Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10bii Education 13 December 2011 App C Spec Ed Ad Hoc 23 Nov 2011 Appendix C Report 1, Education Committee 13 December 2011 REPORT NO. 13, SPECIAL EDUCATION POLICY AD HOC COMMITTEE TO: The Education Committee and DATE: 23 November 2011 Special Education Advisory Committee A meeting of the Special Education Policy Ad Hoc Committee was held commencing at 5:18 p.m. in the Tru in the chair and the following also in attendance: TRUSTEE MEMBERS: Rob Campbell (electronic communication) Pam FitzGerald OTHER TRUSTEES: Jennifer McKenzie SEAC MEMBERS: Beth Doubt, Ottawa-Carleton Assembly of School Councils Rosanna DiMito, Association for Bright Children of Ontario STAFF: Linda Yan, System Principal, Learning Support Services Joanie Asch, Board/Committee Coordinator 1. Call to Order Trustee Funiciello called the meeting to order at 5:18 p.m. 2. Approval of Agenda Moved by Rosanna Dimito, THAT the agenda be approved. - Carried 3. Report 12, Special Education Policy Ad Hoc Committee Moved by Trustee McKenzie, THAT Report 12, Special Education Ad Hoc Committee, dated 17 November 2011 be received. - Carried 4. Work Plan Trustee Campbell noted that the committee has plenty of work to do on this project and suggested that the committee should convene for a day-long meeting to develop recommendations for the report to the Board. Committee members discussed the benefits of ensuring a thorough and complete review of the feedback from the consultations, even if that meant that the final report to the Board may be delayed. Trustee McKenzie suggested that providing the Board with an interim report by the end of January 2012 recommendations. Several methodologies were discussed and discarded, such as focusing on very specific issues identified; or asking the Board and/or the Special Education Advisory Committee for feedback on specific issues. Special Education Policy - 1 - 23 November 2011 Ad Hoc Committee not within the consultations, it was agreed that identification of key areas that are weak or need to be changed would then be provided to staff, who would develop a work plan to address those recommendations. However, Trustee Campbell suggested that the committee should be able to develop some tangible recommendations. could be both policy issues and delivery issues. Trustee Funiciello stated that the committee should reach consensus on what the final deliverable will consist of, even if that means delaying the final report to the Board. The role of staff was seen to be very important, in order to provide information on policy design and implementation solutions that would be beyond the expertise of the committee. Trustee McKenzie suggested that the recommendations be crafted in a fashion similar to the French as a Second Language recommendations. She suggested that developing milestones would assist with designing a work plan. Trustee Campbell agreed, stating that either an end product should be delivered at the end of January and the committee disbanded, or the end of January would be the end of a phase and a request for work to continue through a second phase would be made. All committee members agreed to convene for a day-long strategy session on Monday, December 12. It was suggested that the session be held at 440 Albert Street. Board Services staff are to confirm if space is available. It was also agreed to hold a meeting before that session, to develop a framework for the day. It was suggested that the beginning of the day-long session be spent on identifying who the policy is aimed at, and clarifying relevant definitions. Ms. Doubt noted that any program for all students is not a special education program and should not be funded from the special education budget. It was noted that mental health issues do not fall under the s changes in the policy may result in changes to the processes that lead up to the identification of a child with special education needs. Trustee Campbell suggested that two key issues are stability (for both class placement and location) and transparency of process, and that concrete recommendations on both those issues are needed. There was general agreement that the focus should begin on these two issues. 5. The report was not reviewed. 6. Definitions Trustee Campbell suggested that developing nomenclature for students who have been reviewed by an IPRC or who students with special needs are not only confined to those with IEPs or IPRCs. A discussion ensued on the boundaries of what constitutes a special education student. Ms. Doubt asked what percentage of the special education budget is used to service non-IEP and non-IPRC students. Ms. Yan responded that this information is no longer tracked, as the Ministry no longer requires this. The Committee agreed that the policy must cover not just IEP and IPRC students, but also those who are in the process of being identified or those who have been identified but object to being labelled. Trustee Special Education Policy - 2 - 23 November 2011 Ad Hoc Committee McKenzie suggested that the policy should have a section on the identification and process for IEPs and IPRCs. Ms. Dimito remarked that exceptional students are different, and a policy for special education students does not address their needs. Trustee Campbell suggested that sections of the policy can be developed to specifically deal with those who have IEPs, IPRCs or other needs, but that sections dealing with a commitment to transparency, or on communication, would apply to all. Principal Yan distributed several lists of definitions which had been compiled by Superintendent Paxton from various sources, such as the Ministry of Education and the Ontario Teachers Federation. She noted that there are discrepancies in some definitions, when compared. She also noted that the simplest definition is an exceptional pupil. Trustee Funiciello asked committee members to review the various definitions over the next two weeks and come to the next meeting prepared with a definition of whom the policy is aimed at. The goal will be to discuss the various definitions and come to a consensus on one. Board Services staff are requested to send out a reminder on this task prior to the next meeting. 7. Next Steps Timelines and Future Meetings The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, December 7 at 5:30 PM. 8. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Bronwyn Funiciello Chair Special Education Policy Ad Hoc Committee Special Education Policy - 3 - 23 November 2011 Ad Hoc Committee