Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11biii Education App D Spec Ed Policy Ad Hoc 02 Nov 2011 Report 11 Appendix D REPORT NO. 11, SPECIAL EDUCATION POLICY AD HOC COMMITTEE TO: The Education Committee and DATE: 02 November 2011 Special Education Advisory Committee A meeting of the Special Education Policy Ad Hoc Committee was held commencing at 5:42 p.m. in Room B400, 133 Greenbank Road, Ottawa, with Trustee Bronwyn Funiciello in the chair and the following also in attendance: TRUSTEE MEMBERS: Rob Campbell and Pam FitzGerald OTHER TRUSTEES: Jennifer McKenzie SEAC REPRESENTATIVES: Beth Doubt, Ottawa-Carleton Assembly of School Councils Rosanna DiMito, Association for Bright Children of Ontario STAFF: Dawn Paxton, Superintendent of Learning Support Services Joanie Asch, Board/Committee Coordinator 1. Call to Order Trustee Funiciello called the meeting to order at 5:42 p.m. 2. Approval of Agenda Moved by Beth Doubt, THAT the agenda be approved. An amendment moved by Jennifer McKenzie, THAT the approval of Report No. 10 Special Education Policy Ad Hoc Committee dated 26 October be added as a new agenda item 3. - Carried Moved by Beth Doubt, THAT the agenda be approved, as amended. - Carried - 3. Report 10, Special Education Policy Ad Hoc Committee Moved by Trustee McKenzie, THAT Report 10, Special Education Ad Hoc Committee, dated 26 October 2011 be received. - Carried Special Education Policy - 1 - 2 November 2011 Ad Hoc Committee 4. Discussion Items The Chair asked the members for their thoughts on the items where preliminary action can be taken prior to receiving the report from the consultant. The group proceeded to discuss specialized class location consultations. Superintendent Paxton reviewed the lessons learned from the focus group sessions, noting that the public consultations on the specialized class locations will be held at 440 Albert Street, in the hope that a more centralized and transit-friendly location would result in a high turnout. Sign-in sheets will be provided. While verbatim minutes will not be done, a general summary of themes raised will be captured. A remote phone-in will not be undertaken as it would require additional staff and equipment. While a blog is easy to set up and run, it was noted that there were very few participants for the focus group blog. A discussion took place regarding the information generally provided at public consultations. It was noted that providing a rationale on how staff arrived at recommending a particular class location would assist parents with the context of what was considered. As an example, geography, bell times, and recognition of minimizing moves for students are all factors that need be considered. Trustee Campbell suggested including a wider group of people in the invitation; however Superintendent Paxton noted that some community members have expressed concern regarding being invited to a public consultation when the topic does not affect them. There was consensus that parents and students desire stability and the fewer changes the better. Trustee Funiciello suggested that parents value transparency and communication in the decision- making process, which includes providing the data behind the decision/recommendation. She recognized that there are occasions when the timing makes this difficult. Trustee Campbell suggested that including information such as alternatives which were considered and rejected, would add to the transparency of the consultation process. In addition, providing information on trends would help parents understand that changes may be required in the near future, if demographics indicate that a program will not be viable if the trend continues. Superintendent Paxton agreed to highlight any apparent trends in the Specialized Class Location report. Trustee McKenzie noted the need to do more outreach to marginalized and cultural groups. She suggested that a strategy is needed, particularly for people who have previously declined assistance with support and navigating the system. In response to a query, Superintendent Paxton confirmed that non- mainstream groups were not under-represented in specialized classes. Superintendent Paxton reviewed the timeline and milestones for the Specialized Class Location report, noting that it would be presented to the Special Education Advisory Committee (SEAC) at the end of November, to the Education Committee in December, and then to the Board in December. Public consultations will take place in January, with a final report to the Board in February. ggested that needs additional support is a special needs student. These special needs could be part-time, one-time only, for a particular subject, etc. Special Education Policy - 2 - 2 November 2011 Ad Hoc Committee A discussion ensued regarding whether a special needs student must have an IPRC or an IEP. Superintendent Paxton noted that Learning Support Services does not differentiate, and regards any additional support as special needs. Examples included pulling a child out of a class for one period a week for extra support in a particular subject. The committee members supported the broader definition. In response to a query, Superintendent Paxton advised that for a student to be placed in a specialized class there is a process which involves the student meeting criteria before they can be admitted. Superintendent Paxton noted that it is possible that the Ministry of Education may set criteria for gifted students across the province, as currently there is a big variance across individual school boards for a number of exceptionalities. It was agreed that there needs to be clear definitions of common terms used by Learning Support Services. Trustee Campbell noted that there may be a gap between reporting to the Ministry on services for students who have been formally identified through the IPRC process and those who have an IEP in place, which does not capture all the informal special support services provided. Trustee Funiciello asked if there was a tally of the students who access special education funding but who do not have IEPs or Trustee Funiciello noted the need for clarity of definitions. In advance of the next meeting Superintendent Paxton was asked to circulate a definition Learning Support Services, as well as the tiered model. Superintendent Paxton also volunteered to include any terms used in the parent guides on IPRCs and IEPs. 5. Next Steps It was agreed to schedule a meeting on November 23 at 5:00 p.m. The members also wished to meet before then, to further discuss definitions. Board Services staff will poll the committee members for consensus on a date and time. 6. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Bronwyn Funiciello Chair Special Education Policy Ad Hoc Committee Special Education Policy - 3 - 2 November 2011 Ad Hoc Committee