9 programming, and Millwood High School offers 10‐12 programming. Millwood High Family of Schools has experienced a decline in enrolment over the past five years and it is anticipated to continue to decline over the next few years. This decline will alleviate overcrowding in some schools while creating some capacity in others. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 1224 with a utilization rate of 96%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 1256. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 598 with a utilization rate of 80%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 532. Currently, Millwood High School has an enrolment of 623 and has a projected enrolment of 553 in 2016. The Plan addresses the potential surplus capacity at the high school by recommending a grade re‐configuration of P‐5, 6‐8, and 9‐12. The proposed capital investment would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the Millwood school inventory.


Millwood

High School

(10‐12)

(Late FI)

Sackville Heights Junior

High School

(7‐9)

(Late FI)

Harry R. Hamilton

Elementary

(P‐6)

Millwood Elementary

(P‐6)

Sackville Heights

Elementary

(P‐6)

Existing Millwood High Feeder System


Millwood

High School

(9‐12)

Sackville Heights Junior

High School

(6‐8)

Harry R. Hamilton

Elementary

(P‐5)

Millwood Elementary

(P‐5)

Sackville Heights

Elementary

(P‐5)

Proposed Millwood High Feeder System


Millwood Feeder System


Project Costs


All Schools Grade Reconfiguration – Elementary – P‐5, Middle School 6‐8, High School –9‐12.


Harry R. Hamilton Elementary

Alterations to enhance program delivery and address aging infrastructure

2016 2014 $7 million




SACKVILLE HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Sackville High Family of Schools Proposed Plan The Sackville High Feeder system has seven schools offering grades P‐6 programming: six P‐6 schools and one P‐9 school. There are three sites that offer 7‐9 programming: two junior high schools and one P‐9 school. Sackville High School offers 10‐12 programming. Sackville High Family of Schools has experienced a significant decline in enrolment over the past 10‐15 years and it is anticipated to continue to decline over the next few years. This has created significant under‐utilized capacity within the feeder system. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 1227 with a utilization rate of 58%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 1112. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 930 with a utilization rate of 80%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 669. Currently, Sackville High School has an enrolment of 884 and has a projected enrolment of 669 in 2016. The proposed capital plan for the Sackville High Family of Schools reflects the surplus capacity by identifying possible consolidations of schools. The proposed capital investment would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the Sackville High Family of Schools inventory.


Sackville

High School

(10‐12)

(Late & Early FI)

A. J Smeltzer Jr. High

(7‐9)

(Late FI)

Caudle Park Elementary

(P‐6)

Hillside Park Elementary

(P‐6)

Sackville Centennial Elementary

(P‐6)

Sycamore Lane Elementary

(P‐6)

Leslie Thomas

Jr. High

(7‐9)

(Late FI)

Gertrude Parker Elementary

(Early FI)

(P‐6)

Smokey Drive Elementary

(P‐6)


(P‐6)

Cavalier Drive School

(P‐9)

Existing Sackville High Feeder System


Sackville

High School

(9‐12)

A. J Smeltzer Jr. High

(6‐8)

Caudle Park Elementary

(P‐5)

Hillside Park Elementary

(P‐5)


(P‐5)


(P‐5)

Leslie Thomas

Jr. High

(6‐8)

Gertrude Parker Elementary

(Early FI)

(P‐5)

Smokey Drive Elementary

(P‐5)


(P‐5)

Cavalier Drive

(P‐5)

Proposed Sackville Feeder System


Sackville Feeder System


Project Costs

Potential Reviews

Schools to Monitor



Cavalier Drive School

Grade Reconfiguration from P‐9 to P‐6

2012

Gertrude Parker

Review for potential permanent closure with students being redirected to Cavalier Drive P‐6

Review to occur in 2011‐2012 school year for potential closure in 2012


Review for potential permanent closure with students being redirected to Hillside Elementary



Sackville Feeder System


Project Costs

Potential Reviews

Schools to Monitor

Caudle Park/Hillside Park Elementary

Review for potential permanent closure with a portion of students being redirected to Cavalier Drive and a portion to Hillside Park/Caudle Park





