REPORT ON EXPERT DISCUSSION OF REFORM OF FIRST

NATION
ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION







SEPTEMBER 20, 2012







2

REPORT ON EXPERT DISCUSSION OF REFORM OF FIRST NATION
ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION: SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS

Introduction
As part of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canadas implementation of the
commitments in Budget 2012, the Assistant Deputy Minister of Education and Social
Development Programs and Partnerships brought together four individuals with extensive
experience as analysts or practitioners or both in First Nations education. (For
convenience we henceforth refer to the four as experts.) The purpose was to provide
her with advice on legislative options supporting First Nation elementary and secondary
education reform. The four experts have either written on First Nation education or are
practitioners in the field, and have made acknowledged contributions to policy
development in this area. Annex A provides the names and biographies of the members.
This discussion of legislative options is meant to provide input into Departmental
analysis in preparation for consultations with First Nations in the winter of 2012/13.
The experts met with senior AANDC officials for five days in June and July 2012 to
discuss the following topics:
Mission, policy goals and foundational elements of the contemplated legislation
Potential content of legislation (governance, standards, funding, language and
culture)
Legislative approaches and implementation questions
This paper summarizes the advice and feedback provided at the meetings. Following a
background in Section I, Section II addresses the overarching purpose, mission and
policy goals of the contemplated reform. Section III summarizes the expert advice on
four foundational elements that should inform the legislation. Section IV outlines key
features of the legislative approach recommended by the experts in response to materials
prepared by the Department.
The paper represents the views of the experts only. The ideas and opinions expressed in
this paper do not represent the views of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development
Canada or the Government of Canada.

3

I. Background
The experts share the view of many reports and commentators that the need for reform is
urgent. First Nation education is in crisis. While there is progress in improving students
education, the pace of improvement is unacceptably slow.
The experts agreed that most First Nations schools on reserves lack the full range of
supports available to non-reserve schools and that a sustainable, high-quality and
culturally relevant First Nations education system cannot be achieved without these
supports.
Many First Nations operate stand-alone schools largely on a village model of education.
Most First Nations schools on reserves do have some elements of support from various
First Nations aggregate educational organizations, which have been created by First
Nations joining together in an effort to fill the institutional void and provide second-level
services. But due to financial, legal and other barriers, these supports usually fall far
short of what is available to off-reserve schools. Where school success occurs, it often
must rely on extraordinary efforts of individual principals, teachers, students, parents,
education/band administrators, Chiefs and other leaders rather than on an institutional
structure that sustains and fosters better outcomes.
In contrast, provincial public schools are organized under school boards, which, in
addition to playing a major role in managing schools, also provide shared second-level
professional, educational, and management services to schools. School boards operate
under education ministries, third-level institutions that finance, develop, monitor and
enforce standards set out in provincial education acts.
The federal governments New Paths to Education Program, First Nation Student Success
Program, and Education Partnerships Program have assisted First Nations recently in the
further development of educational organizations across multiple First Nations. In the
experts view, however, time-limited application-driven programs cannot substitute for
the development of a comprehensive First Nations education system with clear roles, a
range of educational supports and reciprocal accountabilities set out in a law.
In addition, the experts noted that there is chronic dissatisfaction regarding funding of
First Nations education. A system of First Nations education will require reliable,
adequate, on-going funding. The federal government has already shown its willingness
to provide additional funds for First Nations education in the 2012 Budget. The experts
agreed that additional funding must go towards establishing the critical elements of a
First Nations education system and not be used to apply temporary Band-Aids to the
existing non-system.
4

