|
Post by kjgdid on Jul 4, 2009 14:10:44 GMT -5
I received a call back from the ministers office. There a section of the education act that states that the minister is obligated to hold a review if the parents of children with intensive needs do not agree with the sd's decision it is section 178 and 178.1 my daughter would fall under intensive needs but I do not know if my son would because he is listed as a diversity student. If not I will cite in my letter all the sections the sd has violated and request information on where the minister plans to have my child attend school because the sd has made it clear that they are not prepared to meet his learning needs.should I be doing anything else? Karen
|
|
|
Post by therose on Jul 5, 2009 11:12:39 GMT -5
What is the difference between diversity and intensive needs? I would suggest to word it a wee bit different, in rather than asking the minister plans on where your son is to go next, restate your preference that your son should go to both schools, and the reasons why. Of course, this should be after the statements of the violations. Plus add two more acceptable ones, and restate your preference.
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Jul 5, 2009 12:23:48 GMT -5
Hi therose I will follow your suggestions.Thanks
Under the Sk ed act a pupil with intensive needs means a pupil who has been assessed by a board of education in accordance with this section and the regulation as having a capacity to learn that is compromised by a cognitive,social emotional,behavioural or physical condition.
In terms of funding the sd receives two levels, diversity or intensive level 1 or 2. My son is listed as a diversity student because he receives accommodations only.My daughter is listed as a intensive level 1 student. My son is on a Student Support Plan[504] rather than a PPP [IEP] so I do not know if I can argue that he has intensive needs.His diagnosis's are LD of written expression,ADHD inattentive type,and DCD, he has also developed anxiety over his inability to organize his assignments and I have a letter that his family Dr wrote to the sd talking about his anxiety and recommending that he attend a alternative program for next year.
I could argue that he falls under three categories of intensive needs cognitive[LD ],social emotional development[anxiety],physical[DCD].
I think before I write the letter I will speak to the advocate from Sk association of community living.I know one of their advocates is a lawyer and see if I may argue that he falls under the category of intensive needs.
Or I will argue because the sd does not follow the act, cite the sections of the act, that the ministry is obligated to respond to my concerns.
|
|
|
Post by therose on Jul 5, 2009 16:11:17 GMT -5
Do contact the advocate on this one. Sounds to me the same type of BS in our province, and probably the rest. My NN would be consider diversity too. All she is entitled to, is accommodations and anything more is granted through the teachers, and if that makes it pass the board. However, I have dug deeper into this, where LD students, in particular the mild to moderate are being put into certain rigid groupings where grades, bad behaviour are the measurements, and NOT the learning problems, psychological problems or for that matter what is stated on the assessment. To move to another group, the child must be failing in all core subjects. As for behaviour, it must be bad, disruptive to the class, and so forth, for movement to occur. Here is where the pencil pushers do their work, moving through stats where the greater percentage of LD kids are in the category of receiving only accommodations by the time they reach grade 6, with very little corrective help in learning and other areas. The kids who do act up, are the kids who have double or triple problems such as ADHD and LD. I don't know if SK keeps stats on special education by provincial, district and school, but if they do check on it. More than likely the mild to moderate LD group will be in the same percentage range per student population under 4 %. I check the stats a few years ago, where the provinces that did have stats available are keeping the LD population under tight control, since it is the only special-needs category where each and every LD child has unique individual needs, that cannot be address by the teacher in the regular classroom, nor in some cases be address by outside help. It is where, you would find children with various labels of LD, autism, ADHD, mild cognitive deficit, vision deficit, hearing deficit, and the list goes on. What has happen, is that the core group of LD children are not receiving the help they need. Note, that the LD population should be 10% in any school or classroom, and recent research says it should be put at the 15 % range. The reason why I have written the above, is to bring an understanding of why they have inserted rules such as in your case. Your son is caught up in their web, as my NN is caught in their web of rules. It is all done, in the name of keeping costs down, related to learning. I am learning now, that even though SK has a different system, different access points - it still does keep the LD population under tight control in terms of costs. I gather a student support plan, is just accommodations. Your son should also have an IEP, but I have learn that the provinces are moving quickly to two types such as SK, with different names. In NL, it is an ISSP (only accommodations) and an IEP ( for those who are on pathways 3,4, & 5 -( special education classes and the gifted are lump into this one). In the year 2008, I had to fight to have NN status remained under an ISSP. While I was fighting for this, the ministry made changes with the introduction of the IEP, without formal communication to parents who where affected. Guess what, NN would have fallen under the IEP from the assessments, and she has lots of company inside her class. About 15 of them have ISSPs, with or without a identified learning problem. Her accommodations are based on her grades, without a thought or a care, on the recommendations of the assessments. What makes it worse, is NN's accommodations is done using the measures of a regular student, and not within her group of ISSPs. This has not only cause problems such as getting the right type of accommodation, but social problems within the group who have ISSPs. It was difficult to explain to NN, why all ISSP students except for two, all had higher averages than she did. I told NN, they received alternative test and assignment formats that are so easy to pass. I went on to say, these students will not be doing academic courses next year, where you will be expected to do so. What none of the kids with ISSPs are receiving is proper and targeted help for their learning problems, as well as social and emotional help that often are problems that stemmed from the learning problems. I would suggest to learn the rules that impact your son, and point up the discrimination, bias and other things such as school's knowledge and your support will be the very rules and regulations of the school system. that will back you up and they might be running for cover under the nearest rock. I often found, that going to the top you will get action a lot faster, than at the school level. Remember, at the minister level - there is an assumption that every school, school board are following the dictates of the ministry. Often the reality is as most parents have discovered, that schools and the boards will often have rules to work around the pesky rights of special education children. Right now, I will be researching of any provinces that actually states the corrective programs, reading, writing and targeted help that is available to a LD student. So far, I have not found any. But, I have hope as I plow my way westward. You see, it has become a problem since the school and board, have always ask me that question. I always thought it should be the other way around, where the ones who have an education in education would be more knowledgeable than a parent. Of course in NL, software, and other programs directed at LD students is dependent only on the school. Whereas software and other curriculum that is directed at the regular student population, approval is at the ministry level. Just another indication, that LD students and their needs are not a high priority in NL .
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Jul 5, 2009 17:26:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Jul 6, 2009 16:48:05 GMT -5
Hi therose You are going to love this one.I received another call from the ministry office today.This guy's title is chief officer for the education minister. He starts out he conversation by saying that he has spoken to their legal person and my best course of action is to write a letter under section 178 of the education act for children with intensive needs and ask for a review. I ask him if my son would qualify under this section because he is a diversity student. He actually asked me if this is a word that the ministry used. I assured him it was and explained the difference. he does not know if he qualifies and directed me back to the regional director for SK learning. He actual said it was not the ministry's responsibility to insure that sd were following the education act. Yah dumb a## it is according to the supreme court of Canada who ruled in a BC case that the ministry could not cite we are merely the funders. I got a call from my school board rep this morning.When I asked what the grievance process was she said it was explained in the parent student handbook.I explained what the handbook said and she said that was correct.I then pointed out that the policy on the sd website differed and we had written a letter to the chairman and the chairman said the board did not hear parent grievances she said that was correct because the division had to large of a geographic area and that they were simply there to set policy for the sd. what? The guy from the minister's office said no that the school board was responsible and I needed to work out my issues with the regional director of children services who I had been in contact with before. I have a call into him and will ask him if my son qualifies under section 178 of the ed act.If so I will follow that process.If not I a letter back to the minister of ed cced to the education critic and the newspaper. I will also write and register a letter to the school board with the specific question on what the grievance process is and cite this guy's name and what he said. It think it is no wonder that there is absolutely no accountability here and these sd's are allowed to run their own dictatorships. Karen
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Aug 26, 2009 9:03:06 GMT -5
We met with the board of ed yesterday.We aired our grievances and they will be writing us a letter back. There was a reporter from the local paper there,they asked her to leave.She waited for us and we spoke to her after our portion was over. I will wait until after I receive her letter and then schedule a interview with her.She became very interested in talking to me when I mentioned that we had been trying to advocate for appropriate services and supports for our children for the last three years and the sd's response was to send us a letter saying we were not to have any direct contact with their teaching staff and would be arrested if we went on school property. She asked me if I had documentation I said yes going back three years
|
|
|
Post by Mayleng on Aug 26, 2009 10:21:52 GMT -5
Goodluck, if all else fails talk to the reporter and get the word out.
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Sept 5, 2009 11:53:28 GMT -5
An update on the situation.My son is not in school right now because the sd has not provided a updated student support plan and are refusing to allow him to go to the AEP program because I have problems with these kids in this program being totally segregated from the kids in the regular school across the street which in SK if they are capable and willing they are suppose to be integrated as per the education act. I have been emailing the minister's office,the education critic and the reporter for two weeks now and the ed critic has written a letter to the minister.I also informed the minister's office that I would be doing a interview with the reporter next Tuesday about my struggle with this sd and the minister's lack of response would be detailed in the paper if this situation was not resolved before then. The only response from the sd was a email Thursday from the superintendent saying Alex was falling behind in his classes and the student support plan from last year would be reinstituted so return him to school immediately. I replied with it is unclear to us why they would insist on following a plan that clearly does not meet his needs and that we were insisting we receive an updated plan that addressed all his learning needs proactively prior to his return to school and if he was falling behind please make arrangements to provide the needed material at home until this issue was resolved. I received a call from the regional director for SK learning yesterday wanting to work out a solution with me so Alex could return to school. I explained once again what the issues were and he called the sd.They are suppose to contact me early next week so that the sd and us can come up with a new student support plan that actual addresses his specific learning needs in a proactive way and they have agreed to actual follow this plan and he assured me that the sd was now more than willing to work with me in a respectful professional manner and at this meeting we will discuss both options,returning to the regular school and the AEP program.I am also suppose to call him immediately if I have any further issues with this sd.Whatever. We will see how long this new and improved relationship lasts. Regarding my daughter the sd has actual agreed to an independent review by a outside person to decide if her programming meets her needs because we feel it does not. If this actual works out I honestly do not know what I will do with myself all day because for the last three years I have spent the a large portion of my day dealing with crap at school.
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Nov 11, 2009 22:26:43 GMT -5
Here is a letter I wrote the director of ed I am done dicking with this women
Ms Casswell-Beckmann this letter is in response to your letter dated 2009 11 09 regarding our attendance at Parent Teacher interviews.
Your letter states that the vice principal,Vicki Moore and the special ed consultant ,Marion Elliot, will conduct Parent Teacher interviews after the PPP meeting on November 16th .
This is an unacceptable alternative to our attending Parent Teacher interviews that were booked the previous week using the process set out by the school.
We have another meeting scheduled after the PPP meeting that was booked weeks ago and we are unable to change the meeting date.
It would be pointless for us to attend Parent Teacher interviews conducted by two individuals that do not work with our daughter so have no knowledge of her experience in her respective classes.
