Interview with the ICBC

Name of Interviewee: Evelyn Chang, Ontario Minister of Education Name of Interviewer: Sunil Bakshi, interviewing for the Independent Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (ICBC) Date of Interview: September 28rd, 2047

SB: For ICBC News, this is Sunil Bakshi, interviewing the Ontario Minister of Education, Evelyn Chang. Good evening, Evelyn.

EC: Good evening, Sunil. Glad I could make this interview.

SB: Yes, thank you for your time. I have to say, you’re quite in demand these past few weeks, wouldn’t you say?

EC: (laughs) Yes, I would agree with that. My rather striking idea has been getting quite the coverage in the news and over social media.

SB: Quite right. And of course, it is precisely that idea that we’re here to discuss tonight. For our viewers at home, Minister Chang is the mind behind Bill 325 SHA, also known as the Schools-into-Housing Act. As we have all seen, the homelessness and cost of living crises have taken their toll on the city of Toronto, and led to much unrest. However, a few weeks ago, Minister Chang suggested to Prime Minister Daniel Marsden a radical new idea for how best to tackle this issue. So Evelyn, could you explain just what Bill 325 is?

EC: Certainly. Bill 325, or the Schools-into-Housing Act, proposes that all public Toronto high schools be torn down and replaced with affordable, subsidized housing. These buildings would be government owned, with extremely low costs, thereby allowing low-income families and those without housing to have a roof over their heads.

SB: Now, I hate to bring this up, but I’m certain our viewers would like to know: Who’s going to pay for this? Not just the construction, but the subsidies as well?

EC: Well, this is a joint venture between the federal, provincial and municipal governments. It’ll be funded by our tax dollars, of course, but a portion of the education budget has been reallocated to construction and housing subsidies.

SB: So education would be defunded, is what you’re saying?

EC: Technically yes, but it’s much better than it sounds. A large portion of the education budget is reserved for maintaining the physical schools themselves and buying new educational supplies, but if all high schools are virtual, a significant portion of that money won’t be needed.

SB: I see. It’s a very ambitious plan, if you don’t mind my saying so.

EC: (laughs) I agree, Sunil. But sometimes you have to be ambitious to make a real difference.

SB: So tell me how you got this idea.

EC: I was born in the mid 2000s, so I was in high school during the COVID-19 Pandemic of 2020. Since I lived at home with my grandparents, my family played it very safe during the pandemic, even when restrictions began to be lifted. As a result, after I graduated, I chose to take the vast majority of my university courses online. When I would eventually meet up with my friends, I was surprised to discover that both academically and socially, there was virtually no difference in our learning experiences. Even back in the 2020s, the prevalence of technology and instant communication made it so that I could do and learn everything I needed for my university career without issue. In fact, it was even easier than before; I didn’t need to commute or drive, I didn’t have to worry about snow or heat, and most importantly, the electronic and recorded nature of my lessons made it so that I could always catch up if I had missed a class. In other words, my high school and university life was made much easier by doing everything online.

SB: And would you say that you were the exception, or the rule?

EC: Well, socially, perhaps I was the exception. Plenty of research has been done to show the negative consequences of prolonged physical distancing, and that’s certainly not what Bill 325 is proposing. Academically, though? I think I was the rule. I mean, most people working out in the world today went through online school the same as I did, for a few years at least. So clearly, we all managed to survive.

SB: I see.

EC: My experiences during the pandemic are why I’ve always been such a proponent of online learning. While I don’t deny in-person schools have their appeal, I think that so long as our children can socialize in-person, their learning can be done virtually.

SB: Right; you’ve been arguing for more online learning ever since you got into politics.

EC: Even before that, actually. When I was a high school teacher at Newtonbrook Secondary, I pushed for a four day in-person school week, with the fifth day being a virtual day. Needless to say, the idea was rejected, but for good reason at the time, as we lacked the infrastructure to do it, what with the security concerns with Zoom and the potential legal issues with Google Classroom and its Chrome integration.

SB: (laughs) Those are some names I haven’t heard in a very long time.

EC: But eventually, our voices were heard and both CanComm and Microsoft Classroom were developed for online instruction, which I began using as much as possible in my lessons.

SB: Did CanComm factor into your idea for Bill 325? If CanComm didn’t exist, would you have been more reluctant to go ahead?

EC: Maybe a little, but there were and still are other options for online schooling. In any event, as the homelessness crisis became worse and worse and the cost of living kept increasing, I thought back to some of the educational theories I had studied in university, such as transdisciplinary skills. I thought to myself “this housing issue isn’t just the concern of the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities; it concerns all of us.” And since I already had an extensive background in virtual schooling, I put two and two together and realized that we could free up school space for housing, but keep school going virtually.

SB: And why only high schools? Was it purely logistical?

EC: Yes, that’s a very good way to put it. When I began to develop the idea, I realized that young children likely wouldn’t gel very well with online learning. All of my past experiences with online schooling were when I was a young adult, but enough research has been done since then to show that the group the most affected negatively by virtual schooling was young children. Another concern was the parents; we couldn’t expect parents of young children to stay home and ensure their children were safe at home learning. It may have been alright during the pandemic of 2020, but that was because almost everyone was working from home at the time.

