The Minister's Review of Services for Students in Nova Scotia report was released a week ago and in it the panel recommended to scrap a program that was very important for many children in the province who have learning disabilities. Called the Tuition Support Program, it diverts a standard funding unit (approximately $6,200) the child's local public school to a private school.
I, along with many parents and professionals are very disappointed to say the least with.
Many people who attended input sessions around the province talked passionately about how their child suffered and failed in public school, yet succeeded in a small class private setting. They asked and begged the review committee to understand this. EEANS showed them evidence that children where thriving. Yet the panel chose not to look at special education needs from a child point of view, but instead from high up in their fortress.
There are a few reasons I think the review panel and the Department of Education included the recommendation to scrap the Tuition Support Program.
1. Children who receive education at a Designated Special Education Private School do well. They thrive. This is very embarrassing for the department and school boards.
2. The department thinks that letting parents divert their funding unit to a Designated Special Education Private School will lead to parents of non LD children to want the same right to send their child to a private school.
3. The union is well represented in the department of education. Protect the union at at all costs. Enrollment is down so they want every child they can get and the money that comes with them.
4. The Department of Education actually believes they can service 100% of all educational needs of our children. They must be much better than the department of Health, who sends patients out of province regularly for specialized services they cannot provide in province.
5. They can't offer the TSP in every corner of the province. OK, so let's scrap heart operations or MRI's on the same basis.
The fact is the department and their review panel suffer from a disability as well. A listening disability.
The report refuses to deal with the merits of why the program is literally saving the lives of students and why it is working and simply says they do not think it is appropriate. I guess it is better to have children fail in the public school system then it is to succeed at Bridgeway or Landmark. This is more about egos, pride and professional arrogance then it is about children. This recommendation sacrifices the children's future on the altar of someones trumpeted up view of what is or is not "appropriate" for the public school system.
The day when the public school system appropriately meets the needs of severe and moderate learning disabled students in a appropriate environment and where they can succeed is the day the tuition support program will cease to have any relevance, it will sunset itself. Parents will have no need or desire to spend the other half of private school tuition cost.
The department has used a smoke screen issue. It has said many times that they support the "Inclusion philosophy". Who doesn't? Their definition of inclusion is all children "must go to a public school!" when in fact it is "all children should have the right to attend public school".
The Department of Education will try to imply to the general public that to continue with the Tuition Support Program would put "Inclusion" in jeopardy. This is false and very dirty pool. The children who attend a private school are in an inclusive setting. They are accepted by their peers. They are in a safe and caring environment. They are learning and laughing with other children.
We have some beautiful fortresses in Nova Scotia, and one very old ugly one.
Brian Hickling
Vice Chair
Equal Education Association of Nova Scotia
Sunday, September 2, 2007
Friday, May 25, 2007
The Rights of Special Needs Children
Under the Education Act every child in the Province of Nova Scotia between the age of 6 and 16 must attend school. In regard to students with special needs, it is stated that school boards are obligated to "develop and implement educational programs for students with special needs within regular instructional settings with their peers in age, in accordance with the regulations and the Minister's policies and guidelines". [s. 64(2)(d)]
All children in the Province are entitled to an "appropriate education", this means an education appropriate to their particular needs. References in the Special Education Policy Manual refer to "programming in a variety of educational settings" and :school boards providing a continuum of programming options and services to meet the special needs of students". Support services are to be co-ordinated within the neighbourhood school and to the extent possible, within grade level/subject area classrooms.
School boards are also obligated to provide necessary medical treatment during school hours, including the administration of oral medication and the health care and comfort of physically disabled students. Although students with special needs in Nova Scotia are entitled to an appropriate education and in theory parents are considered an integral part of the process of forming an education for such children, the actual reality is far from rosy. There are numerous children with special needs in this Province who have been pulled out of school by their parents. Some because the parents feel that the children's needs for physical safety are not being met, some due to the fact that the parents strongly believe that their children are not getting a proper education in school and having their diverse needs properly met. Some of these children are placed in private schools at great expense to the parents, some are officially signed up for home schooling and some are informally educated at home while the parents work very hard to get their children back in school with the type of programming to which they are legally entitled. It is for this reason that for a parent with a child with special needs in the school system, its important to know what the parents' and child's rights are and what tools are available to a parent when despite repeated discussion and negotiation, a school board refuses to provide a child with what they require to obtain an appropriate education.
The IPP
We have heard from many members of EEANS that they have trouble getting IPP's. Unfortunately school staff dissuade parents from obtaining an IPP by telling that putting a child on one will jeopardise their chances of attending post secondary education. This is false. The fact is, if a child is not given an IPP to help them regain their grade level and self confidence, they will be more in jeopardy of dropping out of school early and getting into trouble.
