Talk:Separate school

the Catholic church instructed its parishioners not to respond to the survey

Does the Catholic church still do this? Do "rumours" count as good references for Wikipedia now?--Richardson mcphillips (talk) 00:53, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Article deals with a specifically Canadian situation

Wikipedia is a world-wide reference. People from all over the world use it.

I would suggest that one of two things should therefore happen to this article. Either:

(1) Research be done to see if separate schools exist elsewhere similar to the definition here; OR (2) That in the opening para this be defined as a Canadian term for a Canadian practice.

But it's confusing to have the first para talk about it in general, presumably world-wide terms, then have the second para say "In Canada", then have the rest of the article talk about nowhere else in the world. It's a very parochial approach Randal Oulton (talk) 16:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree and prefer approach (2) because the complexity of this system is intrinsically linked to the Canadian experience which historically sanctioned two religious viewpoints over all others. It was this situation that drove the creation of two separate-but-equal public school systems. Park Flier (talk) 16:33, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

No interest?

The article states: "No church has a constitutional, legal, or proprietary interest in a separate school. Consequently, a separate school is not a parochial or private school, or a charter school."

This is not true, at least in Ontario. Local Catholic church officials maintain a large degree of control of their taxpayer-funded schools, and can fire teachers on religious grounds. Employment requires a reference from a Catholic priest along with a Catholic baptismal certificate. Teachers can be denied employment if a priest believes they do not attend church enough or tithe enough.

Further, the existence of these schools is controlled by the Canadian Constitution, Sections 29 and 93. Section 93 was amended with 93A, to permit Quebec (but not Ontario) to end taxpayer-funding of the religious school system.

These are taxpayer-funded schools, but they are also absolutely parochial (i.e. faith/Christian) schools. They are supposed to be following the provincial curriculum, and other provincial standards, but they also filter everything through their religious perspective. 24.57.239.43 (talk) 02:21, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't know how true any of these last comments are -- except that, since Catholics don't tithe at all, so I don't see how the claim that people are refused employment for not tithing enough can be true, I'm pretty dubious about how well informed these comments are.

Terminology

Confusion arises in the use of the terms jurisdiction and board. Does a board have jurisdiction in a geographic region, or are the two terms synonymous? Park Flier (talk) 16:33, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

The UN condemnation

What a joke. Is this the same UN who never said squat when the Hutus and Tutsi wiped each other out. The same UN that didn't say a damn thing when the United States invaded Iraq on little or no evidence and committed a modern day holocaust. Tell you what. The UN can stay the hell out of Ontario and Canada. The UN is a puppet organization and we should have nothing to do with them. We don't take orders from them so they can blow it out their butts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.53.158.217 (talk) 19:29, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Split material to Racial separate schools (Canada)

The section entitled "Separate schools on racial lines" has been split to its own article, Racial separate schools (Canada), on May 14, 2021. The reason for the split is that this article deals with religious-based separate schools in Canada. The motivations and implementation of religious separate schools are very different from race-based separate schools, and the two types of schools should be treated differently. There's also the fact that religious-based separate schools in Canada have a constitutional underpinning, which is not the case for race-based separate schools. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:20, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Prune the history section?

I'm inclined to prune the extensive history section about the Conquest, etc. Nothing in the Articles of Capitulation, the Royal Proclamation, or the Quebec Act talks about schools and education. This section explains the religious and linguistic demographic of the Province of Canada prior to Confederation, but I don't think it needs to be so extensive. Courtesy ping to Jjazz76, who's been working on the article. Courtesy ping: Jjazz76 Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:39, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

I was sort of feeling the same way but felt it was well written enough so didn't have the heart to cull it, @Mr Serjeant Buzfuz.

Maybe we could cut everything before "After the American Revolution, the new colony was flooded with Anglo-Protestant refugees."

It is really only below that point that schools are mentioned. But feel free to trim as you see fit. You are much more the Canadian expert. Jjazz76 (talk) 02:48, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Right, it's done. Obviously, a lot of citations will be needed, but there's the condensed outline. Comments and edits welcome. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 04:32, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Looks good to me! Jjazz76 (talk) 05:01, 20 February 2026 (UTC)