Finally, the experts indicated that they believe that First Nations should have jurisdiction
over First Nations education. However, to effectively exercise that jurisdiction, First
Nations need to have essential educational institutions, without which First Nation
education success is unlikely. Without such institutions, jurisdiction becomes an empty
promise.
The experts noted that jurisdiction in education should not arbitrarily mean that any
First Nations education institution, i.e., schools or school boards, would be functioning in
isolation. First Nations want their schools and the anticipated education infrastructures
that will serve to exercise jurisdiction to give their students all the educational
opportunities available to all students living off-reserve.
To do this, some First Nations will seek to ensure that the new First Nations school
systems will work closely in partnership with provincial education systems; some may
pursue a relationship with provincial education authorities that is more selective; and
some may choose to create school systems that acknowledge provincial education
requirements but are founded on First Nations-defined education goals, objectives and
outcomes.
In short, the experts saw three goals for First Nations educational reform:
1. Establishing a First Nations education system, to provide high quality culturally
relevant education;
2. Assuring adequate and reliable funding of all the elements of a modern education
system; and
3. Recognizing First Nation control of First Nations education in a federal law, and
providing the institutional tools that permit First Nations actually to exercise that
control.
A First Nation Education Act, which the federal government committed to introducing in
Budget 2012, could be an effective vehicle for achieving these goals.

5

II. Purpose, Mission and Policy Goals
The experts identified three alternatives for a First Nations Education Act.
Alternative 1: The Act could, in theory, be similar to a provincial Education Act. This
would make the Act an all-encompassing statute covering all aspects of First Nations
education. The experts advised that this type of Act was not appropriate, for a variety of
reasons. First, the diversity of First Nations and cultures, as well as the fact that First
Nations schools operate in the context of differing provincial and territorial systems,
makes it difficult to see how a federal Act could parallel provincial Education Acts.
Second, they believe that education jurisdiction should reside primarily with First Nations
rather than the federal government. A provincial type of Education Act calls on the
federal government to regulate First Nation schools at a level of detail which is not
consistent with First Nations control of First Nations education. Finally, any new
federal law on education should be non-coercive in that First Nations could choose
whether or not to opt in.
Alternative 2: The Act could be designed in a way that would require First Nation
schools to meet defined educational outcomes, but remain neutral about the development
of First Nation education organizations of appropriate scale. This approach would
entail the government offering financial incentives to First Nations schools that do well,
and likely financial penalties for those that do not. The experts view was that this
approach would not build the school systems that can help students attain better outcomes
over time. Schools facing the most difficult challenges would be the most disadvantaged
by this approach, while the schools that are now well organized and successful would
inevitably get most of the benefits. Second, measuring the educational outcomes that
mark success in an objective, equitable and meaningful manner across all First Nations
would be very challenging. Should schools in the lower mainland of BC have the same
criteria as the schools in the James Bay area of Ontario?
Alternative 3: Rather than an omnibus education Act that would govern every First
Nation school and the education within that school, a new Act could be designed with a
much more focussed purpose: to enable First Nations wishing to do so to come together
and create First Nations school systems. The new Act could set out the functions
regional institutions need to perform, as well as parameters on how they are structured. It
should include a clear federal commitment to funding at levels at least equivalent to
similarly situated provincial boards. The new statute should require the federal
government to enable and support professional, accountable First Nation institutions of
education building upon prior efforts of First Nations and their education organizations
to date. It could equip regional First Nation institutions with the appropriate mandates to
negotiate arrangements with provincial ministries and school boards, should they choose
to do so.
6

The consensus of the experts was that the new Act should reflect Alternative 3.
Mission
Following from the discussion of the purpose of this Act, the experts came to agreement
on the following mission statement:
To build a professional, accountable education system to help improve the educational
outcomes and affirm the cultures and languages of First Nation students
The above statement emphasizes the pre-eminent need for building an education system
at this stage. The mission statement entails the overarching policy goals of the
legislation, as described below.
Policy Goals
To establish the structures, standards, monitoring and investments that will:
1. Help First Nation students to achieve equivalent educational outcomes, at
grade, whether they study on reserve or in provincial systems.
2. Support the development of pedagogies and curriculum content that sustain
First Nation languages and are consistent with students tribal cultures.
The policy goals entail both required inputs and desired outcomes. The inputs speak to
the structures, educational standards and accountabilities that the statute would establish
or enable. The desired outcomes are the ultimate goals of the initiative.

