LAMBTON KENT DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
SPECIAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Thursday
W.T. Laing School, Wallaceburg
19 00 hours
2000 02 24
Library
(7:00 p.m.
M I N U T E S
PRESENT:
Sandra Blondin, Our Children's Voice
Jane Bryce, Trustee
Maureen Chandler, Member "at large"
Betty DeBruin, Kent Council of Home and School Associations
Karen Hasson, Association for Bright Children of Ontario (Vice-Chair)
Norma Hills, Sarnia & District Association for Community Living
Duncan Longwell, Trustee (Chair)
Sharon Nickerson, Learning Disabilities Association of Lambton County
Donna Scherer, Learning Disabilities Association of Chatham-Kent
Ted Scott, Member "at large"
Wenda Vallee, Autism Society of Ontario
Veronica Vaughan, Wallaceburg & Sydenham District Association for
Community Living
REGRETS:
Dave Ashdown, Community Concerns for the Medically Fragile
Dawn Nevills, Member "at large"
ABSENT:
Pauline Adams, Sarnia-Lambton Parents for Total Communication
Bob Birnie, Chatham & District Association for Community Living
Doug McMillin, Lambton County Association for the Mentally Handicapped
RESOURCE
Ruth Mattingley, Superintendent of Education
STAFF:
Deb Ellacott, Mike Gilfoyle, Cathy Koolen and Cathy Telfer, Special
Education Co-ordinators
*********************************************************************************
1.0
CALL TO ORDER AND SELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR – 19 05 hours.
D. Longwell announced that at the last Board
meeting a Notice of Motion was served from the Board’s Policy
and Regulations Committee in order to amend the Board By-laws to state
that the Chair of any Board Committee must be a Trustee. Several SEAC
members expressed concern about the fact that the Board may insist that
the SEAC Chair must be a Trustee. Past practice has been that either
the SEAC Chair or Vice-Chair was a Trustee in order to facilitate reporting
to the Board and SEAC members do not feel the change is necessary for
a Committee that is mandated under the Education Act and regulated by
Regulation 464. Regulation 464, .which deals with the selection of SEAC
Chair, does not state that the SEAC Chair must be a Trustee and some
members feel that the Board is sending the wrong message by attempting
to regulate SEAC.
Trustee Paul Millman, Chair of the Policy and
Regulations Committee was in attendance and explained that the original
intent of the Board’s By-law was to ensure that the Chair of any
Board committee always be a Trustee. The Notice of Motion to amend the
By-law is simply to clarify the wording. J. Bryce agreed and felt that
the Chair of the Board clarified this point at the Board meeting of
2000 02 22.
K. Hasson suggested that D. Longwell continue
as interim SEAC Chair until further information is received. SEAC agreed.
2.0
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF 2000 01 27
The Minutes of 2000 01 27 were approved as written.
3.0
BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES
3.1
Letter to the Minister of Education Re: Additional Special Education
Funding
At the last SEAC meeting it was agreed that a letter would be forwarded
to the Ministry of Education thanking them for the recent news of additional
funding for special education and to encourage them to provide special
consideration to Boards facing declining enrolment. A copy of the letter
sent was provided. A response received from the Ministry of Education
acknowledging receipt was circulated.
3.2
Learning Opportunities Task Force
M. Gilfoyle announced that he has shared the information distributed
at the last meeting from the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities
with Secondary School Principals and Resource Teachers. The Learning
Opportunities Task Force hopes to gather information on best practices
for assisting students with learning disabilities entering Ontario Colleges
and Universities.
4.0
PRESENTATION – INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Bob Asselin, Superintendent of Education; and Garth Vanstone, Academic
Information Technology Manager gave an informative presentation on the
use of computers within the schools with a focus on how computers are
used with students with special needs. Information was also received
on the Board’s website located at www.lkdsb.net (new address).
The SEAC Agenda is posted on the website monthly, along with approved
minutes.
SEAC learned that more than 2400 new DELL workstations
have been installed in the schools within the last eight months, along
with improved wiring in many of the schools. G. Vanstone displayed pictures
of students using computers with adaptive devices in some of the special
needs classrooms and spoke about some of the specialized software used
to assist students with special learning needs (e.g., Write Away 2000,
Lexia, Dragon Dictate).
S. Blondin expressed concern that some schools
do not have a computer in their Resource Room that is powerful enough
to use some of the specialized software, especially Write Away 2000.
B. Asselin explained that it is up to the school administration to determine
the most appropriate location within the school for the new machines.
Principals will be encouraged to review the software and computer needs
within the school and deploy their new machines in the most effective
manner.
D. Scherer stated that some students with special
learning needs only need a computer with a word processing program on
it and could have made good use of the older 286 computers which were
removed. G. Vanstone explained that the older machines were getting
to the point where the Computer Technicians were spending too much time
on them making repairs. We only have one Technician for every 600 computers
and their time must be utilized efficiently.
