Louis Volante, Brock University
April 30, 2026
The Ontario government recently introduced Bill 101, the Putting Student Achievement First Act that the province says intends to move “Ontario toward a more accountable, consistent and modern model of high-quality education.”
Given that I was a member of the faculty advisory group that helped develop Ontario’s current assessment, evaluation and reporting policies, I was naturally interested in seeing what this new bill entails and the implications for our provincial education system.
Unfortunately, the bill in its current form is likely to create new challenges with implications both for public schools serving children and youth as well as for university Faculties of Education aiming to prepare the next generations of teachers.
More, not less, data needed
Effective teaching and learning are dependent on having timely data related to how students are doing and the working conditions of educators. My own research has demonstrated that education systems that collect and monitor detailed data on their students are better positioned to track learning outcomes and respond accordingly.
Effective teaching and learning depend on having timely data, but Ontario plans to scrap the requirement for boards to administer surveys that gauge important issues such as students’ sense of belonging.
Under Ontario reforms, school boards would no longer be legally required to administer the school climate survey — surveys that gauge students’ sense of belonging in schools, reported bullying and engagement in extra-curricular activities.
They often ask questions related to school safety, engagement, health and well-being, self-efficacy and other factors known to support learning in a safe and inclusive environment.
The argument that there are too many inconsistencies across schools regarding how these surveys are constructed and administered as a rationale for eliminating them as a mandatory requirement does not hold.
Ironically, these inconsistencies underscore the need to develop a provincewide survey that all schools would administer to provide comparative data. I guess if you don’t collect data that shows there’s a problem, then you don’t have a problem.
But school climate surveys point to what might otherwise appear as intangible factors that make for a meaningful and effective education.
A sense of belonging and “non-cognitive” skills like having a flexible mindset directly relate to overall student achievement, partly explain performance patterns across countries, including Canada.
These surveys provide an oversized return on the investment needed for their development, analysis and monitoring.
More nuanced approach to attendance
Bill 101 has an explicit focus on providing students across Ontario with more consistent and effective learning experiences.
To achieve consistency in grading practices, it will mandate attendance and participation being worth 15 per cent of the final course mark for Grades 9 to 10 and 10 per cent for Grades 11 to 12.
To its credit, the government has qualified that this new policy will not be negatively impacted for excused absences, such as illnesses and holy days. However, some researchers who have examined absenteeism caution that many factors influence whether an absence is recorded as excused.
Certainly, measures to boast student engagement are laudable, but the policy could undoubtedly result in teachers merely generating a grade by simply counting up missed classes.
A more nuanced approach is needed — one that connects this new requirement more closely to curriculum expectations. For example, participation can and should be assessed in relation to the oral communication expectations that already exist within Ontario’s curriculum.
More detail needed on resources
The government has also indicated that it will be providing online classroom resources This will be welcome by many educators, particularly novice teachers, who may be struggling to find suitable materials to help them teach lessons and units of study.
Nevertheless, specifics are needed — namely, will these resources be developed and approved by teachers and subject experts, or simply become the purview of for-profit companies?
Ultimately, Ontario’s curriculum and teaching resources should be based on the expertise of educators.
Post-secondary changes
Given that I work in a Faculty of Education with one of the largest teacher education programs in the country, I was also concerned to find that amendments to Schedule 4 of the bill related to the Ontario College of Teachers Act suggests the province is preparing to exert stronger influence over teacher education programs.
While the province has already signalled an intent to drop the length of teachers’ college to a year, the wording of the bill mentions “addressing any other matter relating to the design, delivery or learning outcomes of professional teacher education programs.”
Another part of proposed reforms oddly bundled under Bill 101 involve plans for the province to absorb the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO). The council’s mandate has been “bringing evidence-based research to the continued improvement of the post-secondary education system in Ontario,” and it’s also been charged with reporting on the government’s “free speech” on campus policy.
These disconcerting proposed shifts signal interference in universities, including traditional roles of academic review committees and university senates, which approve all new programs and amendments. This threatens university governance.
Publicly assisted post-secondary system
This encroachment is unwarranted, particularly in Ontario, which has become a “publicly assisted,” instead of a “publicly funded,” system. That is: tuition revenues have surpassed government operating grants, meaning university students pay the largest relative proportion of their education.
The Ontario government provides a significant contribution, just under 40 per cent, but far less than other provinces.
I wonder which private-sector company would allow a minority shareholder group to override the wishes of the other shareholders and exert ultimate authority over key decisions?
Moving forward
The Ontario government has the ability to clarify and amend aspects of this bill.
In the absence of the latter, it falls short of putting students first, and it certainly could mark a terrible precedent for school board and university governance.
Although education policies can help address problems, on the surface, Bill 101 appears to have created new ones.
Louis Volante, Distinguished Professor, Faculty of Education, Brock University
Subscribe to our newsletter.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