SB: Right, but since high school students are older and are already often left at home alone, it wouldn’t pose an issue for them.

EC: Exactly.

SB: In your mind – assuming Bill 325 is passed – what will education look like, say, ten to twenty years from now?

EC: Very good question, but I’d like to add something to it, if you don’t mind.

SB: By all means.

EC: This relates back to my earlier statement about transdisciplinary ideas – Bill 325 isn’t just about housing, nor is it just about school. It’s about both, and more. I adopted a more holistic perspective about solving these issues, so I’d like to slightly modify your question to “What will Toronto, or perhaps even the world, look like ten to twenty years from now?” And I think the first and most striking answer is that we will see a significant decrease in homelessness, and that many low-income families will be able to sleep comfortably with a roof over their heads. And I’m fully aware that it’s a little bit ironic that I, as the Minister of Education, am focused on housing, but let’s not forget that housing is the central issue driving Bill 325.

SB: Of course.

EC: But yeah, the biggest difference will be that more people will have homes. And as for education, I think we’ll see quite a few significant differences, and – dare I say – improvements.

SB: Such as?

EC: Well, bullying will likely drop significantly. I’m not understating the issue of cyberbullying, but research has shown that it’s mostly done through social media, and not through virtual classes – especially because chats and the like can be managed by the teacher. No one is saying bullying will go away, but this approach will reduce the number of incidents. Secondly, we’ll see students thriving in ways we’ve never seen before. They’ll still be able to go out with their friends and have a social life, but they’ll also gain the benefits of virtual education. Like I mentioned earlier, they’ll have no commute time, no worries about weather, and more. If Bill 325 is passed, students will get the best of both worlds, and those in need will have homes and shelter.

SB: A very interesting response. Thank you, Evelyn.

EC: Of course.

SB: Before we conclude, we here at ICBC have compiled some questions sent in to our network via X2. Here’s the first one: “What do you suggest we do about students who don’t pay attention during online school, or who skip entirely? How can we ensure that they’re actually learning?”

EC: A perfectly reasonable question. Our proposed attendance plan is much the same as how it’s currently done in schools; students who don’t check in to class will be marked as absent and have a call and email sent to their parents. As for those who don’t pay attention, individual teachers will have their own unique ways of dealing with that, just like they do in class. Our suggestion is frequent engagement checks in the forms of questions and mini-quizzes, and for those students who aren’t engaged, the teachers will deal with that appropriately.

SB: Alright. Here’s the next one: “What will happen to the admin and janitors?” EC: Well, the administrators would keep their jobs, as they would still be needed for online schooling. And the plan is to keep the janitorial staff on as government employees and have them continue to work in the future buildings. They will be taken care of during the years of construction; obviously we won’t tear down all the schools simultaneously, so they’ll be moved to other schools until the housing units are ready for them.

SB: Another question for you: “What about extracurricular activities? How will students meet up and play sports and start clubs?

EC: We thought of that while proposing this idea, and while the details aren’t finalized, our basic idea is to reserve spots for school sports in community centres. There are some scheduling kinks that still need to be worked out, but that’s the long and short of it. School teams will bring their students to nearby community centres to play their sports. And as for clubs, students will still be able to start and organize them! As long as they have the support of a teacher, they’ll be able to start their own clubs and meet whenever they want, whether it’s in-person or virtually. So the extracurricular aspect of school will be very much alive if Bill 325 is passed.

SB: Okay, and here’s the next one: “Why are you prioritizing the homeless over our kids? Virtual school in the 2020s was awful, and this idea will never work.” Not quite a question, this one. (laughs)

EC: No worries; as always, I welcome the feedback. I don’t view Bill 325 as “prioritizing” one group over another; we’re responding to everyone’s needs as best we can. Bill 325 won’t disadvantage students in any way, as we know from research from the 2030s that virtual education – purely with respect to the learning part – is equally as beneficial as in-person education. So I think the view that we’re “prioritizing” one group is a bit narrow-minded and reductive.

SB: Alright, and now for our last question: “What will happen if years down the road, Bill 325 is a failure? We’ll have already torn down our schools, so what will we do then?”

EC: Well, I’ll start by saying that Bill 325 won’t be a failure. It’s supported by all the research, and it will objectively benefit the homeless and low-income families. So I’ll say that up front. However, if – and it’s a big if – the bill is unsuccessful, we do have some provisions for that. I can’t go in-depth on that yet, as much of it is not finalized and is still being reviewed within the federal government, but there are things we will be able to do. For example, like I said, not all schools will be torn down simultaneously, so we’ll know quite early on the extent to which Bill 325 is successful. So we’ll still have the infrastructure to handle a return to physical schools – if needed, and as I said, that won’t be the case.

SB: Alright, well thank you for your time, Evelyn. It was a pleasure to discuss this with you.

EC: You’re very welcome, Sunil. (shakes hand)

SB: For ICBC News, this is Sunil Bakshi. Back to you in the newsroom.