First Nation children should enjoy the same opportunities as other Canadians to graduate
from high school, then pursue post-secondary education or enter the labour market. The
desired outcome is academic success that is similar to students elsewhere in Canada.
Given the significant challenges still facing First Nation communities, however, the
experts cautioned that while some improvements may be realized quickly, it will take
time to build education systems which routinely have the capacity to achieve educational
outcomes equivalent to those of students in provincial systems.
The second policy goal one emphasized as equally important as the first is to affirm
First Nation cultures and languages. There are two reasons for this emphasis. The first is
the greater likelihood of improved outcomes. First Nation students begin their formal
education with values that are tribal in origin and reinforced by their families and
communities. If reflected in pedagogy and curricula, those values will bear on student
retention and education outcomes, and create a relevant and positive learning
environment. The second reason is Canadas history in First Nation education. For those
First Nations opting in, the new legislation would replace the education clauses of the
7

Indian Act, which still legally sanctions residential schools. A law that explicitly respects
and supports First Nation languages and cultures would mark a powerful symbol of
change, and a concrete means to promote reconciliation.

III. Foundational Elements
To help achieve the policy goals outlined above, four foundational elements for the
legislation were identified:
1. First Nation control at scale
2. Equivalence to provincial systems
3. Regional institutional supports
4. Reciprocal accountabilities
1. First Nation Control at Scale
The legislation could recognize the role of First Nations in delivering education to First
Nation students resident on reserve, which is not now recognized in law except where
specific Acts have been passed, such as for Mikmaw Kinamatnewey (MK) in Nova
Scotia. At the same time, the authority for that delivery could be organized at differing
levels appropriate to the type of educational services being delivered, from responsibility
for individual schools, which would include provision for local parent and student
engagement, to responsibility for groups of schools, which would include provision for
organized democratic First Nations authority. Professional or training associations for
First Nation educators could also be recognized.
First Nation control at scale means provision of the institutional tools to realize First
Nation control over First Nation education. The federal government has acknowledged
the principle of First Nation control as a guide to its education policy since 1973
1
but it
has not provided the means of putting that principle into practice. The new legislation
could promote the development of a professional First Nation education system by
recognizing and funding First Nation-led organizations to provide second-level and third-
level services as part of First Nation education systems. Ideally, second-level First
Nations education organizations would become responsible for overall management and
financial administration for First Nation schools within their system. The organizations

1
See: appearance of Jean Chrtien, then-Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, before the House of
Commons Standing Committee on Indian Affairs and Northern Development (Minutes and Evidence,
Issue No. 18, 24 May 1973, 11:20); and the letter of response from Minister Chrtien to National Indian
Brotherhood President George Manuel agreeing with the principles of Indian Control of Indian Education
(dated February 2, 1973).
8

would be accountable to band members and councils, as well as to parents and students.
At a local level, parent councils, elders, and community groups would play a role in
managing schools and providing local input into regional institutions.
The experts saw a fundamental role for chiefs and councils in setting the overall direction
of how elementary and secondary education is delivered in their communities, but
envisioned accountability institutions extending beyond chiefs and councils. Band
councils would determine whether a Band seeks to opt in under the new Education Act.
Band councils would decide which regional organization to form or join, which could be
a First Nation aggregate or if they preferred a provincial school board. Finally, chiefs
and councilors would serve as champions of local school improvement initiatives and
encourage local school councils.
2. Equivalence to Provincial Systems
Current agreements between Ottawa and First Nations require schools on-reserve to
educate to levels comparable to those found in similar off-reserve schools in the
province of instruction. The experts cautioned against continued use of the term
comparability as the standard. It is an inherently vague term (when precisely are
schools not comparable?) and it has been used haphazardly, seemingly only to enforce
requirements on First Nation schools, without any corresponding accountability of the
federal government to ensure that First Nations schools have the wherewithal to achieve
the standard. Instead, the clearer and more understandable concept of equivalence
could be used, with the understanding that it imposes a reciprocal responsibility on First
Nations and on the government. The experts proposed the standard be that schools on
reserve provide an education equivalent to that of similar schools off reserve, and that the
funding and other supports should also be equivalent to similar off reserve schools.
Equivalent does not necessarily mean the same, any more than the expectations of
equivalent education in Catholic and public or French and English schools in provincial
school systems means that these schools will be identical. For clarity, the experts agreed
that an education equivalent to that of similar off-reserve schools does not mean that on-
reserve schools must simply replicate the curriculum content. First Nations should be
able to adapt or transform provincial curricula, or create their own curricula, to help
students realize equivalent outcomes (although some may wish to adopt provincial
curricula). Some among the experts noted an increasing willingness on the part of
provinces to recognize the equivalence of systems with differing curricula and
accommodate them. They urged the Department to adopt a similar approach as part of a
reform scenario.
Equivalence could be the guiding principle to develop a more detailed list of inputs and
standards for government under the Act and for First Nations that opt in to the new Act.
9

