SUN NEWS COLUMN: Learning Pods Could Help Families And School System

This year, many parents have taken their children out of public school and shifted to educational alternatives such as homeschooling and learning pods.

Learning pods gather small groups of students to learn together – typically at one of the children’s homes – instead of in a larger school setting.

Not only can learning pods help reduce crowding in public schools, they also provide parents more choice. But they come at a price.

Because of the financial sacrifice, pods or homeschooling are not options for many and challenging for others.

Should the government make accessing learning pods and homeschooling easier for families?

According to a new Leger poll commissioned by SecondStreet.org, the general public is divided on giving some tax dollars back to parents who have taken their kids out of public schools in the wake of COVID-19.

It was a near-three-way split: 34% said the government should take some of the tax dollars these parents pay for the public education system and give a portion back to them to offset some of their costs, while 36% said the government should not.

Twenty-nine per cent were undecided.

When undecideds are removed and the results focus only on respondents who are parents with children in public schools, a slight majority of parents (52%) favour taking some of the tax dollars these parents pay for the public education system and giving a portion back to them.

SecondStreet.org research found that homeschooling, learning pods and independent schools have seen a notable uptick this year.

When Torontonian Rachel Danzinger-Marmer started Learning Pods Canada, it began with her own family.

“I knew my four kids would struggle with the COVID-19 rules,” she told us. “They have difficulties with mask-wearing and struggle with social distancing. I was worried about their well-being and I didn’t want to put other children at risk.”

She also had concerns about the instability of the school year. She wasn’t alone.

“I saw the need for my own family and quickly saw the need across the board.” Danzinger-Marmer said. “I’m passionate about empowering parents to make the best choices for their families right now.”

She started the Learning Pods – Canada Facebook group in July, and it has already grown to 11,700 members. The group connects parents and educators to form their own pods, sign customized contracts and access insurance.

Pricing varies, as with homeschooling. The most significant cost for many is the forgone income of one parent.

Instruction costs range from nearly free (parent teaching) to up to $2,100 per week (full-time facilitator).

Insurance costs $1,000 per year. Curricula ranges from free to $800 annually. Rental space, if used, costs $15 to $50 per day.

In short, learning pods require sacrifice.

Beyond offering direct relief for parents, the government could expand access by reducing red tape.

According to Danzinger-Marmer, families in Ontario are restricted from exceeding five students in an in-person pod, because any more could be considered a private school under provincial regulations.

If governments treated learning pods like homeschool collectives, a pod could welcome two families of three kids rather than just one, effectively splitting the cost in half.

Thinking of crowded classrooms, increasing access for parents who already wish to take their child out means potentially reducing class sizes overall.

Supporting families who choose homeschooling or learning pods in the wake of COVID-19 might be a worthwhile consideration for government – one this poll shows decided parents support.

Paige MacPherson is an independent policy professional and contributor to SecondStreet.org.

This column was published in Sun Newspapers (Toronto, Ottawa, Winnipeg, Calgary and Edmonton) on December 4th, 2020. To see article click here. 

 

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

You can help us continue to research and tell stories about this issue by making a donation or sharing this content with your friends. Be sure to sign up for our updates too!

Prevention – reduce demand in the first place

If Canadians lived healthier lives, we could reduce demand for emergency services, orthopaedic surgeries, primary care and more. 

For instance, if you visit the Canadian Cancer Society’s website, you’ll read that “about four in ten” cancer cases are preventable. The Heart and Stroke Foundation notes that “almost 80 percent of premature heart disease and stroke can be prevented through healthy behaviours.” A similar number of Diabetes cases are also preventable. 

Many joint replacements and visits to ERs and walk-in clinics could also be avoided through healthy living. 

To be sure, not all health problems can be avoided through healthy living – everyday the system treats Canadians with genetic conditions, helps those injured in unavoidable accidents and more.  

But there is an opportunity to reduce pressure on the health care system through Canadians shifting to healthier lifestyles – better diets, more exercise, etc. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see this column. 

Partner with non-profits and for-profit clinics

European countries will partner with anyone who can help patients. 

It doesn’t matter if it’s a non-profit, a government entity or a private clinic. What matters is that patients receive quality treatment, in a timely manner and for a competitive price.  

In Canada, governments often delivery services using government-run hospitals instead of seeing if non-profit or private clinics could deliver the services more effectively. 

When governments have partnered with non-profit and private clinics, the results have often been quite good – Saskatchewan, Ontario and British Columbia are just a few examples of where partnerships have worked well. 

Canada should pursue more of these partnerships to reduce wait times and increase the volume of services provided to patients.  

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see the links above. 

Make cross border care more accessible

In Canada, citizens pay high taxes each year and we’re promised universal health care services in return. The problem is, wait times are often extremely long in our health system – sometimes patients have to wait years to see a specialist or receive surgery. 

If patients don’t want to wait long periods, they often have to reach into their own pocket and pay for treatment outside the province or country. 

Throughout the European Union, we also find universal health care systems. But a key difference is that EU patients have the right to go to other EU countries, pay for surgery and then be reimbursed by their home government. Reimbursements cover up to what the patient’s home government would have spent to provide the treatment locally. 

If Canada copied this approach, a patient waiting a year to get their hip operation could instead receive treatment next week in one of thousands of surgical clinics throughout the developed world. 

Governments benefit too as the patient is now back on their feet and avoiding complications that sometimes come with long wait times – meaning the government doesn’t have to treat those complications on top of the initial health problem. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or this shorter video. 

Legalize access to non-government providers

Canada is the only country in the world that puts up barriers, or outright bans patients from paying for health services locally. 

For instance, a patient in Toronto cannot pay for a hip operation at a private clinic in Toronto. Their only option is to wait for the government to eventually provide treatment or leave the province and pay elsewhere. 

Countries with better-performing universal health care systems do not have such bans. They allow patients a choice – use the public system or pay privately for treatment. Sweden, France, Australia and more – they all allow choice. 

Why? One reason is that allowing choice means some patients will decide to pay privately. This takes pressure off the public system. For instance, in Sweden, 87% of patients use the public system, but 13% purchase private health insurance. 

Ultimately, more choice improves access for patients. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or watch this short clip on this topic. 

Shift to funding services for patients, not bureaucracies

In Canada, most hospitals receive a cheque from the government each year and are then asked to do their best to help patients. This approach is known as “block funding”. 

Under this model, a patient walking in the door represents a drain on the hospital’s budget. Over the course of a year, hospital administrators have to make sure the budget stretches out so services are rationed. This is why you might have to wait until next year or the year after for a hip operation, knee operation, etc. 

In better-performing universal health systems, they take the opposite approach – hospitals receive money from the government each time they help a patient. If a hospital completes a knee operation, it might receive, say, $10,000. If it completes a knee operation on another patient, it receives another $10,000. 

This model incentivizes hospitals to help more patients – to help more patients with knee operations, cataract surgery, etc. This approach also incentivizes hospitals to spend money on expenses that help patients (e.g. more doctors, nurses, equipment, etc.) rather than using the money on expenses that don’t help patients (e.g. more admin staff). 

To learn more about this policy option, please watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see this post by MEI.