Relations with the University of Manitoba and the Faculty of Education

"The relation between officials of the Secretariat and the University of Manitoba appear to have been cordial. Part of the reason for this was the fact that the dealing between St. Boniface College and the University had always been based on a good 'entente'. On August 14, 1967, a report by the Ad Hoc Committee on the Role of St. Boniface College in Higher Education in Manitoba -- a committee of the Manitoba Council on Higher Learning -- stated as part of its recommendation that St. Boniface College would be allowed to offer academic courses to students in Education I B and II B. The report further stated

Thus, it would appear that while there were no explicit commitment the door had been opened for the eventual extension of teacher training courses from the academic to the professional at St. Boniface College.

A further allusion to this possibility can be noted in H. E. Duckworth's (vice-president academic at the University) letter (January 6, 1970) to Desjardins stating that. "We do not wish to do anything that might detract from the College's claim to the French Normal School."

Although the above statements might have appeared reassuring to officials at St. Boniface College, the reality seemed somewhat different. The University was not necessarily committed to this orientation. In a press release (July 17, 1967) the president of the University of Manitoba, H. H. Saunderson, stated:

Hence, beginning in September of 1967, the Faculty of Education would ease itself into the training of teachers in the French language. While Duckworth and Desjardins appeared to meet on good terms, the fact remains that relation between the Faculty of Education and St. Boniface College were stained if not in outright conflict. This point was made quite explicit in a letter (February 5, 1971) from R. St-Denis, Rector of St. Boniface College to Desjardins. St-Denis was quick to point out his unease vis-à-vis the Faculty since the latter had developed courses which normally should have been the responsibility of the proposed Institute. St-Denis added:

Bonneau and Chaput were both extensively involved in French teacher training at the Faculty. Bill 113 having brought amendments to the Pubic School Act permitting a greater spectrum of courses to be taught in French in the public schools of the province. Bonneau and Chaput were thus interested in extending the Faculty's offerings in the French language. For his part, St-Denis was upset because French teacher training was supposed to be conducted at the College, if and when the Institute was approved. This problem was also part of the urgency of getting a decision about the establishment of the Institute. St-Denis added:

To remove or delete established courses from the Faculty's curriculum would indeed prove most difficult.

In an article in La Liberté (March 3, 1971) Bonneau and Chaput expressed their concern of being totally ignored in the establishment of the Institute. Bonneau remarked, "I'm under the impression that we are considered the opposition as opposed to colleagues. They do not seem to have any confidence in us." Bonneau, it will be recalled, had previously expressed his disapproval of situating the Instituted at the College. No doubt, despite being a francophone, his disapproval would be viewed as an unwarranted opposition by College officials. Bonneau's main concern was the question of removing French students from the mainstream of Manitoba life and creating, as it were, a sort of linguistic, cultural and social ghetto.

The Faculty of Education position on the establishment of the Instituted was never expressed formally. Indeed, while there were strong reactions against the College, it would have been difficult to express a view contrary to Duckworth's statement of helping the College. However, as R. Hedley, Associate Dean of the Faculty of Education noted (Int. March 1, 1978) his reaction to the establishment of a teacher training instituted at the College was one of opposition. The Faculty, he felt, had both French and Français courses, the facilities, and the personnel. To Hedley's way of thinking, O. Fillion (who became the Institute's first director) was the only one qualified at the College. Hedley, during the interview, agreed that his position and opposition was one of institutional protectionism.

Dean Brown (now retired) was more careful to de-emphasise the misunderstandings. He noted (Int. March 3, 1978)

Dean Brown allowed that Hedley was resistant. Justice Monnin (Int. March 4, 1978) indicated that "Brown was fine. Hedley gave us some problems." Laval Cloutier (March 7, 1978) concurred saying that Hedley was not positive. O. Fillion (March 8, 1978) stated that the negative reaction of officials at the Faculty resulted from their perception that their hegemony in matters of teacher education was being destroyed...."