3. Who are the teachers? How are they defined? Does a common definition include teachers at all levels of the educational system? Is this definition maintained by Ministerial fiat, by professional examinations, or by collective bargaining, or by all three? Is all teaching limited to those defined as teachers?

4. What are the principal characteristics of the administrative structures supported by the legislation in question? To what degree are the procedures specified in the legislation or in regulations? For example, how are programs developed, maintained, controlled? What provisions are there, if any, for pupil (student) participation in program development? Can the legislation be said to embody opportunity for learning in the structures or procedures established?

The application of this last question as a base for analysis requires some elaboration. It can be argued, and perhaps demonstrated, that different administrative structures and different procedures involve varying opportunities for the individuals who must make them work to learn. The traditional hierarchical administrative structure, common to many large organizations, provides much less opportunity for fewer individuals within it to learn enough to understand how it works, than does the 'tabernacle' type organization which demands more decision-making responsibility from more people, and therefore provides more opportunities to learn more about it. In the situations in which we are particularly concerned, the existence of a 'board', of consulting and advisory machinery, and perhaps the existence of several examples of one class of organization, the school board within a single system, or the existence of a variety of different types of organizations for more people than a few large centrally administered agencies. Since it is organizations that are concerned with bringing about learning as their principal or only purpose with which we are concerned, then it becomes of critical importance to examine the built-in opportunities for those who must make them work to learn, as well as examining the degree to which those who are recipients of their services are able to understand how they work. When the only recipients of the services were children and youth, the significance of the latter characteristic was of a lesser importance, but as the majority of recipients or students become individuals who are 'considered adults by their societies', the issue becomes of central concern. We cannot expect very much of teaching agencies providing services for adults which are incomprehensible in their character to those adults or which are impenetrable and unresponsive to expressions of student need for particular types of educational opportunities. The precise point at which student and/or adult influence shouldbe made, or can be most effective, remains a matter of debate, but it cannot be ignored as a matter of concern in a study of legislation affecting the education of adults and children alike.

When we include less 'educational' types of legislation, the background for the commentary and analysis will require some modification, less emphasis will be placed on the first three questions, and more on the fourth. This will be particularly true in the case of the judicial decisions and federal legislation included.

As we have developed this project, exploiting the flexibility in revision of the word processor, it has become clear to us that that particular item of technology functions somewhat as the 'memory hole' in Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four. With each facile revision, whatever 'was' vanishes and whatever 'is' is all there is. The only easily accessible record of the evolution of this project will be contained in printed versions as they appear. Those readers with historical interests will need to guard their successive versions with care. We will keep under close security one copy of each generation of report which we may be able to provide on request at some cost. As we will also identify each successive report by date and number, readers should note that each successive edition may be altered anywhere in the text. We may be able, with each successive edition, to provide a key to where the main changes are to be found. We will, however, from this time forward (1983) maintain a separate section of repealed legislation, by title, and for each jurisdiction. This may be made available upon request or at irregular intervals. While our present plans are to continue publishing in a form defined by jurisdiction, that is, all the legislation for each province, we intend to design the system so that readers may receive, on request and for a fee of some kind, the information in different classifications, for example, all the School Acts with accompanying commentary, or all the judicial decisions relating to learning, 'whether this will work or not, or whether there be sufficient demand, is a matter of experimentation. Readers should be warned that material to be found in these reports is not likely to be exhaustive in the sense necessary for litigation. It is intended to be suggestive only of possible points of view that might be directed to the legislation included and of sources of further, more intensive, information and direction.

We are most grateful to those offices and individuals in provincial ministries who have replied carefully and systematically to our enquiry. We have a firm notion of how much time, effort, and diligence those people took. We can only hope that our further responses will prove to be of commensurate benefit to them and their colleagues.

BACK / NEXT PAGE