Some examples which are described in more detail in Annexes B and C could
include:
Transparent formula-based funding to schools equivalent to that of similar off-
reserve schools
Provincially recognized credentials for students
Teacher/principal certification
Elements of curricula
Student assessments and reporting to parents and the community
School operations
3. Regional Institutional Supports
The legislation could support the creation (or the further development of existing)
regional First Nations organizations to provide second-level support services to
aggregations of First Nation schools. These second-level services could include
management of individual schools and other functions performed in the provincial
systems by school boards. The First Nations school board authority to manage the
schools could be delegated from the local community, which would be part of the local
communitys decision to opt in.
First Nations school boards would need to work closely with school boards in the
surrounding provincial system, because many of the First Nations students will attend
schools in both systems during their schooling years. As well, First Nations school
boards would administer the tuition agreements for their students attending provincial
schools as well as reciprocal arrangements for off-reserve students attending reserve
schools. Partnerships and close collaboration could go beyond administrative
arrangements to sharing of some resources. (See Annex D for a list of possible
secondary service level functions.)
Other First Nations organizations could be empowered to provide some tertiary services
to First Nations school boards, analogous to the role now played by provincial education
ministries. In some provinces there might be a single First Nations school board to
provide both secondary and tertiary services. The experts felt that the arrangements
supported by the Act must be flexible to permit First Nations to organize their schools
reflecting their own cultures and histories. Tertiary institutions would work closely with
provincial Ministries and be responsible for negotiating regional agreements on standards
and information-sharing with the federal and provincial governments.
Alternatively, as is already the case for some First Nations, the legislation should enable
those First Nations that wish to do so to link directly into provincial systems, either
individually or as aggregates, through service or co-management agreements.
10

The experts agreed that aggregation is a crucial element of reform. While aggregate
institutions cannot guarantee the leadership, good governance and professionalism that all
schools require, schools are much less likely to attain these qualities on a sustainable
basis without them. The benefits of aggregation stressed in the discussions were:
Improved deployment and management of educational human resources;
Improved accountability of First Nation schools, via secondary and tertiary
institutions supervising school management;
More scope for career and professional development among educators on First
Nations reserves;
A voice for opted-in First Nations in negotiations with governments;
Greater efficiencies and economies of scale through delivery of pooled services;
Increased opportunities for the research, development and implementation of
culturally appropriate curricula, learning content and pedagogies.

A national First Nations education agency would also be possible, which would have no
direct administrative role, but could be useful in fulfilling some functions under the
legislation. Annex E outlines possible roles for a national institution.
4. Reciprocal Accountabilities
As a precondition to improving outcomes, the legislation could clarify the roles, functions
and responsibilities of the federal government, First Nations and their regional
organizations. It should expand the current emphasis on fiscal accountability to include
educational accountability, emphasizing reciprocity on the part of all parties.
The following accountability measures emerged from the discussions.
Clearly defined roles, functions and responsibilities of schools, secondary and
tertiary First Nation institutions, First Nations, and the Government of Canada.
A federal commitment in the Act to a stable, transparent funding mechanism that
would provide funds equivalent to levels provided to similarly-situated provincial
schools. Further discussions of the funding element can be found in Annex B.
A corresponding commitment by First Nation regional institutions to fulfill the
responsibilities for funds received, to share third-party audits demonstrating
financial accountability, and to seek economies of scale as a means to promote
sustainability.
Regular assessments and reporting on educational outcomes at school and
regional levels, adapted from and incorporating assessments and reporting as is
done for similar schools in the relevant provincial system. The reports would be
shared with students and parents, as well as band councils, the federal
11

government and, possibly, also the public if this is the practice in the relevant
provincial system.
A school management and performance monitoring responsibility for First Nation
regional institutions and a responsibility to intervene, as required, with
underperforming schools (or, for third-level organizations, with struggling
second-level institutions).
Accountability of the boards of regional institutions to community members via
direct election of a majority of trustees; local direct community involvement
mechanisms through parent councils and other means.
Negotiated agreements outlining respective roles, data sharing, shared standards,
and reciprocal accountabilities for First Nation students learning in provincial
systems.