In Nova Scotia, students who cannot meet grade level outcomes, even with various accommodations, are entitled to be put on an individualized program plan, better known as an IPP. An IPP will set out the goals for the student, the strategies which will be used to achieve those goals and the roles and responsibilities of teachers and others, such as Speech Language Pathologists or teachers' assistants. The Program Planning Team is responsible for creating the IPP and reviewing and modifying it as the student's needs change. This team includes the student's teachers any teacher assistants or other specialist teachers involved and the parents or guardians of the child. The parent or guardian of a special needs child is, by law, a member of that child's Program Planning Team. The Policy provides a detailed description for the Program Planning team process stating that the program planning meeting should not be a forum for teachers, administrators, and other agency personnel to present a completed program to the parents. [pg.38] Although the parent is only one member of the Team, the legislation makes it clear that the parents' legal role in the education of a special needs child is not merely because they hold the title of "parent", but because parents, as such, are legislatively considered to possess a wealth of knowledge and experience about the special needs of their children. It is clear that decisions about Program Planning and services should be reached by mutual agreement among team members including parents / guardians. [pg.56]From a parent's point of view, the IPP is often the place where the rubber hits the road as it lays out how and what the school will teach their child. In a sense, its a child's lifeline, from where he is now to where we hope he will some day be. Parents are not only to be afforded the opportunity to participate in the development of an IPP for their special needs child but also to have access to a procedure to appeal that document if they disagree with. It is for that reason that the IPP appeal process is so important for parents- it gives them a process to follow if they do not agree with what the school proposes to teach the child, where they propose to teach him or the methods that they propose to use. From the parent's perspective its very important to know what steps must be followed in order to initiate an appeal of a child's IPP, how much time both the school board and Minister have to respond and set up an appeal hearing and what the parents' rights are at such hearings.
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
With or without the IPP appeal process, the best protection afforded to students with special needs in Nova Scotia appears to be that offered in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Charter is part of Canada's Constitution and as such, every federal or provincial law must comply with it. For our purposes, the most relevant section of the Charter is sec. 15 which provides that "Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination and in particular, without discrimination based on mental or physical disability'. There has been one major case where the Supreme Court of Canada has applied this section of the Charter in the context of the rights of a special needs child in the school system (Eaton v. Brant (County) Board of Education (1996) 142 D.L.R. (4th)385). In that case, the parents of a multiply-handicapped child, Emily, appealed her "placement" - although she had initially been placed in a regular kindergarten class with a special assistant, after two years the school wanted Emily to be placed in a segregated special education class. The parents wanted her to remain in a regular grade level classroom. Through the IPP appeal process, the case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court of Canada. The argument centred around s. 15 of the Charter - was it discriminatory to place Emily in a special education classroom? The Court found that in the facts of that particular case, it was not. It would be in Emily's "best interests" to be placed in a special classroom. Although some people view this case as a step backwards for equality and perspective is, of course, everything, I see this case as an important step forward for special needs children. The court noted that true equality requires the recognition of differences and focused upon a lack of accommodation as the real threat to disabled people in Canada. It was found that segregation could both protect or violate equality depending on the very individual characteristics of the child in question. Although integration was accepted as the general norm due to the benefits it provides, the court found that a presumption in favour of integrated schooling should be rejected on the basis that it may operate to deprive pupils that do require special education services that are best provided in a segregated setting (p. 407). The idea that each individual child, the strengths and needs of that particular child and where those needs are best met are the controlling factors in determining placement makes sense, at least to me. The court held that in some cases segregation would constitute discrimination; in other cases, inclusion in a regular classroom would be discriminatory. It all depends on the particular childHowever, the potential pitfall that I see in this analysis is how we determine (and perhaps more importantly, who determines) what is in a particular child's best interests. Unfortunately, the courts often display a high degree of deference to the "specialized tribunals" that represent school boards, whether it be the Identification Placement and Review Committee which determined placement in Emily's case or the Ministerial Appeal Board we find in Nova Scotia. To date, not only in Nova Scotia, but across the country, the courts definitely tend to come down on the side of the education system as being the best party to make such decisions. It will definitely be an uphill battle for parents as long as the courts operate with this unspoken presumption that the educational system "knows best". However as more and more special education cases are brought before the courts, they will eventually realize that the system, at least here in Nova Scotia, is not working "as it should", and they will become more interventionist. We should also realize that "placement" need not be an all or nothing proposition. Insisting that all special needs children must be placed in a special education setting 100% of the time is as ridiculous as asserting that all special needs children must be in a regular classroom 100% of the time. If we look at the individual child, and their particular needs, we may often find that the real answer is somewhere in between. As long as the governing rule is what is best for this particular child, a program planning team should be able to decide whether a combination of settings within a public school or a separate setting such as offered in Nova Scotia's Special Designated Private School would be most valuable for the child. Another Supreme Court of Canada decision which will likely eventually impact the rights of special needs students is Nova Scotia is that in Eldridge v. British Columbia (Attorney General), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 624. In Eldridge, the plaintiffs, who were deaf, argued that because of the communication barrier that exists between deaf person and health care providers, deaf people received a lesser quality of medical services than hearing persons. The Supreme Court of Canada accepted this argument and found that the health care system was obligated to provide sign language interpreters to individuals in such circumstances. From the point of view of special education, this opens the door for special needs students to argue that where the Nova Scotia's Department of Education and their school boards fail to sufficiently accommodate their disabilities, such students will be receiving a lesser quality of educational services. In such a case, action might also be brought against the Province on the basis that the Province has and exercises the obligation to set policy and standards, evaluate programs and provide any potential funding to school boards for certain types of expenditures. If a student was successful in establishing that they were discriminated against in the quality of education provided to them, they might also be able to establish that the general policy standards and guidelines, and the funding parameters set by the Province failed to meet the constitutional standard.
There is also a very important case soon to be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada.
In December 2006, the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal ruled that the B.C. Ministry of Education and the District School Division discriminates against children with learning disabilities by making cutbacks that disproportionately impacted children with learning disabilities and by failing to provide them with necessary programs and services.
The B.C. Ministry of Education has appealed the case to the Supreme Court of Canada. Should the Supreme court uphold the ruling, that the B.C. Ministry of Education did in fact discriminate, and suggest remedies, the remedies would be for all children regardless of which province they lived. This would be a big and positive step to force the Nova Scotia Department of Education to start living up to their obligations of equal education for all children including those with learning disabilities.
