Looking Ahead Chairs/Coordinators Meeting

1. Looking AheadChairs/Coordinators Meeting November 8, 2018

2. SCWI • Is the initiative actually what we say it is and what it’s funded to be? • How can we minimize the risks involved in not delivering what the programs are intended to deliver? • Government working on their priorities based on stakeholder feedback

3. Accountability and Efficiency “The government believes that Ontario students can attain a high level of educational achievement without the previous year-over-year trend of budget inflation. Ontario’s government for the people is committed to improving accountability and making efficient and effective use of taxpayer dollars — and we will be looking to our partners in the education sector to help find efficiencies.” August 24, 2018 Bruce Rodrigues B14 Memo, Update: Education Funding for 2018–19“ available online: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/funding/1819/B14_memo_2018_19_gsn_en.pdf

4. Managing Transformation A Modernization Action Plan for Ontario (Ernst & Young LLP, September 21, 2018) • “A key recommendation going forward is for a relentless focus on data and analysis to strengthen the government’s ability to drive greater efficiencies and better outcomes. ” (page 5) • We can demonstrate that we: • “put the client at the centre of every policy, regulation, program, process and delivery model, and that we put data at the heart of every decision about design, administration and execution of public services” (p.27)  • This is encouraging: “the Province can help enhance the autonomy and expertise of its various delivery partners by greatly simplifying its expectations and getting out of the way of day-to-day operations and eliminating weak policy prescriptions (those that begin the process of aiming at outcomes without compelling useful reporting or tying funding to the achievement of targeted outcomes).” (p.28) https://files.ontario.ca/ey_report_2018_en.pdf

5. Continuous Program Improvement • Review of feedback and data (student and financial) • Three areas of concern: • Improved Access for Eligible Students • Program Fidelity • Financial Responsibility • Request for Proposals for 2019-22 and areas of focus for 2018-19 to address concerns

6. Dual Credits Focus • Appropriate student selection, college course section and delivery models that best match the needs of the eligible students will be key areas of focus for Dual Credit programs. • Given that this is not an entitlement program, RPTs will need to focus on careful student selection based on eligibility requirements as outlined in policy.

7. Increasing Access to Dual Credits: Aged 20 Years and Under in Adult Ed Centres • Under 21-year olds in adult learning centres should be included in dual credit programs if they meet the eligibility requirements set out in policy. • Where classes otherwise would be small, RPTs may need to propose two programs in EDCS that would allow one class to run that includes both adolescent and adult students. • Feedback from ADC Regional Forums in 2018 indicated this was a significant area of concern in some parts of the province RPTs may want to consider: • Reviewing the new SCWI document on this topic with Adult Education staff • Determining with Adult Education staff if there are students who are eligible and who may be interested in dual credits

8. Increasing Access to Dual Credits: eLearning ELearning dual credits will only be considered for approval: • where a Dual Credit program is not available at the secondary school and where distance to the college is significant (more than one-hour travel time each way from the secondary school to the closest college campus). • A list of eligible schools by board must be included • RPTs can propose eLearning or blended models of dual credit delivery, in specific situations, for students in the primary target group only • RPTs may want to consider: • Student selection • Supports required to ensure student success

9. Increasing Access to Dual Credits: eLearning • Students and, where appropriate, their parents must be made aware that a dual credit delivered through eLearning does not provide the same experience as a dual credit delivered at day school. • ELearning dual credits must be during the regular school day with the support of a dual credit teacher. • Students will take eLearning dual credits at a secondary school location or on a college campus. • RPTs can propose eLearning or blended models of dual credit delivery, in specific situations, for students in the primary target group only • RPTs may want to consider: • Student selection • Supports required to ensure student success