IV. Key Features of the Legislative Approach Discussed
In response to materials prepared by the Department, the experts discussed which
general legislative approaches were most promising. The key features to emerge from
that discussion were:
1. Opt-in legislation
2. Language and culture
3. Regional management of schools
4. Parameters around internal governance
5. Dedicated statutory funding

1. Opt-in legislation
The legislation should be enabling to give First Nations the choice of whether or not to
opt in. In the expert view, there is an appetite for education system-building reform
among First Nations. In addition to adequate and reliable funding, opting in would be
attractive to many First Nations now in various stages of building their education system.
Yet take-up would necessarily be gradual. Some First Nations would wish to enter early
and have the organizational capacity to do so. Many others would require further
capacity development. A transitional plan would be needed as part of the Act, which
would allow First Nations to agree to opt in under the Act, and then be assisted in
developing a school board or other aggregate structures. Entry into the statute could
occur in phases supported by a development program like the current support in the
First Nations Land Management Act.

12

2. Language and culture
Strengthening First Nations languages and cultures is a core goal of the legislative
reform. This area should be treated as a key aspect of the reciprocal accountability
relationship between First Nations and the federal government. The legislation could
commit the Government of Canada to provide funding for language/cultural curriculum
and pedagogy to opted-in First Nation school boards that wish to offer it. In return, the
organizations would establish cultural outcome measures and assess and report on them.
One expert with deep pedagogical expertise provided words of caution on how cultural
content should be introduced in the classroom. Rather than being taught as a distinct
subject which is of arguable benefit to either cultural or learning outcomes First
Nation cultures should be embedded in the learning experience, i.e., in the learning
material, in the curricula, and in the pedagogy.
3. Regional management of schools
School management by school boards in some key areas is a basic activity of all school
boards, regardless of the system. Regional First Nation second-level institutions would
also need to assume some management functions. As, for example, MK in Nova
Scotia, First Nations could delegate up the authority for school management to the
school board as part of the opting in process. Alternatively, First Nations school
boards could own the schools (with local parent councils for input) as with school
boards in provincial systems. Suggested management roles for regional First Nations
organizations include hiring/firing teachers, negotiating salaries and benefits,
maintaining school buildings, and intervening with struggling schools.
While many aggregate First Nations educational organizations are functioning as school
boards and managing their schools, there are other aggregate Fist Nations educational
organizations that provide secondary support services but do not have a role in school
management. As a transitional measure with the understanding that these more limited
organizations could evolve over time towards the role of a school board members
suggested that the legislation might acknowledge two kinds of second-level institutions:
those providing pooled support services only and those providing support services plus
management of schools, with financing appropriately adjusted to reflect the differing
roles.
4. Parameters around internal governance
The statute should establish some broad parameters on how regional organizations should
be governed, with a preference for elected boards. Election of a majority of the trustees
would establish direct accountability of boards to community members. The Cree School
Board in northern Quebec has had community-elected board members since its inception
in 1976 and it is directly accountable to its communities through the board. In addition,
13

this would give First Nation people a further opportunity to engage in public life through
schools.
Another aspect of governance would be the creation of local, community school councils
whose input would assist the management of schools.
5. Dedicated statutory funding
A simple funding principle should be embedded in the legislation. That principle should
commit the federal government to fund First Nation regional aggregates at a level
equivalent to similarly situated provincial school boards. However, some activities could
be funded for opted-in First Nations school boards across the country regardless of
provincial practices. Examples are full-day kindergarten or language and culture
initiatives.
First Nations secondary and tertiary organizations, like provincial school boards, would
receive their budgets directly from AANDC. There was discussion of ring-fencing
education funds going to organizations, requiring that funding for education be used
solely for that purpose. First Nation leaders have called for more generous financial
support of reserve schools. If the government increases per student funding, it is
important to have good accounting practices to assure all stakeholders including band
members as well as the federal government of actual disbursements and to thereby
avoid mistrust.