The Human Rights Act
Students with special needs should also be protected under the Nova Scotia Human Rights Act. All provincial legislation, including the Education Act and regulations made under it, must be in compliance with the Human Rights Act. It contains a provision similar to Sec. 15 of the Charter, stating that "No person shall in respect of the provision of or access to services or facilities discriminate against an individual or class of individuals on account of …. physical disability or mental disability. (s. 5(1)) However, within the past two years, the Human Rights Commission has taken the position that before proceeding to the Commission with respect to a complaint in respect of discrimination against a special needs child in the educational system, the parents must first exhaust all dispute resolution procedures available to them in the education system. This could mean following to its completion the IPP appeal process or any parent concern protocols which various school boards might have. From the point of view of the parent, it often looks like just another roadblock placed in front of them as they try to obtain an appropriate education for their child.
Conclusion
Due to the courts' reluctance in Canada to embrace the concept that a student, or a parent, can bring an action for a school board's negligence in providing, or failing to provide, an appropriate education to a special needs child, the best tool that parents and their special needs children have in attempting to obtain an appropriate education in Canada at this point is clearly the Charter. The Department of Education's Special Education Policy Manual, which has the effect of law, provides that "School Boards are required to provide an appropriate education for all students who reside within their jurisdiction who are of school age." (Policy 1.5) By relying on the right of every individual to have the equal benefit of this law and the right not to be discriminated against on the basis of either physical or mental disability, parents should be in a position to resort to the courts, when necessary, to obtain an education appropriate to their individual child's needs.
All children in the Province are entitled to an "appropriate education", this means an education appropriate to their particular needs. References in the Special Education Policy Manual refer to "programming in a variety of educational settings" and :school boards providing a continuum of programming options and services to meet the special needs of students". Support services are to be co-ordinated within the neighbourhood school and to the extent possible, within grade level/subject area classrooms.
School boards are also obligated to provide necessary medical treatment during school hours, including the administration of oral medication and the health care and comfort of physically disabled students. Although students with special needs in Nova Scotia are entitled to an appropriate education and in theory parents are considered an integral part of the process of forming an education for such children, the actual reality is far from rosy. There are numerous children with special needs in this Province who have been pulled out of school by their parents. Some because the parents feel that the children's needs for physical safety are not being met, some due to the fact that the parents strongly believe that their children are not getting a proper education in school and having their diverse needs properly met. Some of these children are placed in private schools at great expense to the parents, some are officially signed up for home schooling and some are informally educated at home while the parents work very hard to get their children back in school with the type of programming to which they are legally entitled. It is for this reason that for a parent with a child with special needs in the school system, its important to know what the parents' and child's rights are and what tools are available to a parent when despite repeated discussion and negotiation, a school board refuses to provide a child with what they require to obtain an appropriate education.
The IPP
We have heard from many members of EEANS that they have trouble getting IPP's. Unfortunately school staff dissuade parents from obtaining an IPP by telling that putting a child on one will jeopardise their chances of attending post secondary education. This is false. The fact is, if a child is not given an IPP to help them regain their grade level and self confidence, they will be more in jeopardy of dropping out of school early and getting into trouble.
In Nova Scotia, students who cannot meet grade level outcomes, even with various accommodations, are entitled to be put on an individualized program plan, better known as an IPP. An IPP will set out the goals for the student, the strategies which will be used to achieve those goals and the roles and responsibilities of teachers and others, such as Speech Language Pathologists or teachers' assistants. The Program Planning Team is responsible for creating the IPP and reviewing and modifying it as the student's needs change. This team includes the student's teachers any teacher assistants or other specialist teachers involved and the parents or guardians of the child. The parent or guardian of a special needs child is, by law, a member of that child's Program Planning Team. The Policy provides a detailed description for the Program Planning team process stating that the program planning meeting should not be a forum for teachers, administrators, and other agency personnel to present a completed program to the parents. [pg.38] Although the parent is only one member of the Team, the legislation makes it clear that the parents' legal role in the education of a special needs child is not merely because they hold the title of "parent", but because parents, as such, are legislatively considered to possess a wealth of knowledge and experience about the special needs of their children. It is clear that decisions about Program Planning and services should be reached by mutual agreement among team members including parents / guardians. [pg.56]From a parent's point of view, the IPP is often the place where the rubber hits the road as it lays out how and what the school will teach their child. In a sense, its a child's lifeline, from where he is now to where we hope he will some day be. Parents are not only to be afforded the opportunity to participate in the development of an IPP for their special needs child but also to have access to a procedure to appeal that document if they disagree with. It is for that reason that the IPP appeal process is so important for parents- it gives them a process to follow if they do not agree with what the school proposes to teach the child, where they propose to teach him or the methods that they propose to use. From the parent's perspective its very important to know what steps must be followed in order to initiate an appeal of a child's IPP, how much time both the school board and Minister have to respond and set up an appeal hearing and what the parents' rights are at such hearings.