10. Program Fidelity: SWAC School Within a College (SWAC) programs must be delivered on an existing college campus, where other college students are in attendance and where college services are provided. • These programs are specifically designed for students in their final semester of secondary school. • The expectation is that these students will not return to secondary school following the program as they will have graduated at the end of the SWAC program. • Students in SWAC Programs must attempt both one or more Ontario curriculum credits and one or more dual credit(s) in each semester. • This is a full-time program on campus. • Ages of students • Credits attempted while in SWAC • Within reach of graduation (credit accumulation) • Some students had workplace level courses from high school therefore not qualifying for the programs they were interested in • not being used as a last attempt to help students graduate and transition to pse • RPTs may want to consider: • Reviewing eligibility requirements with those selecting students for SWAC programs • Reducing number of SWAC programs • Connecting with others who may be able to refer students

11. Program Fidelity: Student Selection, Ages • has completed most or all compulsory credits; • can potentially graduate within one year (e.g., already has 22 or more credits) if provided with support; (Dual Credit Programs: Policy and Program Requirements, p. 25) • EDCS data shows that there are lots of students, by age, not close to graduation; therefore, not eligible to participate

12. Program Fidelity: Student Selection, Ages • Appropriate student selection, college course selection and delivery models that best match the needs of the eligible students will be key areas of focus for Dual Credit programs. • EDCS data shows that there are lots of students, by age, not close to graduation; therefore, not eligible to participate • RPTs may want to consider: • Student selection • Communicating this clarification, if necessary, with those involved in student selection • Changing program choices

13. Program Fidelity: Students with OSSDs • “Dual credit programs are intended to assist secondary school students in completing their OSSD” (Dual Credit Programs: Policy and Program Requirements, p. 5) • OnSIS data showed that there are dual credit students who have their diploma prior to entry into dual credit programs

14. Program Fidelity: Students with OSSDs • In order to achieve both of the goals of the dual credit program, students who already have a secondary school diploma by the start of the dual credit are not eligible to participate in dual credit programs. • OnSIS data showed that there are dual credit students who have their diploma prior to entry into dual credit programs • RPTs may want to consider: • Student selection • Communicating this clarification, if necessary, with those involved in student selection • Changing program choices

15. Program Fidelity: Level 1 SCWI Seat Purchase • SCWI seat purchase will only be provided for students in the primary target group. OYAP students are not eligible. • Students must be in the primary target group to be eligible for SCWI Seat Purchase • RPTs may want to consider: • Student selection • Using integrated Level 1s • Reducing Level 1 offerings

16. Program Fidelity: Level 1 TCU Seat Purchase • Level 1 programs with Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities (MTCU) Seat Purchase for apprentices with Registered Training Agreements (RTA’s). • Students must be in OYAP in order to be eligible for MTCU Seat Purchase • Must have a Registered Training Agreement (RTA) in advance of starting the Level 1 • RPTs may want to consider: • Student selection • Using integrated Level 1s • Reducing Level 1 offerings

17. Program Fidelity: Summer Dual Credits Summer dual credits were intended for: • Students needing one credit to graduate (in the case of stand alone summer dual credits) • Students needing two credits to graduate (in the case of summer SWAC programs) • EDCS data indicates that there are students who are under 17 years of age participating in Summer dual credits • Students must be in the primary target group in order to be eligible

18. Program Fidelity: Summer Dual Credits In the Operational Details section of the proposal, please describe: • why this delivery model has been selected rather than regular day school delivery • what supports will be provided to dual credit students by the college and by the school board and how these supports will be accessed • the roles, responsibilities and supports to be provided by the dual credit teacher • EDCS data indicates that there are students who are under 17 years of age participating in Summer dual credits • Students must be in the primary target group in order to be eligible • RPTs may want to consider: • Student selection • Reducing programming

19. Program Fidelity: On-campus Learning Experience for All Students • As there is value in having all students complete at least a portion of their dual credit on a college campus (main campus or satellite), for dual credits delivered at a secondary school, describe … how students will be provided with an on-campus learning experience. Funding for one trip to the nearest college campus should be requested under Transportation. In most cases, the visit would be to the closest college campus. • Students benefit from an on-campus experience to help them visualize themselves as college students • 28% of credits were delivered at a secondary school in 2017-18 RPTs may want to consider: • Grouping existing dual credit classes and transporting them to the college at the same time • Including future potential students, if space permits