These individuals would also not be able to answer questions meaningfully in areas that Meghan is clearly struggling in in these respective classes because they do not work with her.
We will be attending Parent Teacher interviews during the time periods that were booked through the school. Mrs Moore and Ms Elliot may attend these interviews if they feel the need.
Your letter states that communication through the communication book, monthly progress reports and PPP meetings in your opinion satisfies the “communication piece regarding Meghan's progress”.
This is not the case, the communication book is used merely to write homework down by school personnel.
Meghan's successes and where she is struggling are never noted..Decisions regarding her educational programming are never discussed etc.
Monthly progress reports report marks only not where she is struggling and why .This month all list that Meghan did not use her safe place once in all her classes .What none of them cite is that Meghan left the school and came home three times in a month period due to the school environment being to overwhelming for her and how this would be addressed and resolved at the school.
PPP meetings are never attended by the school staff members that actually work with Meghan. In viewing Ms Dressler's list on who will attend this meeting on November 16th it is clear that this will continue.
You state in your letter that Mrs Moore will be hosting the information flow with your support. What is not made clear is how Mrs Moore can direct this information due to her refusal to speak to us on the phone when we have a concern about our child at school.
You also direct us to continue to direct our communication to you. We are no longer willing to follow this directive.
It is clear to us that you wish to continue to completely marginalize us as parents.
It is also clear to us from your responses to our concerns that the investigations of these concerns are completely one sided , the outcomes are predetermined and facts are often misrepresented to predetermine the outcome.
It is pointless to us to continue with a process when it is clear that it is not done in good faith.
We have struggled the last three plus years to maintain a business relationship with school division personnel by consistently following all requests and directives.
This relationship is clearly not working for our daughter and not in her best interest.
We are now insisting that either our daughter be removed from Sun West School division and placed in another school division where she has a opportunity to thrive at Sun west school divisions expense or a professional mediator be appointed to mediate a healthier relationship between us and the school division.
We will direct our concerns to the school division school board until this matter is resolved.
In closing we are including a poem Meghan wrote as a journal entry in ELA about her feelings about school.
I can't stand it here Why must I be forced to Go through a daily nightmare Four more years of hardship Am I stupid Am I bad Why must those that are different be punished For the first time in fourteen years I am down on my knees praying Praying for the madness to stop
Respectfully
Peter George
Karen George
cc Crandall Hrynkiw Regional Director of Children's Services Sask learning Jessica Kiunga Reporter Crossroads Publishing Minister of Education Ken Krawetz Maureen Jolly SACL Advocate Kevin McTavish Executive Director SACL NDP Critic Pat Atkinson Minister of Disabilities Assistant Deputy Minister Darren McKee Wilda Wallace Heartland Health Region Randy Weekes MLA Biggar Vicki Moore vice principal BCS 2000 Sun West School Division School Board
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Nov 11, 2009 22:45:58 GMT -5
Sun West School Division School Board
Dear Sun West School Board Members
This letter is a letter of grievance we are instituting against Director Of Education Janet Casswell- Beckmann.
This grievance is regarding Ms Casswell-Beckmann's insistence of not acting in good faith when investigating our concerns with the appropriateness of some of the decisions made by school division personnel on behalf of our two children with unique learning needs and her insistence on marginalizing us as parents
Ms Casswell-Beckmann's investigations of these concerns are always one sided and no effort is ever made on her part to contact us with how these concerns can be resolved amicably, rather her letters are most times very punitive and accusatory in nature.
The outcomes of these investigations of our concerns are completely predetermined by Ms Casswell-Beckmann and often the facts of these concerns are misinterpreted by Ms Casswell-Beckmann in order to predetermine the outcome.
Sun West School Division's Policy states
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY NO. 408 STUDENT AND PARENT COMPLAINTS AND GRIEVANCES The Board is committed to ensuring a fair and equitable process for hearing and addressing student and parental complaints. The Board is committed to just and careful procedures for adjudicating and resolving complaints. PROCEDURES 1. General a. Complaints are to be addressed in a timely and appropriate manner. b. Efforts to address and/or redress complaints are to be carefully documented in order to ensure and enhance a fair and consistent response. c. Complaints regarding school operation and treatment of students may be made by: i. A parent or guardian who is acting on behalf of the student. ii. A student who is: • Sixteen years of age or older and living independently • Eighteen years of age or older. d. In the event of a dispute at the school, the student’s teacher is to be the first person to hear and address any complaint or grievance from a student or parent. e. If the complaint cannot be resolved with the teacher, the principal is to be contacted. f. If a complaint cannot be resolved with the principal, the student or parent may contact the Director of Education, or designate to seek resolution, or: i. Complaints may be made directly to the Director, or designate in the event of conflict of interest with the principal. ii. Complaints against the principal may be made directly to the Director, or designate.
As you are aware we as parents are not allowed to follow this process due to a previous superintendent of education's insistence that our concerns were not to be written down. When we insisted that we would need this superintendent's direction in writing we received a letter stating that due to our “constant negative scrutiny” we were directed to have no direct communication with school staff personnel. When I requested the documentation on this “constant negative scrutiny” using the LAFIOP process we received a letter from Ms Casswell-Beckmann stating there was none.
We have also received several letters from Ms Casswell-Beckmann stating that we were harassing school personnel even though we have not been allowed to have contact direct contact with these people. These letters were written well after we stopped having direct contact.
As you are also aware we received a letter from Ms Casswell-Beckmann in March of 2009 stating that due to our not following her insistence on circumventing the LAFIOP process we were to have no direct contact with school division personnel and would be arrested if we went on Sun West School Division property.
We received a letter from Ms Casswell-Beckmann dated 2009 11 09 stating that we are once again not allowed to attend the Parent Teacher interviews that we booked for November 18th for our multiply challenged child using the process set out by the school..Instead these interviews are to be conducted by the vice principal and the special ed consultant. These two individuals do not work with our child so the information they would provide would be meaningless.
These type of directives serve to completely marginalize us as parents. In this letter dated 2009 11 09 Ms Casswell-Beckmann directs us to once again to direct all concerns about our children to her. We no longer agree to direct our concerns about our children to Ms Casswell-Beckmann as it is clear that she is not acting in good faith when investigating our concerns in a just, fair and equitable manner and insists on marginalizing us as parents. When policies and procedures are not followed in a fair and equitable and consistent manner by the director of education this serves to intimidate parents into not bringing forth legitimate concerns regarding their children and does not allow parents an opportunity to work with school division personnel in the best interest of their children.
Saskatchewan Learning is clear that the education of our children is to be a partnership between parents and school divisions. This partnership is meaningless if concerns are not addressed in a fair, equitable and consistent manner and parents are not allowed to work with school personnel in the best interest of their children..
Ms Casswell-Beckmann's insistence on circumventing this fair and equitable process consistently by passes the democratic process and results in the administration of the school division becoming a dictatorship at rate payers expense.
We are requesting that you look into this matter, resolve it immediately and correspond with us what this resolution will be.
Respectfully
Karen George
Peter George
cc Crandall Hrynkiw Regional Director of Children's Services SK learning Jessica Kiunja Reporter Crossroads Publishing Minister of Education Ken Krawetz Maureen O Hare Jolly NDP Ed Critic Pat Atkinson Minister of Disabilities Office Deputy Minister of Ed Darren Mckee Wilda Wallace Support Coordinator Heartland Health Kevin McTavish Executive Director of SACL
|
|
|
Post by mommywithplenty on Dec 28, 2009 0:35:39 GMT -5
Hi, I'm from Ontario and have had some issues regarding the school. My oldest son has fine motor problems, received help after 6 years! Now he has an OT and should be getting a laptop soon.
My second son(10) has ADHD and just been diagnosed with OCD, asperger's and tourette's. The school has done nothing really for him, time outs,taking his tests to the office and not allowing him to sit in groups. Nothing has helped him, the school has now got him a social worker through the school. They have called CPS on us because of his odd behaviors/hygiene issues though they have no worries about the other kids! Honestly him peeing on his shirt at school is NOT my fault nor is him picking a fight,obsessions with knifes, or his shoes stinking( does any one else smell their kids shoes??!They even claimed I don't feed him( he's obese thanks to them!, all of my other kids are healthy looking) Odd that is goes one way, they have lost my son on many occasions begining at the age of 4, they have been told to feed him what I send and nothing else but he brings back food because when they ask if he has a lunch he tells them no though they check the younger kids lunches and they have food but assume he doesn't w/o looking, I found out that when my kids go the school the school feeds them breakfast, he's allready had breakfast but he has no off switch they also record every snake they give him!, they have fed him chocolate more then once and refused to list it as a allergy because the Dr refused to write a note due to not being able to test for it, he becomes phycotic and he gets a really bad rash from it. they have let him veg for almost two years and are "waiting" for his meds to kick in!honestly that's what the teacher stated last parent teacher interview! only after they called CPS they decided it was time for a social worker! He's had behavioral issues since he started school they are not new. they refuse to put him on an IEP because he's too smart! his last report card he got straight D's because the school had no idea how to grade him. They really need a one on one aide with him or like I hope send him to a class with less kids, though that needs a phy.eval which with my luck would take 2 years. We are tempted to just pull him out!
my third son has speech delays and is catching up on reading, lots of reading done with helpers,letting him say what he needs to say ect.*most issues have gotten better and speech therapy can't help.
my 4th son has reading comprehension delays but since he's only in grade 2 not too worrisome.
my daughter has muscular dystrophy and has a helper in the class, she suffered a broken femur in the fall and caused her to miss 8 weeks of school. The OT is now concerned about her fine motor skills, speech the school is worried about but we have a speech path.
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Dec 28, 2009 11:04:54 GMT -5
Hi MWP Welcome.I have a daughter with PDD-NOS, DCD. and an anxiety disorder and a son with a LD.ADD.and DCD. I would start reading what the special ed system is based on in Ont[ need or diagnosis]. If your son is getting all D's he is not doing well in school. What is your school division's policies on special ed. These should be posted on their website or phone and request a copy. We do not have the laws the States does but School divisions are required to follow the Human Rights code and the Charter of rights and Freedoms. I would look for someone who could help you advocate for your son either through OACL or depending on where you are the Autism Society. From what you have written your school division is jacking around your son and you.
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Dec 28, 2009 11:26:52 GMT -5
I forgot look up the minister of ed's policies and procedures for special ed. It should be on their web site. This will offer you a wealth of information.
What schools usually count on is that parents do not know what is suppose to be happening with our kids.
Educate yourself, not only do they hate that but it levels the playing field.
Also in most provinces there is an appeal process, if a parent does not agree with a decision made by a professional on their child's behalf they have the right to appeal that decision.
What is that process in Ont?
You want to get these decisions in writing because the unspoken rule of these people is if is not written down it did not happen.