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
With or without the IPP appeal process, the best protection afforded to students with special needs in Nova Scotia appears to be that offered in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Charter is part of Canada's Constitution and as such, every federal or provincial law must comply with it. For our purposes, the most relevant section of the Charter is sec. 15 which provides that "Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination and in particular, without discrimination based on mental or physical disability'. There has been one major case where the Supreme Court of Canada has applied this section of the Charter in the context of the rights of a special needs child in the school system (Eaton v. Brant (County) Board of Education (1996) 142 D.L.R. (4th)385). In that case, the parents of a multiply-handicapped child, Emily, appealed her "placement" - although she had initially been placed in a regular kindergarten class with a special assistant, after two years the school wanted Emily to be placed in a segregated special education class. The parents wanted her to remain in a regular grade level classroom. Through the IPP appeal process, the case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court of Canada. The argument centred around s. 15 of the Charter - was it discriminatory to place Emily in a special education classroom? The Court found that in the facts of that particular case, it was not. It would be in Emily's "best interests" to be placed in a special classroom. Although some people view this case as a step backwards for equality and perspective is, of course, everything, I see this case as an important step forward for special needs children. The court noted that true equality requires the recognition of differences and focused upon a lack of accommodation as the real threat to disabled people in Canada. It was found that segregation could both protect or violate equality depending on the very individual characteristics of the child in question. Although integration was accepted as the general norm due to the benefits it provides, the court found that a presumption in favour of integrated schooling should be rejected on the basis that it may operate to deprive pupils that do require special education services that are best provided in a segregated setting (p. 407). The idea that each individual child, the strengths and needs of that particular child and where those needs are best met are the controlling factors in determining placement makes sense, at least to me. The court held that in some cases segregation would constitute discrimination; in other cases, inclusion in a regular classroom would be discriminatory. It all depends on the particular childHowever, the potential pitfall that I see in this analysis is how we determine (and perhaps more importantly, who determines) what is in a particular child's best interests. Unfortunately, the courts often display a high degree of deference to the "specialized tribunals" that represent school boards, whether it be the Identification Placement and Review Committee which determined placement in Emily's case or the Ministerial Appeal Board we find in Nova Scotia. To date, not only in Nova Scotia, but across the country, the courts definitely tend to come down on the side of the education system as being the best party to make such decisions. It will definitely be an uphill battle for parents as long as the courts operate with this unspoken presumption that the educational system "knows best". However as more and more special education cases are brought before the courts, they will eventually realize that the system, at least here in Nova Scotia, is not working "as it should", and they will become more interventionist. We should also realize that "placement" need not be an all or nothing proposition. Insisting that all special needs children must be placed in a special education setting 100% of the time is as ridiculous as asserting that all special needs children must be in a regular classroom 100% of the time. If we look at the individual child, and their particular needs, we may often find that the real answer is somewhere in between. As long as the governing rule is what is best for this particular child, a program planning team should be able to decide whether a combination of settings within a public school or a separate setting such as offered in Nova Scotia's Special Designated Private School would be most valuable for the child. Another Supreme Court of Canada decision which will likely eventually impact the rights of special needs students is Nova Scotia is that in Eldridge v. British Columbia (Attorney General), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 624. In Eldridge, the plaintiffs, who were deaf, argued that because of the communication barrier that exists between deaf person and health care providers, deaf people received a lesser quality of medical services than hearing persons. The Supreme Court of Canada accepted this argument and found that the health care system was obligated to provide sign language interpreters to individuals in such circumstances. From the point of view of special education, this opens the door for special needs students to argue that where the Nova Scotia's Department of Education and their school boards fail to sufficiently accommodate their disabilities, such students will be receiving a lesser quality of educational services. In such a case, action might also be brought against the Province on the basis that the Province has and exercises the obligation to set policy and standards, evaluate programs and provide any potential funding to school boards for certain types of expenditures. If a student was successful in establishing that they were discriminated against in the quality of education provided to them, they might also be able to establish that the general policy standards and guidelines, and the funding parameters set by the Province failed to meet the constitutional standard.
There is also a very important case soon to be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada.
In December 2006, the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal ruled that the B.C. Ministry of Education and the District School Division discriminates against children with learning disabilities by making cutbacks that disproportionately impacted children with learning disabilities and by failing to provide them with necessary programs and services.
The B.C. Ministry of Education has appealed the case to the Supreme Court of Canada. Should the Supreme court uphold the ruling, that the B.C. Ministry of Education did in fact discriminate, and suggest remedies, the remedies would be for all children regardless of which province they lived. This would be a big and positive step to force the Nova Scotia Department of Education to start living up to their obligations of equal education for all children including those with learning disabilities.
The Human Rights Act
Students with special needs should also be protected under the Nova Scotia Human Rights Act. All provincial legislation, including the Education Act and regulations made under it, must be in compliance with the Human Rights Act. It contains a provision similar to Sec. 15 of the Charter, stating that "No person shall in respect of the provision of or access to services or facilities discriminate against an individual or class of individuals on account of …. physical disability or mental disability. (s. 5(1)) However, within the past two years, the Human Rights Commission has taken the position that before proceeding to the Commission with respect to a complaint in respect of discrimination against a special needs child in the educational system, the parents must first exhaust all dispute resolution procedures available to them in the education system. This could mean following to its completion the IPP appeal process or any parent concern protocols which various school boards might have. From the point of view of the parent, it often looks like just another roadblock placed in front of them as they try to obtain an appropriate education for their child.
Conclusion
Due to the courts' reluctance in Canada to embrace the concept that a student, or a parent, can bring an action for a school board's negligence in providing, or failing to provide, an appropriate education to a special needs child, the best tool that parents and their special needs children have in attempting to obtain an appropriate education in Canada at this point is clearly the Charter. The Department of Education's Special Education Policy Manual, which has the effect of law, provides that "School Boards are required to provide an appropriate education for all students who reside within their jurisdiction who are of school age." (Policy 1.5) By relying on the right of every individual to have the equal benefit of this law and the right not to be discriminated against on the basis of either physical or mental disability, parents should be in a position to resort to the courts, when necessary, to obtain an education appropriate to their individual child's needs.