EASTERN SHORE DISTRICT HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Eastern Shore District High Family of Schools Proposed Plan The Eastern Shore District High Feeder system has three schools offering grades P‐6 programming: two P‐6 schools and one P‐9 school. There are two sites that offer 7‐9 programming: one junior high school and one P‐9 school. Eastern Shore District High School offers 10‐12 programming. Eastern Shore District High Family of Schools has experienced decline in enrolment it is anticipated to continue to decline over the next few years. This has created under‐utilized capacity within some schools in the feeder system. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 1037 with a utilization rate of 84%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 1073. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 520 with a utilization rate of 60%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 444. Currently, Eastern Shore District High School has an enrolment of 554 and has a projected enrolment of 414 in 2016. The proposed capital plan for the Eastern Shore District High Family of Schools reflects the surplus capacity at the junior high level and at Oyster Pond by identifying possible consolidations of schools and recommending a grade re‐configuration. The proposed capital plan would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the Eastern Shore school inventory.


Eastern Shore District

High School

Oyster Pond Gaetz Brook Junior

High

Porters Lake Elementary School

O’Connell Drive Elementary School

Existing Eastern Shore Distict High Feeder System


Eastern Shore District

High School

(9‐12)

Oyster Pond

(P‐8)

Gaetz Brook Junior High

(6‐8)


(P‐5)

O’Connell Drive

(P‐5)

Proposed Eastern Shore District High Feeder System


Eastern Shore District High Feeder System


Project Costs Potential Reviews

Schools to Monitor



Eastern Shore District High

Renovations to upgrade aging infrastructure and provide additional specialty program areas

2016 2014 $8‐10 million

Oyster Pond Boundary Review to redirect a portion of students from Lakefront Consolidated

Review to occur in 2011‐2012 school year


Eastern Shore District High Feeder System



Schools to Monitor


Boundary Review to redirect a portion of students from Atlantic View


O’Connell Drive Elementary School

Boundary Review to redirect a portion of students from Atlantic View



(c) Future consolidations, declining enrolments may be negatively impacting programming opportunities Time Line – Anticipated approximate opening date Funding Time Line ‐ Funding commitment required from DOE to meet anticipated opening date Project Scope – Type and scale of work to be completed with the final scope of work will be determined by the School Capital Construction Committee. Project Cost –approximate costs based on 2010 costing


DUNCAN MACMILLAN HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Duncan Macmillan High Family of Schools Proposed Plan The Duncan MacMillan High Feeder system has three schools offering grades P‐6 programming and Duncan MacMillan provides programming for grades 7‐12. Duncan MacMillan Family of Schools has experienced decline in enrolment and it is anticipated to continue to decline over the next few years. This has created under‐utilized capacity within some schools in the feeder system. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 179 with a utilization rate of 42%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 131. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 101 with a utilization rate of 36%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 88. Currently, the high school enrolment is 115 and has a projected enrolment of 89 in 2016. The existing infrastructure is dated and as such capital investment is required. The proposed plan identifies a P‐12 structure which would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the Duncan MacMillan feeder system.


Duncan MacMillan

High School

Sheet Harbour Consolidated Eastern Consolidated Lakefront Consolidated

Existing Duncan MacMillan Feeder System


Duncan MacMillan Replacement P‐12

Proposed Duncan MacMillan Feeder System


Duncan MacMillan High Feeder System


Project Costs


New P-12 school

New school with a P-12 grade configuration. Community partnership may be considered.

2014 2011 $28 million Sheet Harbour Consolidated, and Duncan MacMillan

Lakefront Consolidated

Review for potential permanent closure with a boundary review to redirect some students from Lakefront Consolidated to Sheet Harbour Consolidated and Oyster Pond Academy

Review to occur in 2012 -2013 school year for potential closure in 2014

Eastern Consolidated

Review for potential permanent closure with students being redirected to Sheet Harbour Consolidated

Review to occur in 2012 -2013 school year for potential closure in 2014



(d) Future consolidations, declining enrolments may be negatively impacting programming opportunities Time Line – Anticipated approximate opening date Funding Time Line ‐ Funding commitment required from DOE to meet anticipated opening date Project Scope – Type and scale of work to be completed with the final scope of work will be determined by the School Capital Construction Committee. Project Cost –approximate costs based on 2010 costing