You need this stuff they are saying in writing, from experience this usually slaps them back into reality and their level of respect for the parent increases dramatically.
I hope these suggestions help.
|
|
|
Post by therose on Jan 11, 2010 21:54:20 GMT -5
Hi gals - Quite surprise to see new postings, Actually, I became a bit upset reading the posts, the outright human rights violations. A good site in plain English, and even though it is in BC, it does apply for all the provinces and territories. www.knowyourrights.ca/knowyourrights/PS - it is directed at students and parents. To kjgdid- I am so sorry to read about what is going on, in your part of the world. I am flabbergasted, and shock and piss off. It tells me what is written as policy on education sites, are just that words. In the second letter, the procedures for the complaint process, is a clone in my province, and guess what, a clone in all the other provinces. In fact, the way special-needs children are treated regarding the education component, seems to be operating in the same way in my province, as in the rest of the other provinces and territories. I only have the public stats and my personal experience, but I believe the problem you have, as I still have the same problem, but not to the degree and where the school board has entered into crossing the line of violating your child's human rights. Yes, what your letters and the other gals have posted, are more to do what the school can do legally, without having to provide the proper type of programing and accommodations in the education component. Yes, I have been busy the past year, learning all about the legal side and angles, looking through the lens of a school board or the ministry of education. It certainly was enlightening, and I started to approach my letter campaign through a legal lens, but making it personal how it has impacted my daughter's education, but more importantly her reading and writing ability. Her LD played a secondary role, where teaching methodologies were highlighted that were ineffective and impact her learning, but practiced widely throughout the province. The third factor, that I used hard is using examples starting from grade 1, on examples of statements made by educators, and more importantly made by the higher-ups, that shows the lack of knowledge on LD, how children learn, and the common misconceptions that educated people have. No one, has even come back to me, stating that they did not say it. In fact, I was floored, when my daughter received a Christmas card from the grade 1 teacher, stating 'from your grade 1 teacher'. I have assume that the grade 1 teacher plus a few more teachers have had discussions with education officials, over some of the events that have occurred over the years, inside the classroom. My letter writing was directed at the ministry of education, on key employees. I chose to go above the board of education, since it is the board that has policies that actually works against children who have special needs when it comes to the education component. Special education, has become a dumbing ground for children who are deem unfit for academic pursuits. They are written off early on in the school system. Harsh words, but my daughter could have become a special education student, if I had allowed it. I took measures a long time ago, by becoming her tutor, and re-teaching most of the material that was taught in the classroom. While I did that, I duke it out with the school and the board for accommodations and targeted help. I collected the damaging material, record it, and to be used at a later date in my letter writing to the ministry of education. I did not go out looking for trouble, but it was pretty easy when it is apparent that there is systematic discrimination on children who have special needs. The court cases that I have studied, have a common theme where discrimination has occurred dealing with the education component. A lot of the court cases failed to make headway, because the court saw it differently, something like an administration problem, and the teachers who taught the children were seen as been helpful and trying their best to help the children. In the United States, they have the IDEA laws, whereas parents only have the school acts, the Charter of rights and freedoms and human rights which comes from our Charter of rights and freedoms. What laws that Canadian parents have, it is often incorporated into the mandate and policies of the various levels of the education system. What I am trying to stress here, do not get hung up on the laws, the aim is to get services for your child. There is a reason why, Canadian parents have immense difficulty with the public education system, and the real enemy is not at the school level, but at the board, inside our education ministries, and other agencies that work in the education field, such as the Canadian Principals' Association or the Teachers' association. At these levels, this is where policies are formulated, curriculum is planned, laws enacted, and where few employees have any solid knowledge of the various disorders that impacts learning. The main focus is directed at the general student population, where the trend is to standardized all approaches to teaching, and to concentrate on improving academic performances looking at the whole group, and where individual performance is not look at. It leaves the special needs child, out in the cold. It is where we see children where most of them share the curse of being poor readers, writers or numeracy in all, or some aspects. I am talking about the essential skills needed to become good readers and writers and calculating basic math in everyday life. This is where my fight has been, and I believe schools in grades K to 6, should concentrate on the core elements needed to become good readers, writers and numeracy, it would benefit all of the population, including special needs. Unfortunately, all levels of the school system have focus on where children are given just enough to have the ability to read, write and do simple numeracy, but do not strive to have all become good readers, writers, and good numeracy, because their focus has been on knowledge, and not the sub-set skills needed to express the knowledge. For special needs kids, the target to meet is that 50 % mark. I have lost count, how many educators actually think my daughter does not have LD because obtaining a 50 % or higher means in their world, she does not have a learning problem. Now we know that is a misconception, but it is used as a reason why services are denied. By high school, the reason gets turn-around, and where the school will used the grades, to denied access to academic courses, accommodations based on the disorder. This happens more often with LD children, and the disorders that are considered behavioral, because these children are more than likely the group of children who have poor skills in reading, writing, and numeracy. With my child, they had a problem - what to do with a honour student who had poor skills in writing and reading? In high school, the school will tell the parents that your child needs special education classes, to improve on reading, writing or numeracy. What they do not tell the parents, that it is only remedial help, and will do little in building skills in reading, writing, and numeracy. The tests are simplified, when they are in the general classroom, and in fact may be graded by the special education teacher. The school and the school board was force to give effective help for my child, because if she was put in special education, she would never have to do homework, or study for a test, and she would become the class brain in special education. However, even there she along with the others would never become good readers and writers. On the other side of the coin, it did not look well, to denied services when my daughter have proven over the years she was academic material, and to follow the same procedure where LD students, and students who are preforming at 60 % or below, to be streamlined into basic courses at the high school level. This is another problem at the high school level, no matter what province one is living in. The stats, where 35 % to 40 % are graduating with a basic diploma. Through the research, and my mini-conversations with students who are taking basic courses in my local community, the biggest reasons why, either the school is forcing the student to take basic courses, or the student wants to take it, because they know they do not have the skills needed to take academic or higher. The skills - the subset skills of reading, writing and in some cases numeracy. People who work in the literacy circles, are stating that anywhere between 33 % (which is a very conservative number) and 60 % are graduating with poor skills in all or some aspect in reading, writing and numeracy. I can back this up, but I want you to know stats are important, especially the local stats. I cannot stress it enough, because they is one more item that our public education system does not enough of, assessments for reading, writing and numeracy. What assessments are being used, are poor in design, and even the poorer students with skills can pass it, and make the magic cut off point of 50 %. It is why, help is not given to children early on and none given in the high school years. My daughter can consistently pass the school ones, but has never pass any of the assessments on the Internet, that are free and formulated by the universities in the United States. Most of them are easy to understand, and all can be done where you can print out the results. Education on how the public education system is a must know, and schools will be the last one to freely give you the information that is needed. The first thing to understand, that the education system is not for the children, even though children come first in all of their mandates. Policies, are build around the needs of the educators, and not the needs of the children. The children are force to adapt, rather than the educators adapting to the children's needs. Now, I am going to list what I think are important to know, when dealing with the education system, and special needs children. Perhaps, we should formulate a list for Canadian parents, especially for those who are just starting on the nightmare of getting services for our children. Just an idea. 1. Two types, an ISSP (or another name) where outside agencies are also involved, but generally does not include an education component, because it is seen as behaviour or affecting behaviour inside the classroom. The other type is an IEP, which is the educational component. It is where we see accommodations, and all other aspects of education and the learning needs. For behaviour disorders, some will only receive an ISSP, and others will receive both an ISSP and an IEP. For LD students, the mild to moderate group, the move is to eliminate the IEP by high school, because they are getting grades of 50 % or higher and put them under the ISSP. An ISSP will stopped education services for your LD child, and treat them as if they were the same as a regular student. Under the LD group, having an ISSP, lets the school off, the board more importantly because for most LD kids they are not involved with outside agencies, unless and that is unless they have more than one disorder. LD, is still not considered a medical problem by our health system, it is seen as a learning problem for the education system. Whereas the behaviour disorders, are seen as a medical problem, and not necessary a learning problem. 2. For parents, who have children that have two or more disorders, use the medical system for all its worth. In this context, you can obtain comprehensive psycho-educational assessments, done by health professionals, and far more expert than the staff at the board level. The medical professionals, can become your best friend, where they are up-to-date on how disorders can impact learning. For LD parents, we can take advantage of it, but we are not a high priority, so expect a waiting list. 3. Know how your children's disorders, diseases impacts your child's learning. Know every aspect, even a drop in sugar levels, can turn your child into the most forgetful or sleeping at the desk. Teachers and administrators see this all too often, as a behaviour problem, and uses this as the number one reason for saying its not a learning problem. 4. See your children's behaviour as a symptom and not the cause for the learning problem. Research has hashed over this one, which comes first the behaviour or the learning problem. No one was won this battle, but in the case of my LD daughter, she was born with LD, and any behaviour is a result of the LD problem or poor teaching methods. 5. Educate, educate and educate the school staff, by providing information of your own knowledge, and hit the Internet, to provide up-to-date new knowledge concerning your children's disorders. That includes any outside agencies such as social services. Whatever you do, DO NOT ASSUME because a person is highly educated, that they have the knowledge on the disorders and have a better understanding than you do. 6. Know the sections of education services, concerning your child. Sections pertaining to how special education is delivered and how some rules, if not all will impact your child's ability to learn.Very important for LD children, because our public education system, plays hard with them, because there is no outside professionals looking over the school or the school board concerning LD issues. 7. Do not assume that educators are looking out for the best interest of your children. They too, are also under pressure and often heel to the commands and the different completing agendas of principals, school boards, various agencies, union demands, and other pressing education needs that need to be address. 8. Remember, that you are asking the school, and more so the board, to adapt to your children's needs, which is hard for them to do, when policies are forcing children and their parents to adapt to their needs. 9. Remember, that the nice smiles are for show only. Underneath the smiles, you represent conflict with the other agendas. Conflict in the form of a child, that will not easily conform to the school's standards and create kinks in their well-run school and cause ripples in the management style of the school. 10. Remember, and it is the MOST important point of all, the isolation and discrimination that takes place within special needs. Very few schools, have a special parents group, composed of parents who have special needs children, Nor will we have representation at the other levels. It removes the pressing needs of the special needs children further away from the general population of the school, and for the general public, they are less apt to be inform why these children need special consideration, over and above their normal children. Another reason, it promotes outright discrimination by other parents who have normal children. It is where parents with normal children, will use our children as an example of one with bad behaviour, or being stupid and eventually spills onto the parents and sometimes someone is getting arrested for assault. I too, have heard the whispers of other parents, pointing out the poor writing in her grade one piece, stating to their own child, "Thank God, little Suzie you don't write like little Jane. Your a whole lot smarter than she is." Or calling her stupid. Don't forget it works the other way around, when you special needs child gets the best mark in the class, and comments will come out that discounts the grade. Remarks such as it is a fluke, or her parents did not for her. Or the other remarks, where parents of the smart normal kids, are demanding a rewrite, because the LD kid had an unfair advantage over their children. The unfair advantage, may be just a little bit more time, and once believe it or not, apparently I was the unfair advantage, because I help my kid to study. It is important to see, where others that surround you, due to lack of knowledge, may be reacting but often the reactions are shades of discrimination, bias and sometimes bigotry. Remember school policies, and in higher levels, may be find and look good on paper, but sometimes there is unintended results that often promotes the practice of discrimination toward children who have special needs. Do not take it personal, it is a fact and should be used as a weapon to point out how policies discriminates and downgrades you child. I have found, that educators and others who are in the higher levels, are not aware of the systematic discrimination that is taking place at the school level. BUT certain bean counters, who has the controls of the funding button, are very well aware of it. You see, their aim or goals are to educate 40 % of the population, who will be the material to go to post-secondary education, because I believe it is too costly otherwise. The bean counters, knows very well how some policies promotes the active discrimination where the result is the student sees himself as not being smart or the parents comes to look at their children as being not smart, and it becomes all the more and is generally accepted that it is the fault of the kids, or the parents why there is such poor performance, rather than the education system, and what they are doing. This way it keeps costs down, you know the costs of the resources and materials to run today's classrooms. Now, I do hope this has help. I could add more, but it is start. We can also talk about letter writing, and approaches use to address school staff. I know a few good ones, where the less educated parent will enjoy, to see the teacher twisting and turning trying to make a response to your simple question. I also know teachers associations have a lot of information, and you might be surprise a lot of information on how to manipulate parents in a parent-teacher interviews. For example, do not respond to a parent's questions, unless it is mentioned at least 3 times. It goes on to state, always answer the question, by getting back on topic and that topic is the teacher's agenda and needs. So, I will await for a response, especially from the new gals on the block. I totally understand where you are coming from, but one word of advice. Take it one day at a time. Tackled one issue at a time. Third, always take 15 minutes or more, and educate yourself on your child needs, each and every day. You will be surprise how much you will learn within six months. Fourth piece of advice, each day reward each and everyone of your children for something small, no matter how minor it is, with something equally small, it could be a hug to a smile to a bowl of jello. Raising children who have challenges can have more tough days than the easy days, we might as well give our children something else to remember such as the bowl of jello, in hopes of taking the sting away somewhat on the tough days.