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Notice:EEANS AGM May 22nd
EEANS will be holding it’s Annual General Meeting 7pm, Tuesday, May 22nd at the Bedford Presbyterian Church-
49 Nelson's Landing Boulevard, Bedford.
We will be discussing progress made during the 2006-07 year including the status of the Tuition Support Program as well as providing an overview of EEAN’S goals for the 2007-08 school year.
This will be a great chance for you to have input on EEANS, as well as meet other members who are interested in making sure children with learning disabilities get a fair and equal education in Nova Scotia.
If you are interested in having a more active roll in supporting EEANS goals, a election of directors will take place. We would encourage anyone with a little spare time to participate by volunteering to sit on our board executive or by getting involved in a sub-committee project. Your involvement can be tailored to your availability and any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
We hope you can make it.
49 Nelson's Landing Boulevard, Bedford.
We will be discussing progress made during the 2006-07 year including the status of the Tuition Support Program as well as providing an overview of EEAN’S goals for the 2007-08 school year.
This will be a great chance for you to have input on EEANS, as well as meet other members who are interested in making sure children with learning disabilities get a fair and equal education in Nova Scotia.
If you are interested in having a more active roll in supporting EEANS goals, a election of directors will take place. We would encourage anyone with a little spare time to participate by volunteering to sit on our board executive or by getting involved in a sub-committee project. Your involvement can be tailored to your availability and any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
We hope you can make it.
Friday, April 27, 2007
Today
On Monday April 23rd, over 100 parents and concerned citizens gathered at Halifax West to take part in the Minister's Special Education Review. EEANS made a presentation and a written submission to the review panel. Parent after parent passionatley talked about how Designated Special Education Schools and the help of the Tuition Support Program was making a difference in the lives of their children. One of the most moving statements came from a teacher of Bridgeway Academy, Lynne Fielder. To you and all of the dedicated people who work with our kids in both public and private schools, thank you for being a teacher.
Today I was a teacher.
Today I taught individualized instruction to students with learning disabilities.
Today my largest class size was 6 and my smallest was 2.
Today I visited every single student at his or her desk.
Today I read every single students work.
Today I know that every single student understood their homework assignments before leaving the classroom.
Today I emailed a parent because their son wrote 7 sentences in his journal compared to the 3-word single sentence he was writing in September.
Today I listened as a 16 year old student advocated for herself because she
needed an extension on her assignment.
Today I connected with every single student in my care.
Today I taught kids who “got it.”
Today I know that every student in my classroom experienced success in his or her learning.
Today, when the dismissal bell rang, I saw 97 students with learning disabilities leave Bridgeway Academy with a sense of dignity.
Today I was a teacher.
By Lynne M. Fielder
Teacher, Bridgeway Academy
Presented on April 23, 2007 to the Minister’s Review of Services for Students with Special Needs.
Today I was a teacher.
Today I taught individualized instruction to students with learning disabilities.
Today my largest class size was 6 and my smallest was 2.
Today I visited every single student at his or her desk.
Today I read every single students work.
Today I know that every single student understood their homework assignments before leaving the classroom.
Today I emailed a parent because their son wrote 7 sentences in his journal compared to the 3-word single sentence he was writing in September.
Today I listened as a 16 year old student advocated for herself because she
needed an extension on her assignment.
Today I connected with every single student in my care.
Today I taught kids who “got it.”
Today I know that every student in my classroom experienced success in his or her learning.
Today, when the dismissal bell rang, I saw 97 students with learning disabilities leave Bridgeway Academy with a sense of dignity.
Today I was a teacher.
By Lynne M. Fielder
Teacher, Bridgeway Academy
Presented on April 23, 2007 to the Minister’s Review of Services for Students with Special Needs.
Monday, April 9, 2007
Minister's Review of Services for Students with Special Needs Meetings Schedule
Minister's Review of Services for Students with Special Needs will be getting underway soon.
Purpose of the review as stated by the Minister:
“We want to ensure that each student is receiving a quality education,” says Education Minister Karen Casey. “This review team will identify our successes and where we can do more.”
The purpose of this review is to:
* determine whether the funding provided by the Department to support individual programming and services initiatives has resulted in the intended outcome,
* make recommendations that would improve the outcomes of current initiatives, and
* to identify new programs and/or program adjustments to be considered by the Department that have been shown to be effective for educating children and youth with special needs.
It is very important that as many EEANS members and other stakeholders, who want to see improvement to the quality education of children with learning disabilities in Nova Scotia, take time to attend these meetings. This is a chance to tell your child's story. To inform the government of your experience as a parent and to comment on the present state of special education in Nova Scotia.
See you there.
Here is the schedule:
Berwick Public Meeting
Tuesday, April 17
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Berwick and District School
220 Cottage Street
Yarmouth Public Meeting
Wednesday, April 18
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Yarmouth Memorial High School
52 Parade Street
Halifax Public Meeting
Monday, April 23
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Halifax West High School
283 Thomas Raddall Drive
Dartmouth Public Meeting (French Session)
Tuesday, April 24
7:00 - 9:00 pm
École du Carrefour
201A, avenue du Portage
Videoconferencing will be available from the following sites/le public pourra aussi participer par vidéoconférence à partir des sites suivants :
La Butte
École secondaire de Clare
80, chemin Placide Comeau
Arichat
École Beau-Port
2359 Route 206
Truro Public Meeting
Wednesday, April 25
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Cobequid Educational Centre
34 Lorne Street
Bridgewater Public Meeting
Wednesday, April 26
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Hebbville Academy
16147 Highway #3
Port Hawkesbury Public Meeting
Monday, April 30
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Strait Area Education Recreation Centre
304 Pitt Street
Sydney Public Meeting
Tuesday, May 1
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Sherwood Park Education Centre
500 Terrace Street
Purpose of the review as stated by the Minister:
“We want to ensure that each student is receiving a quality education,” says Education Minister Karen Casey. “This review team will identify our successes and where we can do more.”
