The ISSP & Pathways Commission Report - Government of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• use of spell checker, calculators, tape recorders, computer assistedtechnology and other learning tools and devices; and,• use of specific teaching and learning strategies.The pan-Canadian review of services in other jurisdictions identifies a trend towardssimplifying the documentation requirements for such minimal types of supports. InNew Brunswick, for instance, there are three types of Special Education Plans: onefor accommodations; one for modified programs; and one for individualizedprograms. The documentation requirements for both the modified andindividualized programs are practically identical to our ISSP.The Commission heard consistently that the needs of students receiving PathwayTwo supports ONLY (and for whom there is no interagency involvement) can be metwith the introduction of a simplified documentation process and without an ISSP.Indeed, this finding is confirmed by evidence of the 657 students illustrated in Table6 currently receiving Pathway supports without an ISSP. The Commission heardrepeatedly that an increasing number of teachers and parents were choosing to bypassthe ISSP and documentation process for Pathway Two supports, conservingtheir energies for helping the student rather than filling out forms.The only exception to this was in accessing supports for public exams. TheCommission heard that a narrow set of accommodations was available for theseexams, and that ISSPs had to be changed to reflect these accommodations. TheCommission heard that students needed to be reassessed, and that parents had to“battle the Department of Education” to allow the accommodations that weresuccessful in moving the child through the system be continued so as to move themFocusing on Students:A Report of the ISSP & Pathways Commission44
out of the system. One area of particular concern that surfaced throughout theCommission hearings was the use of technology for exams. While students havebeen trained on word processing programs and have become very independent andoften proficient writers with such technology, such support is not allowed during theactual writing of public exams. The Commission questions this practice, andimagines that accommodations that foster lifelong independence are preferred.While the Commission recognizes the legitimacy of documentation and the use ofan interagency approach to planning (particularly for students with moresubstantive needs and certainly those with interagency involvement) it recognizesthe frustration of parents and teachers.Subsequently, the Commission recommends that:Recommendation 4the Department of Education give schools and parents theoption of developing an ISSP if only Pathway Two supports arerequired.Recommendation 5the Department of Education introduce a simplifieddocumentation process for students who require Pathway Twosupports only.Focusing on Students:A Report of the ISSP & Pathways Commission45
Page 2 and 3: Government of Newfoundland and Labr
Page 4 and 5: Bernice LangdonCommissionerBill Som
Page 6 and 7: 3.11. “At-risk” students 653.12
Page 8 and 9: een developed and implemented withi
Page 10 and 11: AcknowledgementsThe Commission woul
Page 12 and 13: These recommendations evolved direc
Page 14 and 15: of Education pursue certain recomme
Page 16 and 17: 1.3 Advisory CommitteeAn advisory c
Page 19 and 20: Principle 4:The Commission’s data
Page 21 and 22: An exceptionally high rate of retur
Page 23 and 24: • The current model focuses on de
Page 25 and 26: design and structure of curriculum.
Page 27 and 28: Services to Children and Youth. As
Page 29 and 30: When a child/youth is identified as
Page 31 and 32: • Pathway Two: The provincially p
Page 33 and 34: 3.0 Key Findings and Recommendation
Page 35 and 36: The Commission notes that the Labra
Page 37 and 38: Therefore, the Commission recommend
Page 39 and 40: 3.3 Educational Record-keepingThis
Page 41 and 42: Table 3:Provincial distribution of
Page 43 and 44: Given earlier findings on the accur
Page 45: Table 6: Provincial distribution of
Page 49 and 50: • Where there is more than one pr
Page 51 and 52: Adding to this frustration is recog
Page 53 and 54: Table 10: Communications regarding
Page 55 and 56: Recommendation 10the department hea
Page 57 and 58: Recommendation 13the Department of
Page 59 and 60: 3.9 Behavioural analysis and suppor
Page 61 and 62: Even a cursory glance at the litera
Page 63 and 64: assessments. It indicates that 44.3
Page 69 and 70: A pan-Canadian review revealed that
Page 71 and 72: Table 14: Exceptionally Able Learne
Page 73 and 74: Nova Scotia articulates its approac
Page 75 and 76: increased emphasis on mathematics a
Page 77 and 78: The Commission’s pan-Canadian rev
Page 79 and 80: French being the dominant language
Page 81 and 82: Manitoba Education has a similar ap
Page 83 and 84: 3.16 Support for ParentsThe Commiss
Page 85 and 86: Table 15:Numbers of parents who rec
Page 87 and 88: parents. Jurisdictions are increasi
Page 90 and 91: Concern for the absence of an effec
Page 92 and 93: 3.18.2 Teacher AssistantsCurrently
Page 94 and 95: assistants (job titles vary among p
Page 96 and 97:
Recommendation 54the Department of
Page 98:
Table 17: Attitudes of classroom te
Page 101 and 102:
equivalent certification (italics a
Page 103:
Table 20: Academic Qualifications:P
Page 106 and 107:
While implementing these recommenda
Page 108 and 109:
In this light, and combined with pr
Page 111 and 112:
Table 23: Guidance counsellorsRespo
Page 113 and 114:
3.19 Professional DevelopmentGiven
Page 115:
Table 25: Teachers-identified in-se
Page 118 and 119:
Recommendation 74regular “refresh
Page 120 and 121:
too many parents and educators alik
Page 122 and 123:
and continued reason for NL to rema
Page 124 and 125:
Government of Manitoba (2004). Work
Page 126 and 127:
Roberts, C. and Lazure, M. (1970).