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Jan 13, 2010 21:11:50 GMT -5
Hi Rose The latest with my dd is she is not in school right now due to anxiety.
I received a phone call from the regional director of children's services for SK learning yesterday he stated that the deputy minister of ed wants to hire a professional mediator to mediate the situation this would involve the ministry hiring and paying for a lawyer for both sides.
I reiterated that my dd would not be returning to that school and the only thing we would be willing to mediate was the options we presented to the SD which were the SD bearing the cost of sending her to another school division or supplying a homebound program.
I have written a letter to the minister of social services after receiving a letter from the dir of ed stating that my husband and I are causing my dd's anxiety. All the symptoms that dd is experiencing are listed under emotional abuse in the provincial child abuse protocol The protocol outlines professional educators duty to report suspected cases of child abuse. Yet this women accuses us in a letter and does not report it. I have asked the minister to investigate this.
This week I have received a truancy letter from the dir of ed and a letter stating that my dd will no longer receive her assignments at home. I have no intentions of backing down and referred both letters to the director of children's services and requested that he deal with the director of ed.
If the SD charges me with truancy or discontinues sending the course work home I plan to call the paper and see if they will print the story.
|
|
|
Post by therose on Jan 14, 2010 15:59:56 GMT -5
Hi kjgdid, At least it is done in writing, but remember they can be used at a later date to force the school to do it. However, I do not blame you for a change in school or homeschooling your daughter. It is typical of the Canadian public education system, to blame the parents when it comes to the kids. As I have mentioned, I have been pretty busy with reading on the different aspects of education, and one of things that I have discovered especially with special needs kids, the parents are blamed and as a result, parents often take the brunt of it, in forms of isolation, ridicule, restraining orders and in some cases, arrested for assault charges. In my case, there was days my kid took off, to relieve the stress of school-related stresses. Those days, we used them to catch-up on related assignments and in some areas, re-teaching lessons that she did not absorb inside the classroom, because she was too stress out by the school's demands. The school was quite aware of it, but never proceeded to start the suspension process. The reason why, they manage to isolate me concerning parents, so within the local area, I posed no harm since most parents saw me as a trouble maker. The second factor, as long as I did not go public, they would let things slide. This was never voice, but it was imply. I went public in a different way, letters to the editor where I would come to the defense of another parent, who was clearly having problems in getting services for a child who could not read at all, or a service that should be expected and provided by the school. The letters I wrote, were often cut out, and used against me. Of course, it backfired on them, because I saw it as an opportunity to get on the soap box and used my arguments presented in the letters, as to why my daughter needs targeted help in reading and writing. I remember on meeting, the staff member hailing from the regional board office, argued over a half-hour with me, on what is dyslexia and what is not dyslexia. Meanwhile, not a teacher nor the principal voice not one comment, which I took it as, they do agree with me. At the end, I ask him to put it in writing, his take on dyslexia and of course he refuse to do so. Than I blew everyone away, with one question. If she does not have dyslexia, and if she does not have a reading disorder, than pray tell what does she have? His response, "I don't know". When I look around the table, every teacher was looking at the psycho-educational assessment report, which did state at that time, learning disability. It was a priceless moment, and one that I will not forget soon. Soon after that, I started a new letter campaign, with a renewal focus on how special education and services are administrated, and this one meeting started it off. Within two years, that staff member has been transfer, my daughter's assessment now says specific learning disability, and there is a great deal of evidence where the new changes by the ministry of education, are impacting special education and its services at the local schools. They still have a long way to go, considering in our area, special education and services were at one time - very little in terms of services. Your situation, perplexes me where their intentions are to drive you and your kids out of the school, by a route that can quickly form a law suit, and done in writing. It tells me, that you are not being taken seriously at the school level, and where the staff at the school are either too afraid to take the upper levels to task, for fear of recriminations, or they agree with the upper levels. There has been reports, and has been in the news, where teachers cannot voice opposition to school policies, in either in a non-public forum or a public-forum. Even in my province, teachers have been suspended for doing so, and in this case the issue was teacher's stress. Teachers are faced with agendas of others above them, that often conflict with the actual day to day operations. Often these agendas, are to micro-managed costs of day to day schooling. One of the victims, is special education and services, where they cannot control the costs, in the same manner and in the same standards, as a regular student. Standardization does not work in this, because each child, has their own unique set of learning differences. But never a less, it is done, and special needs children pay a steep price and that is an education, and of course to be able to read and write well. Often the management style of the school, is imposed onto the individual school, leaving the staff with little leeway in making changes that is more fitting for that particular school or classroom. Often rules and how they managed the school, the special-needs population often interfere with the management of school, because of their learning differences and as a result, they are seen as the trouble makers. In stats, no matter what part of North America, there is a higher proportion of LD kids being suspended, than from the normal population. Here is another observation, where Ld kids from schools who received services with little trouble, are schools where there is a higher social/economic ranking, than schools with low social/economic rankings. I suspect highly, even though a population within a school, the parents may make far more than what a teacher makes, the discrimination comes into play how one makes their money. Someone who works for a living, in the oil industry or makes a living as a sailor or heavy equipment operator or the assembly line at GM, are still look upon as people who are seen as having little influence or knowledge of the different systems. Whereas, a school filled with parents of professional background such as lawyers and doctors, are seen as having a better social ranking and knowledge, than the guys at GM. In my province, we many not have a high rent districts, but the social ranking is in full force. Few children have received the full benefits of O/G instruction, even though we have two qualified special education teachers, and a third one added on recently. My daughter was pulled out, like many as soon as they seen improvement. Whereas, the few students that actually finished the O/G instruction, had parents whose social ranking was miles above the other parents, but not necessary in income. I also took the provincial education system, to task over this, by using my daughter as an example and what I learned from the parents whose children did received the full course of O/G method. In the first place these parents were unwilling to tell me anything, but it was telling what they said, and more telling on what they did not say. To put it in a nutshell, the school did everything possible for those students, in order to keep the parents pacified, because the parents were seen as potential advocates, who could quickly form support and protest groups within the school, and local boards. As for me, they underestimated me, my education, along with my skills and abilities, where not only did I advocate for my child, I advocated for all children who were struggling in learning. This set of parents shared a common trait, all believe that their children were worthy of receiving O/G, because of where their stood on the social rankings. Not once, did the parents see it as unfair nor did they bother to make changes, so other children can avail of it. This is one of my arguments that I am using, for the targeted specialized help that my daughter needs. The sad thing, it has help me to get the services she needs, but I am now public enemy one, concerning these parents. As for going public, you need something for the newspaper to hang their hat on. A position that looks unfavourable at the school and board. I would hang up my hat on the anxiety issues facing your daughter, and how schools and in many cases are unaware of the induce stress caused by teaching practices, and management styles. A lot of parents, including reporters will relate to busy work, or homework that has little to do with the lessons of the day. Or doing classroom work, where the teacher already knows it cannot be done without the aid of low tech or high tech tools. Or showing how practices become unfair, especially when it is applied unevenly within the school or the classroom. What is happening now, should not be happening, if the school and the board approaches anxiety of children not as a behaviour, but rather as a symptom that impacts learning. Somewhere at the top, who controls the purse strings, is the person who truly does have some misconceptions on anxiety disorders. Lots of LD kids, have trouble with anxiety, and who wouldn't when you are asked to do something, where your basic sub-skills are poor and will hinder in completing the task. Most people will make the connections to anxiety and school, but the trick is to show how it has impacted your daughter and her education needs. If I were you, I would take the time to write it down in a form of letter ahead of time, so if and when you decide to go public, you already have material on hand, because most people are not aware of the difficulties that parents have in obtaining services, even for the mildest conditions. The hoops we have to jump through, and where few have the ability and skills to jump through the hoops and fight them with the same vigor as they do, when denying services.