The purpose of this review is to:
* determine whether the funding provided by the Department to support individual programming and services initiatives has resulted in the intended outcome,
* make recommendations that would improve the outcomes of current initiatives, and
* to identify new programs and/or program adjustments to be considered by the Department that have been shown to be effective for educating children and youth with special needs.
It is very important that as many EEANS members and other stakeholders, who want to see improvement to the quality education of children with learning disabilities in Nova Scotia, take time to attend these meetings. This is a chance to tell your child's story. To inform the government of your experience as a parent and to comment on the present state of special education in Nova Scotia.
See you there.
Here is the schedule:
Berwick Public Meeting
Tuesday, April 17
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Berwick and District School
220 Cottage Street
Yarmouth Public Meeting
Wednesday, April 18
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Yarmouth Memorial High School
52 Parade Street
Halifax Public Meeting
Monday, April 23
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Halifax West High School
283 Thomas Raddall Drive
Dartmouth Public Meeting (French Session)
Tuesday, April 24
7:00 - 9:00 pm
École du Carrefour
201A, avenue du Portage
Videoconferencing will be available from the following sites/le public pourra aussi participer par vidéoconférence à partir des sites suivants :
La Butte
École secondaire de Clare
80, chemin Placide Comeau
Arichat
École Beau-Port
2359 Route 206
Truro Public Meeting
Wednesday, April 25
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Cobequid Educational Centre
34 Lorne Street
Bridgewater Public Meeting
Wednesday, April 26
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Hebbville Academy
16147 Highway #3
Port Hawkesbury Public Meeting
Monday, April 30
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Strait Area Education Recreation Centre
304 Pitt Street
Sydney Public Meeting
Tuesday, May 1
7:00 - 9:00 pm
Sherwood Park Education Centre
500 Terrace Street
Sunday, March 25, 2007
On March 23, 2007, Finance Minister Michael Baker tabled the Conservative government's 2007/08 budget. In it, he announced a permanent third year for the tuition support program.
Here is the section regarding TSP from the speech:
“And, Mr. Speaker, completing our commitments to supporting families whose children have specific needs that cannot be met within the regular school system, the province is also allocating $350,000 to provide funding for a permanent third year of tuition support. This program enables these students to benefit from specialized expertise that is available at a designated private school for up to three years. Tuition support is one of our many Learning for Life initiatives that help students with
special needs.”
This announcement is somewhat deceiving to the general public. It makes it look as if the government has come up with new money to be able to add a third year of tuition support. It makes it look like they are heroes for looking after the needs of children with learning disabilities for another year.
For people who may not be as familiar with the realities of educating a child with learning disability, here's the truth.
Extending the Tuition Support Program for a third year costs the government $0. The $350,000 they mention is already accounted for in the operating budget of public schools. This is not new money. Tuition Support Program simply moves a standard funding unit from public school to a private school setting. No big sacrifice. In fact the Tuition Support Program actually saves the government money. For each student attending a designated special needs private school, the government saves an estimated $5000.00 per student because they are not drawing on special needs programs like teachers assistants, resource teachers, school psychologists, and program planning teams. In the 2006-07 school year this equated to $580,00.00 savings. Making it economically feasible for these students to attend a designated special needs school allows these over-subscribed programs to better meet the existing school population.
The actual fact is that the government only pays half the tuition at the private special education school. Parents have to come up with the other half. Why do the parents have to come up with anything?
Children with learning disabilities are entitled to a proper and free education, just like children without learning disabilities.
The government in this speech has finally admitted that public schools are not meeting the needs of our learning disabled children. Government therefore, should pay the full tuition for children to attend a special education school for as long as needed.
The Nova Scotia Education Act states:
“The education system should be committed to fair and equitable participation and benefit by all people in Nova Scotia.”
“The purpose of this Act is to provide for a publicly funded school system whose primary mandate is to provide education programs and services for students to enable them to develop their potential and acquire the knowledge, skills and attitudes needed to contribute to a healthy society and a prosperous and sustainable economy.”
Extending the Tuition Support Program from two years to three is inadequate. We don't remove a wheelchair ramp after three years of use. We don't remove a cast off a broken arm until it is mended.
Why do we stop supporting children with disabilities after three years? Has the government a study showing three years to be enough?
Many children are three to five years behind their peers in grade level because the public system failed to identify their learning disability early enough. They are in this situation because the special education supports and services in our public system is over-subscribed and under-funded.
Many families will have a very hard decision to make now that their tuition support has run out after three years. Do they try to come up with the full tuition for their child to attend a special education private school, a school where their child is showing improvement? Or do they send their child back to public school to potentially struggle and fail?
The Equal Education Association of Nova Scotia feels that children who need to attend a special education school should receive tuition support for as long as they need it. Not for as long as politicians and their bureaucrats see fit.
Brian Hickling
Vice Chair
EEANS
Here is the section regarding TSP from the speech:
“And, Mr. Speaker, completing our commitments to supporting families whose children have specific needs that cannot be met within the regular school system, the province is also allocating $350,000 to provide funding for a permanent third year of tuition support. This program enables these students to benefit from specialized expertise that is available at a designated private school for up to three years. Tuition support is one of our many Learning for Life initiatives that help students with
special needs.”
This announcement is somewhat deceiving to the general public. It makes it look as if the government has come up with new money to be able to add a third year of tuition support. It makes it look like they are heroes for looking after the needs of children with learning disabilities for another year.