T. Scott asked if the Board ever got involved
with donated computers. G. Vanstone explained that the Board has accepted
donated computers and has participated in the “Computers for Schools”
project in the past, but the computers received were so outdated they
caused more problems than good.
B. DeBruin asked if the Board ever considered
donating their old computers to students for home use. B. Asselin stated
that donations could not presently be made directly to students due
to liability issues. S. Blondin suggested that the older computers be
donated to an outside organization who would then make them available
to families free of charge.
5.0
PROVINCIAL SCHOOL PUPIL STATISTICS
. Koolen reviewed the chart provided indicating the number of Lambton-Kent
public school students attending Provincial Schools. The statistics
revealed that there are a total of nineteen local students attending
three of the Provincial Schools: Amethyst School, London (6); Robarts
School, London (4); and W. Ross Macdonald School, Brantford (9).
T. Scott wondered if the total of nineteen was
about average for students attending Provincial Schools from other District
School Boards. C. Koolen was not sure, but did indicate that Lambton-Kent
students with learning disabilities are well served by the Amethyst
School in London.
6.0
DRAFT LETTER TO EQAO AND EQAO BULLETIN
At the request of SEAC, a “draft” letter was prepared to
the Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) requesting that
the same accommodations that exceptional pupils receive in their daily
work, and outlined in their IEP, be allowed for those who will be writing
the Grade 10 Reading and Writing Test. The “draft” was reviewed
and no changes were suggested. The letter will be mailed to EQAO.
Also provided was a copy of the “Grade
10 Test of Reading and Writing Skills Bulletin” distributed by
the EQAO. C. Koolen announced that she recently attended a meeting concerning
EQAO and it was learned that the Bulletin has been rescinded, either
because the information is incorrect or it was released prematurely.
A copy of the response the School Council Chair
of Alexander Mackenzie Secondary School received from EQAO was distributed.
R. Mattingley commented that the website of
the Ministry of Education might be an excellent source of information
for SEAC members. The Ministry’s website address is: www.edu.gov.on.ca
.
7.0
SPECIAL EDUCATION BUDGET
R. Mattingley referred to the News Release of the Ministry of Education
that was distributed at the last meeting. She highlighted the components
of the news release:
- the Ministry of Education is implementing a
three-year plan to develop quality and accountability improvements to
special education
- audits of IEP’s will be conducted
- standards for the Special Education Plan will
be developed to make sure Boards are delivering high quality special
education programs and services system-wide
- program standards will be developed
- a commitment to develop better co-ordination
of services for students with special needs
In addition, the Ministry announced that they
will refine the special education funding formula:
- Special Education will continue to be a protected
funding envelope
- a portion of the grant (SEPPA) will continue
to be based on enrolment (not good news for us)
- ISA application process will continue but
Boards will be allowed more flexibility in determining the intensive
support delivered to individual students
R. Mattingley explained that we can expect approximately
$400,000 dollars less in our SEPPA portion of the grant for 2000-2001
since our enrolment has dropped by approximately 2000 students since
amalgamation.
Since the ISA grants have been frozen based
on the 1998-99 claims, we can hopefully expect the Ministry to recognize
the additional 150 claims we submitted for the 1999-2000 school year
but have not received any funding for to date. If the Ministry does
not recognize our additional claims we will be forced to reduce spending
by $2 million which may result in the reduction of 30.5 teachers in
the area of elementary Special Education/Resource. This, of course,
is a worse-case scenario, but for staffing purposes, which begin in
March, we must proceed on the premise that we will not receive any additional
funding in order to give teachers that may be reduced an equal opportunity
to apply for transfers, etc. Staff may be placed back into their original
position if additional funding is received.
R. Mattingley outlined the possible areas where
staff reductions may occur. The decisions for possible areas of reduction
were made based on the following criteria:
- maintain range of programs and services
- maintain the intent with the current financial
restraints
- provide equity throughout the district
- consultation with principals to determine their
needs
- continue to implement recommendations from
program review committees
- comply with Ministry Regulations regarding
ISA grants
- compliance with Ministry regulations regarding
class sizes and special education classes.
Information concerning the ISA application process
will be released soon by the Ministry of Education, but school staff
have already been asked to begin gathering information and documentation
in order to prepare the necessary applications for the 2000-2001 school
year. Staff are well aware that funding is directly related to accurate
and well-prepared ISA applications. Additional information will be brought
forward as it is received.
S. Nickerson voiced concern about the fact the
Ministry will be allowing Boards more flexibility in determining the
type of intensive support a student should receive. R. Matttingley explained
that intensive support does not necessarily mean the support of an Educational
Assistant. Some students benefit more from small group instruction or
programs with specialist teachers. With each ISA application a student
timetable must be submitted indicating exactly how the student will
receive support. There are many checks and balances in place to ensure
that approved students get the support the Board received funding for.
The Ministry has given the Boards flexibility but have said that they
will be watching to make sure Boards adhere to the rules.