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Jan 15, 2010 9:21:02 GMT -5
Hi Rose I agree with what you are saying. I know that I am making an impact at the school I have ben told this by other professionals associated with the school but who do not work for them. The biggest crime my husband and I have committed is believing in our dd's ability and trying to follow the process set out by the province and the SD to get disagreements resolved. The latest one from yesterday was receiving a letter from the dir of ed stating that dd course work would no longer be sent home and return her to school. I phoned the regional dir for SK and reiterated that he and I agreed that she would receive her course work at home until this was settled so he better deal with the dir of ed and that my dd would not be punished for being unable to physically attend school just because she was not physically present in the building did not resolve the SD of their responsibility to educate her. Her course work came home at the end of the day. I spoke to the sup of the other school division and clearly he stated that they will not allow my daughter to attend their closest school because they do not want to become involved with this because the ministry is involved and he stated his understanding that the mediation would result in her returning to that school. I clearly stated to the regional dir when I talked to him on Monday was that the only things that were on the table at mediation were dd going to another SD or a homebound program. She will not be returning to that school. I know exactly what you mean by the children with parents that have a perceived higher social standing receiving more. My dd this year was suppose to have access to a full time EA. This to me would mean that the person should be physically present in the room.Not she spends the majority of time in another classroom with another student who has no diagnosis but his mother is the resource teachers neighbour and best friend. I think writing down how her anxiety and how their practices impacts on her is a wonderful idea. Thanks Karen
|
|
|
Post by therose on Jan 17, 2010 9:26:13 GMT -5
Hi kjgdid, Keep working on contacts outside of the school, and in particular people who have the power to change things. You have to think of the political structure of the school system, and in any system, the tendency to put out fires, rather than to prevent fires. Much like office politics, and things can get nasty in that environment, when one or two employees are not provided with the necessary resources to do the job. Often the reason behind it, have nothing to do with work quality, but rather personal agendas. Such agendas, can run in the form of disliking the person to the person not getting along with the other employees, and where they cannot fire the person, unless they have good reasons to under the labour code. Hence, most tactics used are to make that person's life miserable, and to get that person to quit. Much like I have observe in the schools, and what other parents have told me. I knew, I was in trouble, the first time I raise and asked for an assessment back in grade one. When both the school staff and parents objected and was upset, that I dared to question the school and their so-called expertise. It was not until grade 6, I change my tactics, from looking at it from a different angle and narrowed down the parameters, to refine the focus. I went from looking at my child, and how she will or will not react, to how school administration, teaching methods and rules/regulations, including general policies impacts my child's learning. It was at that point I started to get results, and when I reached the point of being better educated on all things LD, than the school staff including most of the upper levels. I was teaching the educators, and policy makers how the deliver of education, can impact over-all student achievement, using my kid as a prime example. Even though, both kids have different problems, both will be impacted on the teaching methods, attitudes, knowledge of the teachers, and their personal teaching styles. For example, take our two kids and put them in the same classroom. It is time to do the work, and the teacher's regular practice is to help any child that raises their hand. But in reality, the practice is not done keeping fairness and equal time for each child. Some children may need more time than others. Often kids like ours, who appear to be smart enough to do the work to the teacher, sees other behaviour issues and not how the learning issues is impacting, or in your case how the anxiety is impacting learning. So, these kids are told by the teacher or in some form or another, you did not listen to the instructions, or the line, I know you can do it, you are smart enough without needed my help. Teachers see not learning, as behaviour issues and not the fault of the teacher. So getting back to my example, and is typical in years gone pass for my kid, is that my kid was often ignored when she raised her hand, until near the end of the class. At the end of the class, there was no time to actually help her, and what help there was, was not effective because by that time, she was in no mood to be help. Why? She saw other students, who she view as much smarter than herself getting all the help they needed, and she concluded that the teacher only like the brighter students, and not students who were not bright. As for your child, much the same take but on a more personal level where her anxiety disorder kicks in, making learning a difficult task. In either case, both kids did not get the proper help to promote learning, and as parents we are left to pick up the pieces. In my case, the heavy load of re-teaching, and at the same fighting the issues of her feeling stupid, the teacher hates me, and all that stuff, when a kid comes home feeling inferior. I remember some of the real bad days, where my kid was not able to cope because she was also dealing with the bullying comments coming from the other children. Comments, such as I always thought you were stupid, or teasing comments of asking for help. She was damn if she did, and damn if she did not. A catch-22 situation where most special-needs children face in and every school day, and when the holidays come, most of the symptoms disappear at home, and parents have found out a few things about their children's strengths. Keep in mind, when talking to anyone in the education field, that it is the lack of knowledge of your child, and due to this lack of knowledge, how teaching methods impact your child. You are on good footing, because all teacher's colleges concentrates on management of the classroom, rather than requiring courses in the essentials in reading, writing, and numeracy and of course the learning styles of students, and how it impacts the classroom. Most teachers are skilled in managing classrooms, but not so skill when dealing with the individual's learning differences. It is why, over the years that standardization of curriculum, rules, and the day to day administration of a school has been so popular with the bean counters. Popular because it reduces costs, but by doing so they are willing to sacrifice learning potential of all the students, for reaching a certain percentage of students reaching their potential. Kids like ours, rarely reached their potential due to this one policy. You have no idea, how costs and controlling costs, can impact learning inside the classroom. This is where, teachers no matter how good they are, are also victims by being force to take the side of the education system, by defending the practices and policies of the education system. Few will point it out, for fear of recriminations coming from the boards, teachers association and the ministry. I learned over the years, that I had to educate myself on matters that little to do with education, such as policy formation - and believe me there is a whole body of science to learn from. You be surprise, how rules, regulations, and changes made to those rules, regulations are dependent on cost factors. The rules/regulations have to adapt to the cost factors. And how the cost factors, impact the classroom positively and negatively. Special needs children are impacted negatively, because the controls for cost, are placed on them, because it is likely these children, will have learning needs that are beyond the normal student population needs. It is where their needs are measured against the needs of the normal student population, and the benchmark costs relating to the normal student population. So, lets say it costs $7000 for a regular student, how much is the school board willing to go above the $7000 to cover the learning needs of a special-needs student? In Canada, and in some parts of the United States, this question has not been answered, or research on. The education systems, refuse to release this type of data out to the researchers, let alone release this type of data out to parents at the school level. It is a question I have posed to all levels, in the context of the extensive re-teaching at home and her poor reading and writing ability. I also add the other part, if I had left it up to the education system, my child would not be a honour student now. By controlling the costs of my child's learning needs, how much did it cost the education system over and above the benchmarks of regular students, by not providing for targeted help in her learning needs. So far no answer from anyone, but plenty of discussion on my kid's needs are. There is the other side of the coin, where administration rules, and even the school acts can play havoc with a special needs population and where the rules and acts are applied to all students. This is where we see parents of normal children demand the same accommodations for their kids, as the LD population. Where we see schools often cave into the demand of parents with normal kids, and high-fought accommodations are taken away from the special-needs child. Or where accommodations that are normally reserved for the struggling learner, are now given to all students, no matter the need. This is done to make the learner who have needs, more comfortable in the classroom, but as I have observed - it actually downgrades the learning needs of the special needs, by using statements such as, the home-teacher is now able to provide the targeted help, with the use of the extra resources or accommodations. Providing accommodations, or extra resources to all, still does not help the child who has learning weaknesses when teaching methods and the practice of them do not change, but remains the same. As for social standing, the newest threat is my kid being accuse of cheating by a certain set of students. I have told her, next time demand that student to come to the principals office, to explain how she is cheating. This set of students, has been the same bunch causing trouble for my child, and it the children being coached by their parents. The parents get upset, over competition coming from any LD child, who has the nerve to beat their kids in grades, or receive special attention from a teacher. I don't know if she will do it, because she is afraid of trouble outside of the school. Its funny, these are the same kids who will fight over her in groups, yet make statements that she is cheating, without explaining how she is cheating. If the parents found out that their children actively seek her out in group activities, where in the lower grades, she was the very last person to be picked, I wonder what these parents will do. As for the school, I guess in the next discussion will be parents of normal kids, who perceived accommodations and special help as an edge over their more capable kids, will be talk about. Living in a small community, has its advantages, where the school will know who I am talking about, without naming names. To let them know, that it is and has been a lonely battle, without the support of parents, who believe their children are entitled to more, based on social standing, rather than learning needs of the children. Remember when writing how your daughter's learning needs, take in consideration how education policies that are mandated from the top down, and often schools do not have any say or are limited to changes within narrow parameters, can impact the learning of children with special-needs. I still believe, it is someone at the top who is giving you trouble, and whoever she or he is, more than likely she or he operates in a fashion where rules are to be obey, without question. More than likely, it is the director of education that may be the source, go higher to the ministry of education and include the premier of the province. Other areas is special education and staff who works at the ministry of education. Here, there are more concern with the legal implications regarding your child's education. Include clear literature coming from reliable sources, concerning your child's disorders, and use this as your foundation, as to how the policies are impacting your child, and other children with special-needs. Try to obtain Canadian sources, and research done on anxiety disorders and how they can impact learning, and if not, make note on American resources and their qualifications and respect. I have run into this, where American studies are quickly dismiss, and Canadian studies are not dismiss as quickly. However, for the most part, Canadian researchers who are in the education field, often replicates the same studies as in the United States for the most part. Ground breaking research that occurs in Canada, are the studies that are met with a jaundice eye by the leading educators. Examples are the cognitive-brain research studies, and programs formulated by the researchers. Little of this is seen inside any school walls, and can often help in a big way for all students who are special needs. A prime example is in the autism group, where the new cognitive approach is used, but it is denied for other groups with different disorders. Keep also in mind, what is the focus and pick key parts that are important to you, because it is the system and how it operates, and not the people within the system. In a lot of cases, educators are not aware that they are impacting on children's learning, nor are some educators who form policies are aware of the negative impacts. So, focus on the system, rather than the people. People are more incline to listen when looking at the system, rather than the people. For individuals who are part of the problem, there will be time soon enough to deal with them. It came to passing, when I have opportunities to pass details of individual's teachers or comments coming from up-above that impact my child's education and her self-confidence and being set up for being bullied by the other students. Just wait and be patient, it will come when the time is right and where the discussions are taking place in a fashion of a two-way conversation, as opposed to what is happening now - the one-way conversation, completely ignoring your concerns over the years.