Page 128 and 129:
Recommendation 9the department head
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
needs related to the Model for the
Page 138 and 139:
Newfoundland and LabradorAssociatio
Page 140 and 141:
Visit to Labrador DistrictNovember
Page 142 and 143:
Visit to Eastern DistrictNovember 1
Page 144 and 145:
Visit to Conseil Scolaire Francopho
Page 146 and 147:
Table 1: The Stratified SampleSchoo
Page 148 and 149:
Table 2: Response RateStatus Freque
Page 150 and 151:
Data AnalysisAt the completion of t
Page 152 and 153:
TEACHER SURVEYSection 1(To be compl
Page 154 and 155:
5. (a) Please indicate the number o
Page 156 and 157:
8. (c) Please indicate the average
Page 158 and 159:
16. On average, how long are you wa
Page 160 and 161:
33. Some students are “falling th
Page 162 and 163:
54. Speech Language Pathologists as
Page 164 and 165:
APPENDIX E:List of SubmissionsAnder
Page 166 and 167:
Langdon, TrentBishop, DavidNewfound
Page 168 and 169:
APPENDIX F:Key InformantsAnthony, J
Page 170 and 171:
Ferguson, TammyFerris, MaryFitzpatr
Page 172 and 173:
Humphries, AnneKean-Dobbin, Claudin
Page 174 and 175:
Palmer, Dr. BarbaraParsons, RobertP
Page 176 and 177:
Sarkany-Coles, GailSheppard, FaronS
Page 178 and 179:
White, PerryWindeler, HenryPrincipa
Page 180 and 181:
Evolution of special educationA rev
Page 182 and 183:
out of this report that would go on
Page 184 and 185:
In the early 1970’s, this parenta
Page 186 and 187:
with provisions for joint planning,
Page 188 and 189:
attended to in separate classrooms
Page 190 and 191:
against the parents of the rest of
Page 192 and 193:
ising wind of change that would swe
Page 194 and 195:
done. The curriculum guides outline
Page 196 and 197:
education and bridging “the divid
Page 198 and 199:
where the benefits will extend to a
Page 200 and 201:
egular classroom when the choice cl
Page 202 and 203:
parents in the planning process for
Page 204 and 205:
Tables 2 & 3 (see end of this docum
Page 206 and 207:
knowledge as to their needs. Subseq
Page 208 and 209:
a lack of practical supports in the
Page 210 and 211:
and resulting frustration among all
Page 212 and 213:
negate blame and validate the strug
Page 214 and 215:
Table 1: Enrolment and Teacher Allo
Page 216 and 217:
Table 3: Categorical AllocationsExc
Page 218 and 219:
graduation: A handbook for all teac
Page 220 and 221:
Maich, K. (2002). When pathways cro
Page 222 and 223:
Skrtic, T. M. (1995). The special e
Page 224 and 225:
APPENDIX H:Inter-Ministerial Protoc
Page 226 and 227:
4. Services should be organized to
Page 228 and 229:
- Support ongoing professional deve
Page 230 and 231:
2. The ISSP is a process with a pre
Page 232 and 233:
. child's level of development indi
Page 234 and 235:
13. The ISSP Manager will be respon
Page 236 and 237:
Appendix J:Child Youth ProfilesMode
Page 238 and 239:
CategoryPhysicalNeed (check allappl
Page 240 and 241:
CategoryTechnologyProgramNeed (chec
show all

The ISSP & Pathways Commission Report - Government of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?