MUSQUODOBOIT RURAL HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Musquodoboit Rural High Family of Schools Proposed Plan The Musquodoboit Rural High Feeder system has three schools offering grades P‐6 programming, and Musquodoboit Rural High School offers 7‐12 programming. Musquodoboit High Family of Schools has experienced decline in enrolment it is anticipated to continue to decline over the next few years. This has created under‐utilized capacity within some schools in the feeder system. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 331 with a utilization rate of 57%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 327. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 149 with a utilization rate of 66%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 133. Currently, the 10‐12 enrolment is 187 and has a projected enrolment of 106 in 2016. The proposed capital plan for the Musquodoboit Rural High Family of Schools reflects the surplus capacity by identifying possible consolidations of schools. The proposed capital plan would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the Musquodoboit school inventory.


Musquodoboit Rural High School

(7‐12)

Dutch Settlement

(P‐6)

Musquodoboit Valley Education Centre

(P‐6)

Upper Musquodoboit Consolidated

(P‐6)

Existing Musquodoboit Rural Feeder System


1. Review for potential closure with students being redirected to Musquodoboit Education Centre

Musquodoboit Rural

High School

(7‐12)

Dutch Settlement

(P‐6)

Musquodoboit Valley Education Centre

(P‐6)

1.Upper Musquodoboit Consolidated

(P‐6)

Proposed Musquodoboit Rural Feeder System


Musquodoboit Rural High Feeder System



Upper Musqudoboit Consolidated

Review for potential permanent closure with students being redirected to Musquodoboit Valley Education Centre

Review in 2011‐12 school year for potential closure in 2012

Dutch Settlement Monitored in conjunction with Oldfield Elementary


(e) Future consolidations, declining enrolments may be negatively impacting programming opportunities Time Line – Anticipated approximate opening date Funding Time Line ‐ Funding commitment required from DOE to meet anticipated opening date Project Scope – Type and scale of work to be completed with the final scope of work will be determined by the School Capital Construction Committee. Project Cost –approximate costs based on 2010 costing


CHARLES P ALLEN HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Charles P Allen High Family of Schools Proposed Plan Currently, Bedford has five schools offering grades P‐6 programming: four P‐6 schools and one P‐9 school. There are three sites that offer 7‐9 programming: two junior high schools and one P‐9 school. Charles P Allen High School offers 10‐12 programming. The challenge for the Charles P Allen High Family of Schools is the increasing enrolment. This increase in enrolment has created overcrowding in many of the area schools. It is anticipated the enrolment will continue to increase in the next years. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 2177 with a utilization rate of 75%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 2453. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 1186 with a utilization rate of 97%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 1261. Currently, Charles P Allen High School has an enrolment of 1215 and has a projected enrolment of 1409. In April 2009, the Province of Nova Scotia allocated capital funding to Nova Scotia school boards and included the following new construction projects and renovations:

Charles P Allen replacement The Plan addresses the overcrowding by recommending a number of capital investments including an additional high school to accommodate growth in the Ravines, Bedford South/West and Hammonds Plains areas.


Charles P. Allen High School

Bedford South

(late FI)

Bedford Junior High (early and

late FI)

Sunnyside Elementary

(including early FI)Basinview Drive

Madeline Symonds Middle

(early and late FI)

Kingswood

(including early FI)

Hammonds Plains Consolidated

(Including early FI)

Existing Charles P Allen High Feeder System


Charles P. Allen Replacement

School

Grades 9‐12

Bedford Junior High

(6‐8)

Sunnyside Elementary (P‐5)

Basinview Elementary (P‐5)

Proposed Bedford West/South Jr.

High

(6‐8)

Bedford South

(P‐5)

Fairview Junior High

(6‐8)

(FI studnets only)

Burton

Ettinger

(P‐5)

(FI only)

I

Grosvenor Wentworth

(P‐5)

(FI only)

Rockingham

(P‐5)

(FI only)

Madeline Symonds Middle School (6‐8) (FI Only Late and

Early)

Hammonds Plains

(P‐5)

(FI only)

Kingswood Elementary

(P‐5)

(FI only)

Proposed Charles P Allen High Feeder System


C.P Allen High Feeder System


Project Cost


All Schools Grade reconfiguration from existing P‐6, 7‐9, 10‐12 to P‐5, 6‐8, 9‐12.