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Jan 17, 2010 12:21:38 GMT -5
Thanks Rose. I will take all that you have said into consideration when dealing with the system. what I find most interesting in this situation is the behind the scenes stuff that is going on with the regional dir for SK learning and the SD's. I provided another SD my DD's previous assessments with the hope of switching her to another SD approx 6 weeks ago I received notice that they would review the material and get back to me. I never heard back from them.In SK the SD receives funding for all intensive needs students at the beginning of the school year and if the student moves out of the SD the old SD is obligated to pay the receiving SD for the student. I spoke to the dir of ed months ago and stated that we wanted our DD to be placed in another SD at the time she told me I could place her in any one in the province if I wanted to I said that was not true that the SD was obligated to pay because of her intensive need status. She stated they would not pay. I spoke to the regional dir for SK learning on Monday he said he had talked to the sup of the other SD and the sup said they could not meet my DD's needs in that SD. I phoned the sup of the other SD he told me my DD would not be going to their SD because they did not want to get involved because the ministry was involved nothing about not being able to meet her needs. Another thing I find interesting is I have been writing letters and receiving letters from the SD and school board for two years now. This year I have been scanning all their letters and my replies and ccing different people in the ministry and the opposition. I have received no replies. The day after the ministry of social services received the letter from us requesting an investigation on the dir of ed allegation in her letter that we are causing our DD's anxiety and therefore emotionally abusing her.There is a big meeting amongst the ministry staff including the dir for SK learning and now they want to go to mediation.
|
|
|
Post by therose on Jan 19, 2010 17:12:43 GMT -5
Hi kjgdid, You got me thinking and damn curious when you mentioned how it is funded. So, I googled SK education system, to look for how children are identified and received special services. Now, I am going to list things, rather than discussing because I have only spent about 15 minutes, surfing the education site, without going to the boards. This is where stats become important, and in this case it is an eye opener, where even the most severe disorders are completing for dollars against children who have mild to moderate disorders. In the 2009 SK education indicators report, www.education.gov.sk.ca/AAR_Indicators_ProgramYou need to go on the site, because I will siting a set of numbers, which you will find on page 81 in the PDF file, and this is all about the optics, what looks good on papers, and presenting the numbers in such a way, that it appears that the education system is doing wonderful things, for all their special needs children, and providing the necessary supports for these children. I am putting this down first, before listing because it is these numbers and how intensive supports is administered, and in part the language that is used, where parents are downgraded, and the outside agencies and the education system are upgraded, where it implies and in some cases, the school rules supreme over education services, no matter what the parents objections, or even the children's needs. On page 81, there is two charts. The first one compares the total student population to the total requiring intensive supports resulting in year 2007 - 2008, 4.2 % with a total of 6742 requiring intensive supports. For year 2008 - 2009, 4.6 % with a total of 7304 requiring intensive supports. Note the language of requiring intensive supports, for most reading it, most would not pick up there is a difference between requiring and receiving intensive support. Now, As for the percentages, this includes all special needs that have been identified. Now, I have learn where there is stats for individual schools, the provincial percentages, dovetails nicely with the individual schools. I have seen percentage ranging from just below 3 % to just below 5 %. These numbers do not jived with the stats, of reported LD in any given population, where some of the researchers are now looking to increase it above the 10 % to 15 % or higher. Ditto, for other mild disorders that more than likely are never identified at the school level. The second chart, is the breakdown of the various groupings in intensive supports, where the overall population of requiring intensive supports and the various subpgroups within that population are compared, with percentages. The percentages are higher, since the overall population of requiring intensive supports, is much smaller than the overall student body count. For the year 2008 to 2009: Blind/Visual impairment: 164 - 2.0% Dear or hard of hearing: 279 - 3.4% Intellectual disability: 1592 - 19.3 ** Mental Health Impair: 447 - 5.4% Orthopedic Disability: 541 - 6.6% Pervasive Development: 1018 - 12.4 % ** Physical Health Impair: 697 - 8.5% Prenatal substance exposure: 405 - 4.9% Substance-related disorders: 20 - 0.2% Other diagnosed : 1157 - 14.0 % ** Other Undiagnosed: 1919 - 23.3% ** The 2 other groupings, are 37.3%/3076 Total of special needs children - 8239 and I go 1 step further to find the percentage, which is 5% of the total provincial student population. The optics here, that the stats for unidentified kids are included. Those are the ones that are suspected on an informal basis, such as giving out accommodations by the teachers. Remember this, and keep this in mind. Now, the breakdown of the groups should be look at. I would be hard pressed to find the group, that represents learning disabilities, nor the other common disorders such as ADHD or anxiety disorders. LD should have their own group, since they are the largest subgroup within special needs needing for the most part, an education component. The groups marked with two stars, are as I suspect that is where the LD population is scattered within the 4 groups. The three groups, without the group, pervasive development disorder. The three groups represent 85 % of special needs in SK. As for the pervasive development disorder, that percentage will only go up, but I did not include it for a reason. This is the new medical term being applied in an education setting, not much different from the old term of development delays. These children on the most part, represent the primary student population. In the case of SK, the majority of students have major language delays and difficulties, and the rest being the other disorders such as autism, severe anxiety disorder, or even severe cases of ADHD. What I am trying to get at, is that the groupings represent medical language labeling students, based on medical information, rather than based on the educational needs of the students. The optics are, that special needs children and their education needs can be managed through a medical lens, and not through a comprehensive educational assessments, looking at from an education viewpoint. For anyone looking at these charts, as a parent with a LD child, I would be just as upset, as the parent who has a child with autism, as a parent who is dealing with a severe anxiety disorder. It is labeling the child, and by doing so, it isolates the special needs community, and the parents where they have to fight misconceptions on the ability that the child can learn. It sets up the system, where these children need to be managed, rather than being educated. I bet a lot of parents, who having kids with mild learning problems, are refusing to get their children assess, because learning problems does not exist as a group. The groupings implies that all have learning problems, and I can see no parent would be open, let alone eager to get their kids on this list. Now for my list: 1. SK is undergoing changes in special education. Be wary, from what I have seen, it will reduce the paper work, concerning SE students, and the school will be given more power to what or will be given in supports to SE students. It will not change the system, and how things are delivered, nor will it bring greater accountability in ensuring SE kids are receiving a quality education compared to their abilities. 2. As far as I have read, the groupings will remain as is. The reasons given that there is a medical component, but it does not mean that these students will access the intensive supports in school. Watch out for language, especially when it is downgrading the needs of the special-needs population. 3. Other language, is calling parents, caregivers. I am a parent, not a babysitter. Furthermore, parents have been left out of the equation when it comes to psycho-educational assessments, and where it is the active work of the teacher that leads to the assessment, and even then, the student must meet a narrowed criteria in getting that assessment. Even though, you have gone passed that journey, remember that parents concerns have been downplayed, in favour of the teachers and staff at the school level. 4. The bit of stats provided, and is what I have observed, the 4 % figures, is the norm at the school board level, and NOT the provincial level. Shame on SK, and where the provincial levels should be from anywhere between 15 % to 20 %. There is a lot of SE students not being counted for whatever reasons. I suspect it is the students who have mild to moderate vision, hearing deficits, long with the LD kids. I feel sorry for them, because they not only need the accommodations, but also the targeted help in reading and writing. 5. I suspect you are in the position that you are in, your daughter is in limbo, just like mine. In your case, the school and the board, sees your daughter through a medical lens, and not an educational lens. In the case of my province, my daughter who falls into the mild to moderate category, and not receiving special education, besides accommodations, the school in the pass have seen her from the lens of looking at her grades, and not at her identified weaknesses, that for the most part can be corrected. What we share both, are that special education services are denied for different reasons, and how parents are written out by reducing our role, where our concerns are address through the teacher only. 6. As for funding, it is much the same way I suspect in my province, but you have more details than what is available in my province. The school board determines the funding of the individual schools, and where SE services is funded, by the individual schools determining the needs of the SE population. At the ministry level in SK, they like to boast they are moving away from the medical model, to the model where the SE population needs are addressed at the local level, the schools. I suspect highly that is where schools are force to select the most neediest over the less neediest, and to keep percentages under the 5 % mark in any student school population. So for the most part, the mild to moderate SE population are thrown to the wolves, or written off as being non-academic material. Now, that is me being nasty, so I will look at it from an accounting position. The board is willing to keep costs down, and reaped savings on the backs of the mild to moderate SE population. At the same time, the savings will be put into hiring of the specialized staff needed. The figures always look good, until you start to dig into the resource side, and where for the most part, SE students will require at some point in their school life, specialized targeted help in some area of education or all areas. 7. My last point is, keep all of this above, when and if mediation becomes a reality. Perhaps the ministry staff, wants the mediation to use as damage control and to prevent you from traveling further down the road, why your daughter is being treated like that. I suspect, they may throw you a few bones concerning your daughter, but will they concede to your demands is quite entirely a different kettle of fish. If they were willing to, why have you not seen any major changes at the school level, like I have, when I was throwing out words such as discrimination, using their own stats to prove my point. The school, the head board and the regional office, all received phone calls from the ministry, to change their evil ways. You also have social services involve, which none have the medical degrees to assess the anxiety disorder and the learning problems that result from the anxiety disorder, nor can they assess reasonably well, the learning environment, and how it can impact the anxiety disorder. Walking into that meeting, you be faced with people who have different agendas, and none will be looking out for your best interests or your child. It be easier to blame the parent, rather than looking at themselves objectively, and how they view your daughter and impact her learning. In closing, I just took a quick look at the SK education site. What I have read, I can offer no comfort, but there is information in the form of stats, mandates that can be used against them. By making your own graphs using the stats, you can make them damn uncomfortable in either defending their stance, or shaming them to silence. You also have the damning letters from the educational staff, as another set of proof. The third set, is your personal observations selecting the points that have been common since your daughter had started school. Between the three, write it down, as though you are giving a speech to professionals, without the emotion attached to it. That will be the hard part, but it can be done. Copies should be given out and where you will read it out, and where there is supporting evidence, hand out a copy to each at that time. The reason why, it will allow some to digest what you are saying, and you have a chance to personally observed the people sitting at that table. The aim is to get the social services rep to make a comment, that your daughter is an educational issue and not one for social services. Another aim, is to set the agenda, and not allow the educators to set the agenda. The guy who is leading the mediation, will be looking for cues or direction from either side. If anything he will be impress with your presentation, and how few parents do it well, without starting to scream or cry. Another point, try your best to stay on an even keel, wait until you are behind close doors to scream and cry. Pretend you are in court, and in fact I have stated many of a time, how I view school meetings, I rather faced a Revenue Canada auditor, than a meeting at the school. It is how I have describe meetings, where it is not fun to be confronted by a roomful of teachers. As for not receiving replies to your letters, I don't know what to say. In all cases my letters have been responded to. My letter writing has improve over the years, and one site that offers good advice, is the Wrightslaw site. There is a section, regarding letter writing and how to become more effective and some really good examples. Finally, start digging at the school level, what type of parents are getting all the help, and compare it the group who are getting help in drips and daps. I know it might not be easy, as it was in my case. My case, looking to see how many students received the full O/G course, apparently only two so far, and children having parents that have higher social standing than poor little me and others. By the way that is in the last 15 years. To make matters worse, both students were not considered officially as having learning disabilities, which does imply discrimination. I bet there is quite a few that have a diagnose of anxiety disorder by a doctor, but parents have found out using this to access special services is out of the question. Remember the one thing, the public education system was built around the needs of the educators, and staff that work within the education field, and NOT built around the children's needs. Administration and delivery of education is meant to make the teachers lives easier, and has little to do with learning and how children learn.
