Aurélie Diep, president of the Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) Commission de la relève, expressed her irritation this weekend at the group’s annual convention in Saint-Hyacinthe, with politicians who denounce the three-speed school system, “as if it were desirable or possible to impose the same speed on all students,” she said indignantly in her speech.
Calling the education system a “three-speed” system is an unfortunate analogy inspired by the debate on the health system. In the medical field, the expression “two speeds” evokes inequitable access to care, between the public and private sectors. In education, it is rather a question of three categories of teaching: ordinary programs for the public sector, programs with a profile for the public sector and private secondary schools.
Or, Mme Diep confuses “speeds” with the time needed to pass certain courses. Saying that a student can complete secondary school in four, five or six years has nothing to do with educational categories. Each young person has their own learning pace, regardless of the institution they attend.
Grant-aided private schools, although labelled as “private,” receive about 60% of the per-student funding that public schools receive, raising questions of equity. The government covers a significant portion of educational costs in these schools. Designating these schools as “private” minimizes the impact of public funding and gives the impression that they operate autonomously.
While the government saves on education costs when a student attends a private school, it also deprives children from low-income families of access to institutions that could provide them with enriching educational opportunities. This confusion of terminology creates a misperception of equity in the education system.
It is true that teachers cannot be blamed for wanting to work in private schools, where staff turnover is often lower than in public school service centers. Working conditions and job stability are important factors in choosing a career in teaching. However, this should not obscure the systemic inequalities that exist between the public and private sectors.
Rather than debating superficial measures, such as the use of the formal “vous”, it is essential to tackle the real problems in our education system. The inequalities in funding between the public and private sectors are creating an ever-widening gap between students, condemning the most disadvantaged to deplorable learning conditions.
Of course, it is natural for parents to want the best for their children. However, it is the responsibility of the State to ensure that all young people, regardless of their socio-economic background, have access to quality education in institutions worthy of the name. This is a question of equity and social justice.