For people who may not be as familiar with the realities of educating a child with learning disability, here's the truth.
Extending the Tuition Support Program for a third year costs the government $0. The $350,000 they mention is already accounted for in the operating budget of public schools. This is not new money. Tuition Support Program simply moves a standard funding unit from public school to a private school setting. No big sacrifice. In fact the Tuition Support Program actually saves the government money. For each student attending a designated special needs private school, the government saves an estimated $5000.00 per student because they are not drawing on special needs programs like teachers assistants, resource teachers, school psychologists, and program planning teams. In the 2006-07 school year this equated to $580,00.00 savings. Making it economically feasible for these students to attend a designated special needs school allows these over-subscribed programs to better meet the existing school population.
The actual fact is that the government only pays half the tuition at the private special education school. Parents have to come up with the other half. Why do the parents have to come up with anything?
Children with learning disabilities are entitled to a proper and free education, just like children without learning disabilities.
The government in this speech has finally admitted that public schools are not meeting the needs of our learning disabled children. Government therefore, should pay the full tuition for children to attend a special education school for as long as needed.
The Nova Scotia Education Act states:
“The education system should be committed to fair and equitable participation and benefit by all people in Nova Scotia.”
“The purpose of this Act is to provide for a publicly funded school system whose primary mandate is to provide education programs and services for students to enable them to develop their potential and acquire the knowledge, skills and attitudes needed to contribute to a healthy society and a prosperous and sustainable economy.”
Extending the Tuition Support Program from two years to three is inadequate. We don't remove a wheelchair ramp after three years of use. We don't remove a cast off a broken arm until it is mended.
Why do we stop supporting children with disabilities after three years? Has the government a study showing three years to be enough?
Many children are three to five years behind their peers in grade level because the public system failed to identify their learning disability early enough. They are in this situation because the special education supports and services in our public system is over-subscribed and under-funded.
Many families will have a very hard decision to make now that their tuition support has run out after three years. Do they try to come up with the full tuition for their child to attend a special education private school, a school where their child is showing improvement? Or do they send their child back to public school to potentially struggle and fail?
The Equal Education Association of Nova Scotia feels that children who need to attend a special education school should receive tuition support for as long as they need it. Not for as long as politicians and their bureaucrats see fit.
Brian Hickling
Vice Chair
EEANS
Thursday, March 8, 2007
Strategies for a Tuition Support Appeal.
Each appeal will vary based on personal circumstances.*
Here is some general advice collected from some appeals and strategies in dealing with the Department of Education
1) Everyone should appeal. Even if the department states that you have no grounds, appeal anyway. If you don’t put in an appeal it makes trying to obtain tuition support more difficult.
2) Meet with your MLA. Your MLA is there to assist his constituents in their dealings with the government. Go over your particular case with your MLA. He can guide you through the provincial regulations and the appeal process. He may also suggest what grounds you may appeal on. Your MLA may also choose to lobby on your behalf.
3) Your appeal must deal directly with the reviewer’s decision as it relates to sections 70 & 71 of the regulations. The regulations on the Departments web site are outdated. The current regulations are on the Legislature site. www.gov.ns.ca/just/regulations/regs/edgic.htm Sections 67-78
4) You are allowed to personally present your case before the appeal board, but you must request this. Include in your letter of appeal “We request the right to present our case before the appeal board”. (It’s harder for the reviewer to say no to a person sitting across the table. Especially with a well presented case.)
5) Get everything in writing. If you have phone conversations, take notes during and after. Keep all correspondence with the Department.
We noted that the most common reasons for the government to deny an application for a tuition support agreement is often:
A) Not currently in the public school system
B) Beyond the three year limit
C) No IPP
D) From out of province.
Some strategies to look at:
1) While your child was enrolled in the public school system, did you ever apply for a tuition agreement and were denied? Section 71(2) allows those who have previously applied for tuition support and at that time met the criterion for 71(1) (b)-(e) to apply while enrolled in a designated special education private school.
2) Did an employee of the school board (teacher, school psychologist, principal, etc) suggest that you take your child out of the public system or suggest they might make better progress in a smaller class private school? Did they deny your child services? i.e. IPP. Then the actions of the school board have put you in a position where you do not meet the criterion. Appeal on this basis.
3) Were you told that putting your child on an IPP would limit his or her chances of post secondary education thus dissuading you from getting an IPP? This is a myth that unfortunately is still being told to many parents and it is wrong. The fact that you received misleading counsel from an employee of the school board (teacher, school psychologist, principal, etc) should help.
4) The two-year(now three) time limit is in breach of the charter of human rights. By placing an arbitrary time limit on the specialized services the government is denying services to those who may still be in need. Our children have a right not to be discriminated against due to mental or physical disabilities. Denying them the form of education that they need due to their disability is in breach of the charter. They deserve an equal education and sending them back to a public school environment ill-suited to a students needs would be in violation of the charter and the Education Act.
5) People from out of province are not eligible to receive tuition support unless their child attended a Nova Scotia public school. This an is illegal according to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that states:
Every citizen of Canada and every person who has the status of a permanent resident of Canada has the right (a) to move to and take up residence in any province; and (b) to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province. Limitation (3) The rights specified in subsection (2) are subject to (a)any laws or practices of general application in force in a province other than those that discriminate among persons primarily on the basis of province of present or previous residence; and (b) any laws providing for reasonable residency requirements as a qualification for the receipt of publicly provided social services.