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Jan 21, 2010 11:12:01 GMT -5
Hi Rose You make some really amazing points. When we moved here in July of 06 the province was in the process of revamping the spec ed system from a medical model to a supposed needs based model. My son who has an LD of written expression. ADD and DCD was given a PPP. The next year he was given a student support plan. With PPP's the SD is obligated to meet with the parents 4 times a year and discuss progress. With a SSP they write a paragraph that often does not even correspond to the accomodations they are receiving and all accommodations are teacher choice. My daughter was given a PPP under mental health classification. She has DCD in the severe range and in April of 07 was diagnosed with a PDD here in SK. A PDD is listed as one of their categories. The superintendents of the SD dismissed that diagnosis and I had to go back and get 2 Dr letter's stating that was her diagnosis was. How they determine whether a child is intensive needs is a rating scale called the ISSIS assessment which is a joke and weeds out most kids. It is totally determined by the teaching staff and there is no parental involvement. Everything in the SK educational system is what looks good on paper not what they are actually doing to meet the child's needs. This is our biggest issue, we go to meetings and it is agreed at the meeting that they will provide something and then written down by them. Then never seen again and not implemented or sometimes reported as being implemented when it is not. All kids needing extra support are lumped into one big group and stats are kept and they receive extra funding based on how many kids are on any type of plans. What I find interesting about the school that my children attend is that there are approx 110 children on some type of plan out of 348 kids that attend the school. Statistically disabilities across the board run approx 1 in 12. By my calculations there should be around 37 kids not 110 as stated last year by the principle. They have at that school over 90 kids on behavioural support plans which are included in their stats. If that is not a red flag that something is wrong at that school I do not know what is. I plan as being as cool as a cucumber in dealing with this situation. I will explore the site you cite indepth. Thank you. I was away yesterday and received a call from someone that called himself a dispute resolution officer. I have jotted down what I will be discussing with him. Someone also phoned from the school yesterday but did not leave a message. I am not calling them back and will wait until they call me. I was not home yesterday because my DD had an appointment with the psychiatrist. All the symptoms of extreme anxiety have gone away since she has not been attending school. The Dr wants to wait until the issue with the school is resolved and then start weening her from her SSRI meds. The Dr's recommendation is that she not return to that school. That is what we will pursue Thank You so much for your support and I will keep you updated.
|
|
|
Post by therose on Jan 21, 2010 17:46:01 GMT -5
This is real quick, on to be prepared as to some questions that they will throw at you. Why do you care, since this does not apply in this situation. Your response, I would not be in this situation, if it was not for how the system operates and discrimination that occurs at the access points. Use their own language, and I know it is a steep learning curve, but access points they understand. One of the access points, is placing the child in one of the groupings, and as you pointed out, the ISIS assessment weeds out most kids. I check the site for the ISIS assessment, forms and anything else, related to special services, or supports. Unless, a child has deficits in vision or hearing, most children have another model, that I call, "Let pretend everyone is normal" model. It means no targeted specialized help in reading, writing, or numeracy, unless it is the first few foundation steps that needs addressing. Otherwise, it is left up to the general teachers to sort out, and this access point depends on their knowledge of how children learn, the resources available, and their knowledge in the disorders. It is the lack of knowledge of disorders on the teachers' part, that puts children in the position, where often they are given the wrong accommodations or no accommodations - this leads to no targeted help in specific areas - both above leads to the discriminatory practice of children receiving accommodations/help by grades. As long as the student is making a 50 %, the child will not get the help. I had to withdraw support at home in grade 3, and within 3 weeks the school was calling me to sign the papers for the assessment. This year, I have withdrawn crucial supports at home, that will impact her reading and writing. Same thing happen, but now the school and I are in red-tape up to our ears, to prove she needs a specialized modified course for grade 10, (my hopes are dash for grade 9), where she will received specialized targeted help, and I am shame to say, starting right from learning her phonemic sounds and through all the foundational skills to fluency and comprehension. I am getting the support of the teachers, and questionable support from the principal. I have been supplying material, the good and the bad, to support my case, and I got the teachers on my side. They have somewhat pick up the ball in school, knowing that I am not picking it up at home in certain areas. I know she has been failing in written LA tests, and her grades for written portions of tests, in other subjects have dropped, but she is not failing in those. The teachers have been collecting the tests, as their evidence that she needs the highly specialized help, backing it up with research that I have provided, and finding the solution within the resources, rules, regulation of the school system. The problem is, my kid will be one of the first ones, where modified course does not mean dumb it down , as it is used presently in the system. It is also where gifted students, and their parents does not find anything useful in the modified course outline. I am telling you this, that there is a disconnect between teachers who are in the classroom, and the higher levels who make up the programs and rules to go by. When a teacher goes to PD day, what they learn is the fluffy information of bullying, health, but not the real gritty details of what impacts learning in the classroom. Know that, questions may get right dirty, and very personal. Do not response to them, or react to them, get it back on the topic. There will always be one in the room, that will do anything to get you off topic. Response to questions on your actions of the past, by stating I acted accordingly to the information that I had on hand at that time, and if it seems suited at that moment, as a mother and parent, I would do the same things. However, if I had the information that I know today, we would not be here today,sitting discussing it. This usually leave most silent, and this gives you the opportunity where the audience is more receptive in listening and understanding your position. Now for the site, there is little information for parents as a whole for dealing with special-needs children, let along information for students who are struggling in school. Go through it with a fine-tooth comb, and understand how it impacts your child, and try to see how it impacts other children. Other questions, that will be thrown at you, is what you know of the system. By knowing it, you can put a quick end to this line of questions, and perhaps a few red faces will appear, when you mention bias, discrimination, and lack of knowledge in the same sentence, by pointing out the LESS obvious ones. You be surprise how some rules, all done for the good of the child, discriminates where your child needs are compared to what a normal child needs are. Never use your parenting style for support, but rather use your abilities and skills as a parent to support the fact, without the support that I have shown and given my child at home, she would not where she is today. I f I left it up to the school, she would have failed a grade or two, or put in whatever you think is right. Present any weaknesses in her reading, writing, and numeracy. The public education system, has a big problem in teaching the skills of reading, writing, and numeracy beyond the first few steps in the foundation chain. Over half of Canadians have poor skills in all, or in parts. There is also studies linking that graduates, over 60 % have poor skills in reading, writing or numeracy in one or all of them. The SK system regarding supports, and how it is manage, goes through the lens of the children who have hearing or visual deficits. Everything goes through that lens, and where many special-needs children are not getting the right kinds of support, nor do they meet the criteria. I have search high and low for forms that would discount my position, but at this time the only forms I have found are for the only two groups, and schools are directed to these forms. This is where that nasty funding formula is used, where schools will increase the number needing intensive supports, for increase funding, and this funding will go to support the teacher inside the classroom, since there is no resources that teachers can access. This is a bean counter move, done at the highest level to reduce costs and expenditures regarding the needs of the children with cognitive impairments, the ADHD population, the autism group and of course the biggest group of them all, learning disabilities. It creates an image to the public, that the school system is meeting the needs of special education, by just moving money from general education into special education and back into the general classroom. It will appear that there is an increase in funding. If you go at this angle, your position would be, if there is an increase in funding for special education, than why have I not seen an increase in resources that are specific for the various groups in intensive supports. Most, will not know, nor will they have access to those numbers. Some will defend it, by pointing out the changes in your school. This is where thinking fast on your feet, and where to know the changes, and how it is directed and the impact on your daughter's education. Others will have no idea that this is happening., and privately are pissed off their well-thought policies are not so well-thought in the first place. Keep me inform, and if you have any problems thinking things out, let me know, perhaps I can help you. If there is one thing I have learned about myself, I am very creative when I want to be. Bye for now
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Jan 22, 2010 9:43:17 GMT -5
Thanks Rose I have a lot of work to do before next Friday. I will explore the site and read everything I can.I am fairly well educated on SK learning mandates as I have spent the last 2 and a half years researching what should be happening versus what is happening.I have not focused on how the system as a whole effects our kids I will need to do that.
I will also phone her family Dr and request copies of their medical findings. I know the family Dr wrote a letter to the psychiatrist stating how her severe anxiety symptoms had gone away.I will also request the progress notes from the psychiatrist to the family Dr. Even if I do not use these documents I want them for my records.
I will also follow up on the letter to the minister of social services regarding the abuse allegation. I have received no response from that letter and to my knowledge. It has not been investigated. I fully believe that this mediation thing is in response to that letter. I am skeptical about this mediation thing as all these people involved work for the province and all have an agenda to make this go away while appearing to work with us.
I will keep you informed. Again Thank you
|
|
|
Post by therose on Jan 22, 2010 15:26:36 GMT -5
Hi Kjgdid, Have at least 5 examples, how her anxiety impacts learning in the classroom. With my daughter, her anxiety would increase when the teacher was talking to her from the side, rather than face to face. She often would have to ask to have it repeated, and perhaps a third time. This always led to the teaching accusing her of not listening. Her low phonemic awareness is tied in to her major delay in speech which impacted her listening skills. A FM system would have been perfect for her needs, and is denied for all, except for those who have a hearing deficit. Note here, that in my daughter's case, the behaviour is being blame , and she must change, rather than the teacher's lack of knowledge and/or her pace when speaking. This just increases anxiety in my child, and I can imagine it, that your daughter's anxiety increases ten-fold compared to my daughter. As for this meeting, go in prepared, but do not have expectations regarding the outcome. Just do one thing only, steer the discussions back to the topic and do not have anyone take over the agenda and your concerns. Remember that this meeting has been arrange for different reasons around the table, and all of them are thinking how to end it, without caving in to your demands. I have experience it, and it lies where the people around me had no respect for me as a person, or a parent or the knowledge that I had. This might explain why you have been having so much trouble, especially the accusation of abuse. The last piece of advice, concerning the meeting, is when (and it will happen) one voices misconceptions on either your daughter's disorder, or telling you a different reality than what you have experience - stick to your guns, stopped everything - until the misconception is sorted out. Do not let anything slide. It happen to me several times, and the misconception of what dyslexia is and reading disorders. And always back it up, with reliable sources. If they object to the source, respond to it, by asking, "Now, what would you suggest would be a good source of reliable knowledge?" For most, they will keep quiet, and for the few - they will suggest names. Nine times out of ten, it is a local name, a provincial name all within the education field, who has never had the opportunity to published their research in one of the journals. Or they will cherry-picked a researcher, where the time date is somewhere in the 70s or 80s for having papers published in a journal. Dress up for the meeting, as if you are going to Church, and put on make-up that makes you feel good about yourself. Keep in mind, not only are you going to battle for your daughter, but for other parents and their children. Few, go the route that you have taken, and for good reason - if you score for your daughter, you are also scoring for the other children and their parents. If you don't, at least one thing has been accomplished, an increase in respect and knowledge of yourself, and hopefully an increase in respect for all parents.