14

Annex A: Biographies of Members
Harvey McCue is an aboriginal educator and specialist in aboriginal self-government with more
than 30 years experience as a teacher, curriculum developer, researcher, author and executive
manager in Indian education and the federal government. Mr. McCue is a consultant in First
Nations education, aboriginal health, and self-government with experience in evaluations, cross-
cultural training and human resources.
Mr. McCues expertise in First Nation education is nationally recognized and is reflected in his
extensive experience as a teacher and administrator, as well as his considerable body of written
work including, Analysis of INAC Education Expenditures in 2002 and, First Nations 2nd Level
Services (prepared for INAC) in 2006, and a literature review also prepared for AANDC on First
Nations elementary, secondary, and postsecondary education.
Mr. McCue has held positions as an Associate Professor of Native Studies at Trent University,
the Director of Education Services with the Cree School Board in James Bay, Quebec, and the
Director of Education and the Chief Executive Officer of the Mikmaq Education Authority in
Nova Scotia.
Michael Mendelson is Senior Scholar at the Caledon Institute of Social Policy. Prior to his
appointment to the Caledon Institute, he was the Deputy Secretary (Deputy Minister) of Cabinet
Office in Ontario. He has served as an Assistant Deputy Minister in Ontarios Ministries of
Finance, Community Services and Health. In Manitoba, he was Secretary to Treasury Board and
Deputy Minister of Social Services.
Mr. Mendelson has been an active participant in several of Canadas major developments in
federal-provincial relations, finance and social policy. He co-led Ontarios delegation on division
of powers in the Charlottetown Constitutional negotiations. In the Federal Privy Council's
Ministry of State for Social Development, he played a critical role in the development of the
Canada Health Act. He was a consultant for the National Forum on Health and the Parliamentary
Task Force on Federal-Provincial Fiscal Relations. As Deputy Minister in Manitoba he oversaw
the recognition of First Nations Child Family Service agencies on reserve and the establishment
of the first major off-reserve Aboriginal controlled child and family preventive agency in Canada.
Mr. Mendelson has published many articles on social and fiscal policy, as well as a book on the
issue of universality. He has been a Visiting Professor at the University of Toronto, School of
Social Work. As a result of his 2009 publication, Why We Need a First Nations Education Act
(among others), Mr. Mendelson is widely recognized as an expert in the field of First Nation
education legislation.
John Richards is a professor with Simon Fraser Universitys Public Policy School. He has
written extensively on Aboriginal education. His most recent publications on this issue are
"Aboriginal Education in Quebec: a Benchmarking Exercise" and "Aboriginal Education:
Strengthening the Foundations". He has written extensively on social policy in Canada, primarily
via the C.D. Howe Institute, where he holds the Roger Phillips chair in social policy. He co-edits
15

(with Henry Milner) Inroads, a Canadian policy journal, and his current social policy focus is on
Aboriginal policy.
During the 1970s, he served as an elected member of the legislature in the province of
Saskatchewan. In addition, he has undertaken teaching and research in Bangladesh over the last
two decades. He heads a modest policy institute linked to the International University of Business
Agriculture and Technology.
Gordon Martell is a member of the Waterhen Lake Cree First Nation in Saskatchewan and is
widely respected as a First Nation educator. Mr Martells experience in First Nations and Mtis
education began in Beauval and continued with the Greater Saskatoon Catholic Schools where he
has served as a teacher, principal, co-ordinator of Indian and Mtis education and, most recently,
as the superintendent of learning services.
Beyond his local community, Mr Martell has served on the First Nations and Mtis Education
Provincial Advisory Committee, the Canadian Teachers Federations Committee for Aboriginal
Voice, the Awasis Special Subject Council, and other provincial committees dealing with
education, governance and community development. In 2002, he was a member of the Ministers
National Working Group on Education, a national aboriginal group convened by the federal
minister of Indian Affairs. He was also a member of the expert panel on student assessment
results in Saskatchewan.
Mr Martell is currently a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Educational Administration at the
University of Saskatchewan. Mr Martell has a particular expertise in the responsibility of
governments to consult with Indigenous peoples in policy development and on the experiences of
Indigenous educators and their contributions to post-colonial education through indigenizing
processes that shape public education.