2018

Sunnyside Replacement and consolidation of Eaglewood, Fort Sackville, and Waverley Road

2016 2012 $14‐18 million Review Fort Sackville and Waverley Road

Bedford Junior High

Capital Funding for alterations to existing C.P.A to accommodate and deliver junior high program. Alternative adult programming should be

2014 2012 $6 million


C.P Allen High Feeder System


Project Cost


considered for excess capacity

Basinview Community School/Kingswood Elementary

Boundary review once new Bedford West/South Jr. High is delivered

New Bedford South/West Junior High

Amend request from a requested elementary school to a new junior high.

2013 2011 $20‐24 million New Bedford South/West Junior High

Bedford South Reconfigure for a P‐5 program delivery, alter Jr. high specialty areas. Boundary review.

2014 2011 P3 school ($1 million)

Boundary review as part of Kingswood and Basinview review.

Bedford South



(f) Future consolidations, declining enrolments may be negatively impacting programming opportunities Time Line – Anticipated approximate opening date Funding Time Line ‐ Funding commitment required from DOE to meet anticipated opening date Project Scope – Type and scale of work to be completed with the final scope of work will be determined by the School Capital Construction Committee. Project Cost –approximate costs based on 2010 costing


PROPOSED RAVINES HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Proposed Ravines Family of Schools Proposed Plan As outlined, the Bedford area is experiencing growth and it is projected to continue over the next few years. The proposed plan includes an additional high school and as such a feeder system will be developed. This feeder system will be determined upon receiving funding for the high school and a potential location.


1. Proposed realignment of Clayton Park Junior high and elementary schools from Halifax West to Proposed Ravines High Feeder

System 2. Proposed realignment of Madeline Symonds Middle School and elementary schools – students from English program to

Proposed Ravines High Feeder System

Proposed Ravines High School (9‐12)

1.. Clayton Park Junior High

(6‐8)

Duc D’Anville

(P‐5)

English Program

Rockingham

(P‐5)

English Program

Grosvenor Wentworth Park

(P‐5)

English Program

2. Madeline Symonds Middle School

(Regular Program students)

(6‐8)

Kingswood Elementary

( English Program)

(P‐5)

Hammonds Plains Consolidated

(English Program)

(P‐5)

Proposed Ravines High Feeder System


Ravines High Feeder System


Project Cost Potential Reviews Schools to monitor

All Schools Grade reconfiguration from existing P‐6, 7‐9, 10‐12 to P‐5, 6‐8, and 9‐12

2018

New Ravines High School

New high school to accommodate growth in the Bedford South/West/Hemlock Ravines Area

2017 2013 $40 million

Clayton Park Junior High and its feeder elementary schools (English program)

Realignment from Halifax West Feeder system to the Proposed Ravines High Feeder System


Ravines High Feeder System


Project Cost Potential Reviews Schools to monitor

Madeline Symonds Middle School and its feeder elementary schools (English program)

Realignment from Charles P. Allen High Feeder system to the Proposed Ravines High feeder system


(g) Future consolidations, declining enrolments may be negatively impacting programming opportunities Time Line – Anticipated approximate opening date Funding Time Line ‐ Funding commitment required from DOE to meet anticipated opening date Project Scope – Type and scale of work to be completed with the final scope of work will be determined by the School Capital Construction Committee. Project Cost –approximate costs based on 2010 costing


HALIFAX WEST HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Halifax West High Family of Schools Proposed Plan The Halifax West High Feeder system has eight schools offering grades P‐6: seven P‐6 schools and one P‐9 school. There are four schools that offer 7‐9 programming: three junior high schools and one P‐9 and Halifax West High School offers 10‐12 programming. Halifax West Family of Schools has experienced a slight decline in enrolment which is projected to continue. This decline will be beneficial to some schools that had been experiencing overcrowding while creating excess capacity in others As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 2525 with a utilization rate of 75%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 2499. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 1221 with a utilization rate of 67%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 1306. Currently, Halifax West High School has an enrolment of 1449 and has a projected enrolment of 1360 in 2016. The Plan addresses the aging infrastructure and would create a viable feeder system.


