School and Contemporary post Industrial society: Welcome Back Kotter!
TORONTO – Life is complicated as it without “advocates” for retribution associated with evils, real or imagined, that might have taken place but are no longer germane to the life we live or aspire for our children. The Minister for Education in Ontario has the enviable task of caring for the preparation of our children for the challenges the future may throw in their direction.
He also has a fiduciary obligation to ensure that the structure and personnel to carry those responsibilities to fruition can withstand scrutiny. It is in our collective interests to augur him success as our children return to school. It is they who should receive our undivided attention, and that of those who aspire to the noble profession of in loco parentis: mater et magistra – no gender bias intended.
In such a profession, vindictiveness should have no place. The profession never was intended for “careerists” to use the education system as ladder to their unfettered personal goals. We remain uncertain as to in class benefit of the actions by some School Boards, now under supervision, to execute actions whose association with improved learning and cultural growth would require more than even the most forgiving and indulgent parent might shower on a spoiled brat.
The provincial government, at the end of June 2025, declared that eight of the 72 boards of education, 29 Catholic, were incompetent fiscally, only marginally adept pedagogically and internally (governance-wise) too quarrelsome to survive and hence suspended them. It placed all operational authority in the hands of Supervisors who answers directly to the Minister. A $315,000 yearly guarantees it.
Only one director of education was dismissed. All trustees (including those allegedly guilty of the “sins” enumerated above are allowed to seek re-election (we will feature them in another article). The Senior Staff of the most egregious “offending board” – the TCDSB converted an in-year budgetary surplus of $100 million into a $40 million deficit which by June 2026 had ballooned to $75 million deficit – was treated to promotions in titles and in remuneration.
The solution by the Supervisor, an individual whose curriculum vitae does not reveal expertise or experience in in-class instruction, chose to chop $7.5 million (10% of the deficit, or about 0.05% 0f the total annual budget) from that deficit total by eliminating the International Language Day program. Was he following the “informed advice” of the same senior staff who had prompted the suspension of the board? Was it a “get even moment” to free the supervisor of a pesky issue by an ever-growing demographic component, or something less elegant?
He and the other supervisors will be the only authority to determine where the $8 billion (or share thereof that could accrue to the boards) from the class action lawsuit against the META group of companies for the deliberate emotional, psychological and cultural damage prompted by constant use of their programs. A similar suit has already been resolved” in the USA.
Parents who have not been able to contact anyone of influence to address their concerns in the last week have directed them to media like the Corriere with the complaint “that money belongs to us”. Indeed.
And the people -senior staff – who knew about the damage authorized the use of the offending programs and encouraged it. Lawyers, please line up.
In the pic below, a scene from “Welcome Back, Kotter”—the famous American sitcom starring John Travolta that aired from 1975 to 1979 (photo from social media)