If you are denied because you came from out of province, bring to their attention that their requirement that the child must attended a Nova Scotia public school for one year is in direct conflict with the Charter’s Mobility Rights law. The mobility law is there to allow people to move freely to any province and for those people to be treated the same as the people who live in the province. The fact is, if your child went a public school in any other province of Canada, the government must consider this to be the same as if you went to a Nova Scotia public school.
Educate yourself on you rights.
Make sure you have copies of all relevant documentation and bring it to the appeal. We suggest having a binder that includes all your child’s report cards, resource reports, assessments, IPP’s, correspondence to and from the school and school board, each organized in its own section.
Familiarize yourself with the various regulations and policies of the Dept of Education, and the school board. i.e. Regulations for the Education Act, Special Education Policy Manual, Halifax Regional School Board Special Education Procedures, Halifax Regional School Board Special Education Policy, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Prepare a 5 Minute summary of your Child’s learning experiences, what services were provided, what services were denied and how his/her needs were or were not met by the public system. Explain what his/her needs are now met, and how these needs cannot be met adequately by the school board. Back up your statements with documentation. The better prepared you are the higher your chances of success.
We hope this is of some help you as you present your appeal.
If you have any questions fell free to email us at info@eeans.ca
*These are examples of a few strategies that have worked for others. They are not to be taken as a guaranteed approach for your particular case or as legal advice.
Here is some general advice collected from some appeals and strategies in dealing with the Department of Education
1) Everyone should appeal. Even if the department states that you have no grounds, appeal anyway. If you don’t put in an appeal it makes trying to obtain tuition support more difficult.
2) Meet with your MLA. Your MLA is there to assist his constituents in their dealings with the government. Go over your particular case with your MLA. He can guide you through the provincial regulations and the appeal process. He may also suggest what grounds you may appeal on. Your MLA may also choose to lobby on your behalf.
3) Your appeal must deal directly with the reviewer’s decision as it relates to sections 70 & 71 of the regulations. The regulations on the Departments web site are outdated. The current regulations are on the Legislature site. www.gov.ns.ca/just/regulations/regs/edgic.htm Sections 67-78
4) You are allowed to personally present your case before the appeal board, but you must request this. Include in your letter of appeal “We request the right to present our case before the appeal board”. (It’s harder for the reviewer to say no to a person sitting across the table. Especially with a well presented case.)
5) Get everything in writing. If you have phone conversations, take notes during and after. Keep all correspondence with the Department.
We noted that the most common reasons for the government to deny an application for a tuition support agreement is often:
A) Not currently in the public school system
B) Beyond the three year limit
C) No IPP
D) From out of province.
Some strategies to look at:
1) While your child was enrolled in the public school system, did you ever apply for a tuition agreement and were denied? Section 71(2) allows those who have previously applied for tuition support and at that time met the criterion for 71(1) (b)-(e) to apply while enrolled in a designated special education private school.
2) Did an employee of the school board (teacher, school psychologist, principal, etc) suggest that you take your child out of the public system or suggest they might make better progress in a smaller class private school? Did they deny your child services? i.e. IPP. Then the actions of the school board have put you in a position where you do not meet the criterion. Appeal on this basis.
3) Were you told that putting your child on an IPP would limit his or her chances of post secondary education thus dissuading you from getting an IPP? This is a myth that unfortunately is still being told to many parents and it is wrong. The fact that you received misleading counsel from an employee of the school board (teacher, school psychologist, principal, etc) should help.
4) The two-year(now three) time limit is in breach of the charter of human rights. By placing an arbitrary time limit on the specialized services the government is denying services to those who may still be in need. Our children have a right not to be discriminated against due to mental or physical disabilities. Denying them the form of education that they need due to their disability is in breach of the charter. They deserve an equal education and sending them back to a public school environment ill-suited to a students needs would be in violation of the charter and the Education Act.
5) People from out of province are not eligible to receive tuition support unless their child attended a Nova Scotia public school. This an is illegal according to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that states:
Every citizen of Canada and every person who has the status of a permanent resident of Canada has the right (a) to move to and take up residence in any province; and (b) to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province. Limitation (3) The rights specified in subsection (2) are subject to (a)any laws or practices of general application in force in a province other than those that discriminate among persons primarily on the basis of province of present or previous residence; and (b) any laws providing for reasonable residency requirements as a qualification for the receipt of publicly provided social services.
If you are denied because you came from out of province, bring to their attention that their requirement that the child must attended a Nova Scotia public school for one year is in direct conflict with the Charter’s Mobility Rights law. The mobility law is there to allow people to move freely to any province and for those people to be treated the same as the people who live in the province. The fact is, if your child went a public school in any other province of Canada, the government must consider this to be the same as if you went to a Nova Scotia public school.
Educate yourself on you rights.
Make sure you have copies of all relevant documentation and bring it to the appeal. We suggest having a binder that includes all your child’s report cards, resource reports, assessments, IPP’s, correspondence to and from the school and school board, each organized in its own section.
Familiarize yourself with the various regulations and policies of the Dept of Education, and the school board. i.e. Regulations for the Education Act, Special Education Policy Manual, Halifax Regional School Board Special Education Procedures, Halifax Regional School Board Special Education Policy, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Prepare a 5 Minute summary of your Child’s learning experiences, what services were provided, what services were denied and how his/her needs were or were not met by the public system. Explain what his/her needs are now met, and how these needs cannot be met adequately by the school board. Back up your statements with documentation. The better prepared you are the higher your chances of success.
We hope this is of some help you as you present your appeal.
If you have any questions fell free to email us at info@eeans.ca
*These are examples of a few strategies that have worked for others. They are not to be taken as a guaranteed approach for your particular case or as legal advice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