Halifax West High School

Clayton Park (7‐9)

Duc D’Anville (P‐6)Rockingham (P‐6)

(early FI)

Grosvenor Wentworth (P‐6)

(early FI)

Park West (P‐9)

Fairview Junior High (7‐9)

(early FI)

Fairview Heights

(P‐6)

Burton Ettinger

(P‐6)

(early FI)

Brookside JH

(7‐9)

(late FI)

Atlantic Memorial –Terence Bay

(P‐6)

Prospect Road (P‐6)

Existing Halifax West Feeder System


1. Proposed realignment of a portion of western Halifax peninsula to Halifax West 2. Proposed realignment of Ridgecliff Middle School and its feeder elementary school from Sir John A Macdonald to Halifax

West Family of Schools 3. Realignment of Brookside Junior High School and its feeder elementary schools to Sir John A Macdonald

Halifax West High School

(9‐12)

Fairview Junior High

English Program

(6‐8)

Fairview Heights

(P‐5)

Burton Ettinger

(P‐5)

1. Portion of Western Halifax Peninsula

2. Ridgecliff Middle School

English Program

(6‐8)

Beechville – Lakeside –Timberlea (P‐5)

( English Program)

Park West

P‐8

Proposed Halifax West High Feeder System


Halifax West High Feeder System



Schools to Monitor


2018

Burton Ettinger Elementary School

New school to replace existing school

2014 2011 $14‐18 million

Fairview Heights Elementary School

Addition and alterations to existing main building to replace annex building

2016 2012 $6‐8 million

Beechville‐ Lakeside‐ Timberlea

Replace senior elementary building. Respond to aging infrastructure and potential growth in Westwood Hills area

2018 2014

$12 ‐ 14 million Boundary review upon delivery of new elementary school





J.L ILSLEY FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


J.L Ilsley Family of Schools Proposed Plan The J.L Ilsley High Feeder system has eight schools offering grades P‐6 programming: six P‐6 schools and two P‐9 schools. There are four sites that offer 7‐9 programming: two junior high schools and two P‐9 schools. J.L Ilsley High School offers 10‐12 programming. J.L Ilsley High Family of Schools has experienced a significant decline in enrolment over the past 10‐15 years and it is anticipated to continue to decline over the next few years. This has created significant under‐utilized capacity within the feeder system. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 1445 with a utilization rate of 58%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 1544. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐9 is 853 with a utilization rate of 82%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 868. Currently, J.L Ilsley High School has an enrolment of 786 and has a projected enrolment of 600 in 2016. The proposed capital plan for the J.L Ilsley Family of Schools is quite extensive and reflects the surplus capacity by identifying possible consolidations of schools. The proposed capital investment would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the J.L Ilsley feeder system.


J.L Ilsley

High School

(10‐12)

(Late & Early FI)

Rockingstone Heights

(P‐9)

Central Spryfield Elementary

(P‐6)

Cunard Jr. High

Jr. High

(7‐9)

Chebucto Heights Elementary

(P‐6)

(English)

J.W MacLeod/

Fleming Tower

(English)

(P‐6)

Elizabeth Sutherland School

(P‐9)

(Early FI)


(P‐6)

(FI Only)

J.W MacLeod/

Fleming Tower

(P‐6)

(FI only)

Herring Cove Junior High

(7‐9)

(Late FI)

Harrietsfield Elementary

(P‐6)

Sambro Elementary

(P‐6)

William King Elementary

(P‐6)

Existing J.L Ilsley Feeder System


J.L IlsleyHigh School

(9-12)

Rockingstone Heights

(P-5)

Central Spryfield Elementary

(P-5)

Cunard Jr. HighJr. High

(P-8)


(P-5)

J.W MacLeod/Fleming Tower

(P-5)

Elizabeth Sutherland School (students

from Rockingstone, and Central Spryfield)

(P-8)

Herring Cove Junior High (P-8)

Harrietsfield Elementary

(P-5)

Sambro Elementary (P-5)


(P-5)

Proposed J.L Ilsey Feeder System


J.L Ilsley Feeder System


Project Costs



2018

J.L Ilsley High School

Grade Reconfiguration to 9‐12 from 10‐12. Alterations to enhance program delivery and update aging infrastructure

