number of specialties. In 2006-07, a more detailed breakdown of specialist teachers was introduced. In the data set prepared for the project, I have included the detail for specialist teachers for the period 2006-07 to 2015-16. I have included the teachers” data in the totals “other for the four main categories. As is the case with other aspects of the EFIS Appendix H data, it is not always clear that boards have prepared and entered the data on a consistent basis, either within a given year or over time. As a result, some caution should be exercised in using the data, with greater caution required as the data used becomes more granular. For comparison purposes, the summary data are expressed as ratios of students to teachers. The summary results are as follows: Including only teachers in the regular program, the elementary student/teacher ratio declined from 21.8 in 2002-03 to 19.2 in 2015-16 in public boards. The corresponding figures for the secondary regular program are 18.3 and 17.3. Including both regular program and special education program teachers, the elementary student/teacher ratio declined from 18.7 in 2002-03 to 16.8 in 2015-16. The corresponding figures for secondary are 17.0 and 15.5. Occasional teachers Although the EFIS system does not capture FTE data for supply (occasional) teachers, it does report expenditures on their wages and salaries on an annual basis, board by board. To put the data into perspective for comparative purposes, both over time and among boards, annual expenditures for elementary supply teachers from 2002-03 are expressed as a percentage of the Elementary Pupil Foundation Grant received by each board for that year. The grant is adjusted to consider the fact that in-school administration was transferred to the School Foundation Grant effective 2006-07. Over the period from 2002-03 to 2015-16, expenditures on elementary occasional teachers increased slightly, from 3.6 per cent of the Pupil Foundation Grant in 2002-03 to 4.0 per cent in 2015-16. In public boards, the pattern was almost the same an – increase from 3.6 per cent to 4.1 per cent. In general, the highest users of occasional teachers were rural Catholic boards, where ratios were typically in the five to 10 per cent range. The overall public board average was higher than the total for the province, largely because the Toronto District School Board’s expenditures were generally slightly above the average.
number of specialties. In 2006-07, a more detailed breakdown of specialist teachers was introduced. In the data set prepared for the project, I have included the detail for specialist teachers for the period 2006-07 to 2015-16. I have included the “other teachers” data in the totals for the four main categories. As is the case with other aspects of the EFIS Appendix H data, it is not always clear that boards have prepared and entered the data on a consistent basis, either within a given year or over time. As a result, some caution should be exercised in using the data, with greater caution required as the data used becomes more granular. For comparison purposes, the summary data are expressed as ratios of students to teachers. The summary results are as follows: Including only teachers in the regular program, the elementary student/teacher ratio declined from 21.8 in 2002-03 to 19.2 in 2015-16 in public boards. The corresponding figures for the secondary regular program are 18.3 and 17.3. Including both regular program and special education program teachers, the elementary student/teacher ratio declined from 18.7 in 2002-03 to 16.8 in 2015-16. The corresponding figures for secondary are 17.0 and 15.5. Occasional teachers Although the EFIS system does not capture FTE data for supply (occasional) teachers, it does report expenditures on their wages and salaries on an annual basis, board by board. To put the data into perspective for comparative purposes, both over time and among boards, annual expenditures for elementary supply teachers from 2002-03 are expressed as a percentage of the Elementary Pupil Foundation Grant received by each board for that year. The grant is adjusted to consider the fact that in-school administration was transferred to the School Foundation Grant effective 2006-07. Over the period from 2002-03 to 2015-16, expenditures on elementary occasional teachers increased slightly, from 3.6 per cent of the Pupil Foundation Grant in 2002-03 to 4.0 per cent in 2015-16. In public boards, the pattern was almost the same – an increase from 3.6 per cent to 4.1 per cent. In general, the highest users of occasional teachers were rural Catholic boards, where ratios were typically in the five to 10 per cent range. The overall public board average was higher than the total for the province, largely because the Toronto District School Board’s expenditures were generally slightly above the average.
Shortchanging%20Ontario%20Students%20-%20An%20overview%20and%20assessment%20of%20education%20funding%20in%20Ontario.docx