16

Annex B: Detailed Discussion of Funding
Adequate and reliable funding would be among the core obligations of the federal
government in a new education system. First Nations would be much less likely to
accept a statute entailing substantial legal responsibilities without an assurance in law of
the required funding. While Parliament would prescribe the principle of equivalence
which would determine the amount of funding, the detailed formula and other
mechanisms for calculating specific amounts would be in the regulations under the Act.
Recognizing the possibility of financial emergencies and other unforeseen circumstances
the Act would also have to give the Minister or the Cabinet the power to override the
legislative determination of contributions.
The point concerning dedicated statutory funding is outlined in the main report above. In
addition, the following points arose in the funding discussion:
Transparency in amount and means of allocation
Achieving transparency and consistency in funding opted in First Nations secondary and
tertiary organizations would be critical. Possibly a national financing commission or
committee could make a recommendation to the Minister.
Dispute resolution mechanism
A simple non-legalistic second review or other appeal mechanism could be built in to
the legislation, should First Nation regional institutions dispute the funding allocation
levels. The objective would be to avoid lengthy and costly disputes over funding levels
that could end up in litigation or highly politicized.
Funding for self-governing First Nations
The legislation should be available to First Nations in self-government agreements, if
they wished to opt in and if their organizations met the conditions for opting in. There is
nothing inherently contradictory between self-government and accepting a conditional
grant or other voluntary arrangements.
Funding for school infrastructure
Equivalence with provincial systems is far from being achieved in physical infrastructure
front. Beyond overcrowding and aging infrastructure on many First Nations, many of the
school assets are deteriorating prematurely and a number of schools pose health and
safety concerns. Funding pressures require the Department to prioritize major capital
projects. The Department received new dedicated funds in the 2012 Budget, but can
usually afford to construct only one to two schools annually.
Provincial governments have separate capital budgets, which they allocate to school
boards. Some found this an issue worth flagging. Possibly, at this stage, the legislation
17

could distinguish between procedures for financing new capital and maintaining existing
schools. The Department could continue to manage the overall budget for school
infrastructure; regional second-level institutions could receive a budget and responsibility
for maintaining the schools. Generally, the integration of school capital and maintenance
into the overall management of education was understood as important, but the means to
integrate effectively would require further work and discussion, and might be
incorporated in to a second round of amendments to the Act a few years hence.











18

Annex C: Detailed Discussion of Standards
Regional First Nations organizations would be mandated to develop standards in areas
outlined in the Act. Regional First Nations organizations would develop the standards in
negotiation with their provincial counterparts. The standards would then apply to
member schools and, where applicable, to the regional organizations themselves.
The discussions did not clarify which organization should be charged with monitoring
and enforcing third-level standards in cases where no dedicated First Nation third-level
exists.
Graduation certificates
The legislation could require that First Nation regional organizations either issue a
provincial graduation certificate, or negotiate with provincial ministries the terms of
accepting a First Nation certificate. Once a regional agreement with the province is in
place, issuing graduation certificates could be a third-level function of a regional First
Nation institution.
Teacher/principal certification
Teachers and potentially also principals at First Nation schools should be certified in
the province where they teach. However, experts also observed that provincially certified
teachers often lack the skills required to teach on First Nations, which have distinct
values, traditions and social dynamics. They suggested that regional organizations might
be empowered, as part of their human resources function, to require teachers to gain
additional certification as preparation to teach on First Nation schools. How and who
could provide this certification could be negotiated by First Nation regional organizations
with universities and provincial education ministries.
Curricula
The educational outcomes of students will not change dramatically if the reform focuses
solely on the administrative structures of First Nation education. Some experts stressed
that First Nations children have not been well served by provincial curricula. As such,
the legislation should facilitate and encourage the new structures to alter and even
transform provincial curricula to ensure cultural, social and historical relevance, and to
negotiate recognition of those curricula with provincial ministries. Other experts
observed that provincial curricula have themselves changed a great deal in recent years,
and stressed that First Nation organizations may wish to collaborate with provinces in
developing joint language and cultural initiatives.