Sept 2013 2012 $8‐10 million

Cunard Jr. High Grade reconfiguration to 7‐9 from P‐8. Grade 9 students redirected to J.L Ilsley

2017 2014 $10 million

J.W MacLeod/Fleming Tower

Review for potential closure. Students to be redirected to Cunard P‐8

Review in 2014 with closure in June 2017

Chebucto Heights Review for potential closure. Students to be redirected to Cunard P‐8

Review in 2014 with closure in June 2017




Project Costs


Elizabeth Sutherland

Grade reconfiguration from P‐9 to P‐8.

2013

Rockingstone Heights School

Review to occur in 2014 with students being potentially redirected to Elizabeth Sutherland




Project Costs


Central Spryfield

Review to occur in 2011‐2012 school year for potential closure in 2012 with students being potentially redirected to Elizabeth Sutherland

Herring Cove Jr. High

Grade reconfiguration from 7‐9 to 6‐8 in 2014. Potential reconfiguration to P‐8 in longer term.


Review for potential closure with students being redirected to Herring Cove P‐8

Review in 2014




Project Costs


Sambro Elementary

Review for potenial closure in 2011‐2012 school year with potential closure in 2012 with students being redirected to William King




SIR JOHN A MACDONALD HIGH FAMILY OF SCHOOLS


Sir John A Macdonald High Family of Schools Proposed Plan The Sir John A Macdonald High Feeder system has three schools offering grades P‐6, one school that offers P‐5 programming, one junior high school, one school offering 6‐9 programming, and Sir John A Macdonald offers 10‐12 programming. Sir John A Macdonald Family of Schools has experienced a steady enrolment which is projected to continue. As of September 30, 2010, the enrolment for P‐6 was 1974 with a utilization rate of 77%. The projected enrolment for 2016 at the P‐6 grade level is 1871. Currently, the enrolment for 7‐8 is 1056 with a utilization rate of 63%. The projected enrolment in 2016 for the 7‐9 grade level is 1107. Currently, Sir John A Macdonald High School has an enrolment of 958 and has a projected enrolment of 993 in 2016. Although there is steady enrolment in the overall feeder system, there is surplus capacity within some of the schools. Additional capacity will be created with a grade reconfiguration. The Plan addresses the surplus capacity by recommending school reviews. The proposed capital investment would create a balanced utilization while ensuring long term viability of the Sir John A Macdonald school inventory.


Sir John A Macdonald High

(10‐12)

Ridgecliff Middle School

(6‐9)

Beechville – Lakeside –Timberlea

(P‐5)

Five Bridges Junior High

(7‐9)

(early and late FI)

East St. Margaret’s Elementary

(P‐6)

Shatford Memorial Elementary

(P‐6)

St. Margaret’s Bay Elementary

(P‐6)

Tantallon Elementary

(FI)

(P‐6)

Existing Sir John A. Macdonald Feeder System


1. Realignment of Brookside Junior High School and elementary schools to Sir John A Macdonald 2. Realignment of Ridgecliff Middle School to Halifax West feeder schools

Sir John A Macdonald High

(9‐12)

1. Brookside Junior High School

(6‐8)

Atlantic Memorial –Terence Bay

(P‐5)

Prospect Road Elementary

(P‐5)

Five Bridges Junior High

(6‐8)

East St. Margaret’s Elementary

(P‐5)


(P‐5)

St. Margaret’s Bay Elementary

(P‐5)

Tantallon Elementary

(P‐5)

Proposed Sir John A Macdonald Feeder System


Sir John A Macdonald High Feeder System


Funding Time Line



2018

Terence Bay

Review for potential permanent closure with students being redirected to Atlantic Memorial

Review to occur in 2011‐2012 school year with possible closure in 2012


Review for potential permanent closure with students being redirected St. Margaret’s Bay

Review to occur in 2013 school year with possible closure in 2014


Sir John A Macdonald High Feeder System


Funding Time Line


East St. Margaret’s Bay Elementary

Potential declining enrolment may provide an opportunity for consolidation



Documents

HRSB Agenda March 30 2011 Meeting