S. Nickerson also mentioned that she has received
some reports of parents not receiving a copy of the IPRC Parent Guide
prior to their child’s IPRC meeting. C. Telfer commented that
an in-service session was held last week with Principals and Resource
Teachers in attendance. Both were reminded to make sure parents receive
a copy of the Parent Guide prior to the IPRC.
K. Hasson stated that at the ABC Provincial
Meeting held last weekend it was announced that the IEP Audit mentioned
in the Ministry’s News Release will also involve contact with
parents and students.
M. Chandler expressed concern about students
in the Behaviour Units being reintegrated back to their regular classrooms
in March. She wondered if the students may fit in better if they waited
until September to return to their home schools. She also suggested
that it may be a good idea to have the regular classroom teacher and
even the Principal observe the student in the Behaviour Unit before
he/she is returned to the home school.
Ted Scott asked if the ISA criteria will be
changed for 2000-2001. R. Mattingley explained that it was not expected
that the criteria would be too much different from the previous year,
but concrete details have not been received yet. Once received, staff
will have to be in-serviced, applications prepared and internally validated,
and submitted by the end of April, 2000. It is projected that, if all
of our existing ISA applications are recognized we should make up our
funding shortfall.
D. Scherer asked if Special Education funds
were being spent in order to support non-identified students. R. Mattingley
stated that although she was not sure of the percentages, there are
some non-identified students receiving some resource support, and some
students in Special Classes that have not been IPRC’d, for a variety
of reasons. D. Scherer stated that the public needs to get the message
that crime will increase if children do not receive a proper and nurturing
education.
K. Hasson wanted clarification that the Board
will not put any extra dollars toward special education for 2000-2001.
R. Mattingley stated that was correct--there are not any extra dollars.
K. Hasson also questioned whether or not extra supports should be provided
to non-identified students. R. Mattingley responded that quite often
non-identified students receiving support are in the process of being
identified.
K. Hasson suggested that if the Ministry is
saying that special education dollars are to be spent on identified
students only, perhaps funds to support non-identified students requiring
extra assistance could come from the regular program budgets.
J. Bryce stated that due to the lateness of
the hour, SEAC member should take time to digest the difficult information
received tonight and further discussion could take place at the next
meeting if required.
Dr. Vaughan felt that if more special needs
students were integrated into the regular school setting it may alleviate
the need for some special class teachers and help reduce staff.
8.0
SECONDARY SPECIAL EDUCATION UPDATE
M. Gilfoyle announced that the information he presented at the last
meeting has now been shared with Principals and Resource staff. Parent
and Team meetings are currently being held at the schools with IPRC
Review meetings to be scheduled beginning after the March Break. Additional
supports for higher achievement are being examined by secondary school
administration and program staff. More information will be provided
to SEAC members at the April meeting.
9.0
CORRESPONDENCE - LETTER SENT BY THE TRILLIUM LAKELANDS DISTRICT SCHOOL
BOARD SEAC TO THE MINISTER OF EDUCATION
SEAC was provided with a copy of a letter sent to the Minister of Education
from the Trillium Lakelands District School Board SEAC. The letter expressed
concern about the Special Education Funding Model
10.0
ASSOCIATION REPORTS AND OTHER BUSINESS
D. Scherer announced that the Learning Disabilities Association of Ontario
has distributed invitations to various agencies to participate in a
“Focus Group” to gather information on screening and assessment
techniques used to identify learning disabilities. The first meeting
will be held in London on March 29, 2000. If anyone is interested in
participating contact the Project Co-ordinator at 1416-929-4311.
W. Vallee wondered why the life skills classes
at Chatham-Kent Secondary School were not being transferred to John
McGregor Secondary School along with the ABLE program. M. Gilfoyle stated
that four new classes transferred to one school at one time is too much.
M. Chandler passed on a questionnaire she received
to C. Koolen concerning the conflict of exceptionality definitions for
Hearing Impaired students.
K. Hasson received information at the recent
ABC provincial meeting on the electronic curriculum planner and special
education companion produced by the Ministry of Education on CD-ROM.
The Special Education Companion lists ways that the regular classroom
teacher can assist students with special learning needs. An attempt
will be made to provide SEAC members with copies of the Special Education
Companion booklet.
11.0
QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
None
12.0
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
C. Telfer announced that the feedback from the Ministry of Education
on our Special Education Plan should be received soon. Once received
there will be a need to review our plan and make revisions based on
the Ministry’s recommendations and resubmit the plan by May 15,
2000. C. Telfer asked for two SEAC volunteers to assist in the review
of the Special Education Plan. S. Nickerson and D. Longwell volunteered
13.0
NEXT MEETING
Thursday, March 23, 2000
W.T. Laing School, Wallaceburg - Library
7:00 p.m.
14.0
ADJOURNMENT – 21 45 hours
Joan Sparks,
Recording Secretary.