19

Assessments and reporting
First Nation students should be required to complete the standard provincial skills
assessments and tests for literacy, numeracy, and conceptual abilities, where these exist.
The assessment results should be used to measure the performance of schools and
regional aggregates, to the extent that this is done for schools in the provincial system.
Some stated that assessment results should be accessible in the public domain if these
were accessible for public schools in the province (as is, for example, the case in
Ontario).
One function of regional organizations would be to ensure the tests are administered, and
to negotiate adaptation of them with provincial ministries. To facilitate measurement of
progress toward equivalence in outcomes, the federal legislation could require that
reporting of graduation rates and other milestones use the same measures as those used
by the corresponding province.
In addition to assessment and reporting regarding provincial exams (adapted, where
necessary), regional organizations could be given the responsibility to develop and apply
measures concerning language and cultural outcomes. With input from local school
councils, they could also measure other outcomes they deem to be relevant.
The experts recognized the current reluctance of some First Nations and regional
organizations to subject students studying on reserve to provincial assessments.
However, some stated that this reluctance would likely be alleviated if organizations
could adapt tests, and if funding levels for students were equivalent to those of
neighbouring provincial school systems.
School operations
Some experts suggested that the legislation should empower/require regional
organizations to pass bylaws in areas such as school safety, discipline, school calendars
and attendance.




20

Annex D: Functions and Size of First Nation Regional
Organizations
Suggested functions
The following list outlines the general functions of First Nation regional organizations.
Organizations might be prepared in capacity and will to assume all functions at once.
However, others would need to need to evolve and gain capacity before assuming the full
agenda of functions listed below
1. Provide pooled education and professional development service supports to
aggregations of reserve schools.
2. Manage reserve schools. Ideally, management services would encompass the full
range that school boards provide in provincial systems. At a minimum, they should
include hiring and firing of teachers and principals, negotiating salaries and benefits,
maintaining schools, and intervening where schools are struggling.
3. Track the performance of students and schools, with targets set for the short,
medium and long term.
4. Exercise authority to draft bylaws and policies in such areas as discipline (codes of
conduct, suspension, expulsion) and more detailed areas of daily operation of schools.
5. On behalf of member schools, negotiate with provincial counterparts such things
as tuition agreements, service and data sharing agreements, professional development
opportunities, and accountability relationships for First Nation students attending
neighbouring schools.
6. Where established through agreements with provincial and federal levels, fulfill
some third-level type functions (such as curriculum development, setting of school
calendar, attendance requirements, class size, and instructional hours).
7. Receive the funding for all educational services provided directly from the federal
government. Manage budget and make required allocations to individual schools.
Members also discussed the optimal size for regional aggregate organizations. A number
suggested was an optimal floor of roughly 1,000 students per second-level aggregate.
However, it was also suggested that the statute should not prescribe a specific size or
number, but rather focus on the scale required to achieve professional capacity.


21

Annex E: Potential Roles for a National Institution
Experts were of the view a national agency for First Nation education would be a
desirable aspect of the reform. Such an institution would have no direct administration or
enforcement responsibilities in systems that are fundamentally regional. A number of
possible roles a national organization could take on, either singly or in combination
include:
Promotion of excellence in education leadership: Provide and promote
professional training of education administrators and leaders, share best practices
in school improvement, provide moral purpose, vision and advocacy for First
Nations education, interface with Council of Ministers of Education Canada.
Institutional advisory services: Provide advice and training in institutional
capacity-building, partnering with provincial institutions, promoting readiness for
the legislation, acting as an intermediary between regional aggregates and the
federal government.
Independent assessments/recommendations: Apply funding formula and develop
published annual recommendation to Minister, possibly verify/certify readiness of
aggregates to operate under the legislation.
Research: Undertake or commission research that will advance and inform First
Nations education.
Performance measurement: Provide a national overview on the performance of
First Nations education; develop indicators for measuring culture/language
outcomes; address issues related to OCAP and data sharing.