20. Program Fidelity: SHSM Programs • RPTs should consider if their existing Dual Credit programs for SHSM students are meeting the needs of their college bound students. …The connection between the sector and the college course must be obvious. • EDCS data shows that there are SHSM programs with few, or no, SHSM students • 63% of students in SHSM dual credits were reported being in SHSM RPTs may want to consider: • If their application/registration forms accurately captures this information • New SHSM dual credit programs as replacements for existing ones

21. Program Fidelity: Dual Credit Teacher Forums It is expected that each RPT will deliver at least one forum: • all dual credit teachers and college faculty receive orientation around dual credits, including roles and responsibilities, policies and procedures. • college faculty and dual credit teachers discuss the content of the dual credit, students and supports. • share successful practices in such areas as instruction, assessment and evaluation These are not intended to provide basic information on dual credits for school staff not involved in the delivery of the program. • Activity and Forum Monitoring reports indicate that, in some cases, Dual Credit Teacher forums do not include dual credit teachers and college faculty • Need to reinforce policy and procedures with dual credit teachers and college faculty • Need to provide time for collaboration RPTs may want to consider: • Holding small sessions to best meet the needs of dual credit educators

22. Being financially responsible while meeting the needs of the eligible students • RPTs will need to select appropriate delivery models and dual credit courses in order to ensure that sufficient funding is generated through the benchmark for the college to run the program and for the board to provide the dual credit teacher. • Dual credit college courses for the primary target group are not designed as an enhanced career pathway activity. • Requests for additional funding to run small classes • RPTs may want to consider: • Integrated (top-up) courses • Blended adolescent/adult dual credits • Limit course offerings and selecting courses that may have a broader appeal

23. Financial Responsibility: Dual Credit programs located in the community • Please use the following new benchmark. This will be the amount of the current benchmark for delivery at a secondary school ($585/course/student). • Where necessary, RPTs will be able to request facility funding (costed by the week) as part of their Miscellaneous request. • Colleges increasingly focusing on community-based programming • Schools and colleges may not have facilities for program delivery close to students • RPTs may want to consider: • If programs delivered in the community are providing students a college experience

24. Financial Responsibility: Night School Dual Credits for Adolescents In the Operational Details section of the proposal, please describe: • why this delivery model has been selected rather than regular day school delivery • what supports will be provided to dual credit students by the college and by the school board and how these supports will be accessed • RPTs must describe the roles, responsibilities and supports to be provided by the dual credit teacher • 30% of students 16 years of age or age “unknown” • 76% in the PTG • Higher per student delivery cost as we fund the dual credit teacher • RPTs may want to consider: • Student selection • Reducing programming • Course choice

25. Financial Responsibility: Dual Credits at Nearest College Campus Students are only eligible to take dual credits: • offered within their RPT and • at the closest college (main or satellite/regional campus) to their secondary school. • Selected students in RPTs with more than one college are eligible to choose from any of the courses offered by the closest college to their secondary school. • Transportation accounted for 17% of approved dual credit funding • Transportation accounted for 44% of underspending in dual credit programs • Currently, not all dual credit students have the option of selecting which dual credit course to take • 88% transportation expended RPTs may want to consider: • Course selection • Increasing use of integrated courses • Focusing on college experience rather than career clarification

26. Financial Responsibility: Activities and Forum Funding vs Participants • In cases where the benchmark either generates too much or too little funding to run an activity or forum, RPTs are asked to detail their request in the Miscellaneous section of the online application rather than requesting benchmark funding. • EDCS data indicates there are some Activities and Forums that had far fewer than requested participants, but spent most or all of the approved funding RPTs may want to consider: • Using previous year’s data to propose more realistic numbers • Not using benchmarks; costing out the event instead

27. SCWI • Is the initiative actually what we say it is and what it’s funded to be? • How can we minimize the risks involved in not delivering what the programs are intended to deliver?