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Jan 25, 2010 9:43:15 GMT -5
Hi Rose I have not responded because I am so angry and disappointed with both SK learning and the SD. I received a letter on Friday from the dir of ed saying my dd was not going to be able to take her midterm exams as agreed with the regional director of children's services. The letter states that their reasoning is we have not provided them with a Dr form on what accomodations the SD would need before she returns to school.I have explained repeatedly it is the student services that are responsible for accommdating not a Dr. The reg dir phoned the super and she said that dd has missed to much instructional time and if we return dd to school immediately the school would ensure she received the instructional component so she could take exams. DD has missed over a month of school so they are saying that it would only take 1 day to provide this instructional component because exams start tomorrow. It is obvious that the SD is holding my daughter's education hostage in order to force us to return her to that school and that is not happening. The mediator and I agree that mediation at this point will not work. So we are once again at a stand still.
|
|
|
Post by therose on Jan 25, 2010 13:17:55 GMT -5
Oh wow, and so disappointing. I had to search for it, and I have no idea if you know about it, but here is the specific page for accommodations regarding exams. "1.3.13 Special Provisions Policy Special provisions may be made in writing departmental examinations for students with sensory disabilities, physical disabilities, acute or chronic illness, and learning disabilities. The special provisions must not compromise the integrity of the formally stated foundational and learning objectives. Requests for special provisions must be based on assessment of need by qualified personnel. The special provisions that may be made include: • exten ded writing time (beyond the 30 additional minutes provided to ALL students, see 1.3.12); • use of a separate room for writing; • specially printed examination paper (e.g., large print, Braille, coloured paper); • use of a reader and/or scribe (The writing session must be audio taped for appeal purposes. Interpretation or clarification of terms, questions, or content cannot be provided to the student. The scribe will write the answers verbatim with the student giving direction as to the form of the answer in the case of paragraphs and essays, and the spelling of significant words.); • use of a word processor or brailler (Students are not permitted use of program utilities such as spell check, thesaurus, dictionary, or grammar check.). Decisions regarding special provisions or considerations are made by the Office of the Registrar in consultation with the school and ministry personnel. Parents or guardians and other involved agencies may also be consulted. Procedures The principal must submit a formal written request (use the Application for Special Provisions form in Section 5) to arrange for a special provision or consideration for a student writing a departmental examination. The formal written request must include: • an explanation of the student’s disability. The supporting documentation substantiating the disability is to be retained at the school. (In the case of learning disabilities, the supporting documentation should include recommendations for accommodations made by a qualified educational psychologist within the last three years.); • an outline of the current approaches used in written examinations as identified in the student’s personal program plan; and • a description of the proposed special provision for the writing of the departmental examination. This request must be directed to the Office of the Registrar, Provincial Examinations and Student Services, as early in the session as possible. The Registrar will notify the principal in writing of the special provisions that can be made for the student." www.education.gov.sk.ca/Default.aspx?DN=d0f7d4c1-3d0b-4b27-8259-9308e1d85c2e&c=all&q=accommodations for exams, midterm That little gem, goes to 3 departments - Office of the Registar, Provincial Examinations and Student Services, and all signed by the prinicpal of the school. Also note no specific time dates, just get it in ASAP in the beginning of the session. At least in my province there is specific dates plus it only goes to student supports. Saying all that, I think you have the real problem with the principal of the school, with his supervisors above him, supporting him, rather than looking out for the best interests of your daughter. This really pisses me off, and it is happening right across Canada concerning accommodations and exams. Even the accommodations that are available, for a lot of students do not meet the criteria and for most, if getting an accommodation, it is the wrong one. Such as using a book dictionary as opposed to a Franklin electronic dictionary. In most cases dictionaries are not allowed to be used, except in some exams and only in book form. Students who have problems in word decoding, are severely hampered by the other set of rules that is meant for all students, where only the word is repeated without telling the meaning, and questions can be read out word to word, but the teacher cannot change the question around, to get what the question is asking. In the case of my daughter, a dictionary would come in handy to explain meanings of words, and where she would get a better grip on what the question is asking. Kids like mine, are not entitled to have exemptions, and it appears that - wrong word - kids who will benefit having accommodations like your daughter, are receiving the same type of treatment as my kid, but using the administration rules/regulations, rather than meeting the criteria. In either way, both kids are handicapped, and the irony is once reaching post-secondary education, the door is open to them for accommodations. As for your comment on , "The reg dir phoned the super and she said that dd has missed to much instructional time and if we return dd to school immediately the school would ensure she received the instructional component so she could take exams. DD has missed over a month of school so they are saying that it would only take 1 day to provide this instructional component because exams start tomorrow." That is red tape bull shit, so someone down the line can check the box that this student has received the proper instruction at the school, before exams. It also implies that home instruction, even if it consists of doing the homework does not meet the criteria for exams. Does it mean, a student who is off sick, but still capable of doing his homework will not be allow to take exams? From what I have observed, these students get a free pass from taking exams, as my daughter did when her father died, and we were out for two months. It is time to write to the ministry of education, and copies to high ranking staff within the ministry's office. Make sure, it is stated due to the lack of clear documents found on the ministry of education site, I did not have the needed knowledge to navigate the education system to advocate for my daughter's needs. As a result, due to her being away for a month for medical purposes, the school and the director of education took advantage, to denied the writing of her mid-term exams, by the use of rules and regulations found in the Registar's Handbook for School Administrators 2009-2010. State the page, and the one I cited, is on page 11. Used words, like above, and stay away from words that are implied there is a bad guy. What I had said, without knowing all the particulars, are words that implied there is something wrong with the system, and unintended results of discrimination. Play the lack of knowledge concerning administration of education on site, the reason why you are sitting in this position. As well as the lack of cooperation from the staff in the education department in being willing to provide this information to parents in a timely fashion. If you are not aware, it is hard to make good decisions for your children. Play on why your daughter stayed home, and used all medical terms. State it as fact, and show if I had known the rules regarding exams and accommodations, I would have taken this into consideration, and at the very least went down to the school, to make sure all was in place. They are giving you a very rough time, but the game is not finish. They are counting on you not to go higher up the food chain. Also check the Wrightslaw site, for examples of letters and language to use. Very informative, and where your intent is to have the ministry of education and I forgot to include the Premier read the whole letter, and a timely response from both. My thoughts are with you, and the game is not finish........
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Jan 25, 2010 18:23:26 GMT -5
Hi Rose You are going to love this one. I received a phone call from the mediator who said his hands are tied for the next 2 weeks because of a letter from the director of ed to regional dir of SK learning stating she would be out of the province for 2 weeks and there would be no meetings or correspondence on this issue until she returns. He received the letter on Jan 20th I received the dd would not participate in exams letter on the 22nd.After snake women had left the province. I phoned regional dir of SK learning and asked what educational plan was in place for dd while snake women was on holidays. He did not know. I told him he better figure it out because our letter to dir of ed and cced to everyone in the ministry on Dec 20th clearly stated dd would not be returning to that school. He phoned superintendent and she is suppose to call him back tomorrow. I am going to sit down tomorrow and compose a letter to the min of ed. The ministry is aware of this situation and I am going to cc it to everyone including the children's advocate and premier. Talk about not dealing in good faith.
|
|
|
Post by therose on Jan 26, 2010 8:37:51 GMT -5
Good for you. Provincial ministers believe in their changes that they make, will benefit the people of a province in some way, but when they are making policies it is being applied onto the whole province, rather than looking at the individual. Believe there is a whole science of policy formation, would make your head spin. They like to think, everyone is following not only the spirit, but as well as the reasons for changes. Their focus is on the whole of the province, and levels below that, their focus is on implementation of the goals and policies. The trouble is in the lower levels, and what lens they are viewing it from. Often the implementation is taking place, to make their lives easier, but not the users of government services. Its in the education field, we find it most often, making the policies and goals of the education ministry to fail, because there is no accountability measures at the lower levels, to ensure compliance. Here are the goals of SK education ministry. Statement from the Minister Honourable Ken Krawetz Just over a year ago, Saskatchewan's new Government outlined an exciting agenda for our province and our provincial education system. We recognize the PreK-12 education sector has an essential role in economic growth, preparing our young people to take their place in Saskatchewan's economy. As well, a high quality public education system supports Saskatchewan's families and attracts new families to our communities. Our Government has set forward a plan for Securing the Future. I present to you, within these pages, my Ministry's Plan for 2009-10. In this Plan, we are highlighting key actions that best identify how the Ministry of Education aligns with the Government's vision for a secure and prosperous Saskatchewan, leading the country in economic and population growth, while providing opportunity for a high quality of life for all. The 2009-10 Provincial Budget supports the Ministry in moving our Plan forward, and delivers on our promises. I will report on our success in implementing this Plan and my Mandate Letter commitments in the Ministry's Annual Report. The Honourable Ken Krawetz Deputy Premier and Minister of Education Mission Statement The Ministry of Education provides strategic, innovative, and collaborative leadership to the early learning and child care, pre-kindergarten through grade twelve education, literacy, and library sectors. It promotes higher student achievement and well-being for Saskatchewan children and youth, and improved literacy skills for all, as a foundation of the province's social and economic growth. Response to Government Direction for 2009-10 Ministry Plans for 2009-10 align with Government's vision and goals and the key priorities for 2009-10, as presented in the Government Direction for 2009-10. The 2009-10 Plan communicates a high-level framework for the Ministry's activities over the coming year and reflects the Ministry's primary areas of focus. Together, all ministries support government's three goals, working towards a secure and prosperous Saskatchewan. Strategies and Actions An outline of our key activities and intended results for the coming year. Government Goal - Economic Growth Sustain Economic Growth for the benefit of Saskatchewan people, ensuring the economy is ready for growth and positioning Saskatchewan to meet the challenges of economic and population growth and development. Government Goal - Security Secure Saskatchewan as a safe place to live and raise a family where people are confident in their future, ensuring the people of Saskatchewan benefit from the growing economy. Government Goal - Promises Keep Government's Promises and fulfill the commitments of the election, operating with integrity and transparency, accountable to the people of Saskatchewan. Related Documents Performance Measures performancemeasures.pdf ( 490.2 KB ) Financial Summary education-FS-for-2009-10.pdf ( 527.8 KB ) Download the Plan for 2009-10 plan09-10.pdf ( 776.9 KB ) Related Links Minister Mandate Letter Print this page Email to a friend www.education.gov.sk.ca/plan/Plenty of ammo here, to get the top level of education angry enough to call certain employees and ream them out. As for your position, although I do agree with your goals and the spirit that the goals are formed on, as a parent with a special-needs child, it is a difficult task for me to ensure that my child too, can take advantage of economic opportunities, when others who work below the level of the Ministry of Education, have hinder my daughter's education and her economic future. Lots at the ministry level, that can be used. Another tip, when using special education or special-needs or some other name, always add a good grade average, honour student, or something to indicate intelligence. All too often, people associated special education, special-needs with poor grades. I can go on and on about that, but these little facts come in handy and can be use as a means to promote action on those who can act and having the authority to do so. Keep me updated, bye for now - Nancy
|
|
|
Post by kjgdid on Jan 26, 2010 16:24:54 GMT -5
Hi Nancy Thank you so much for your support. It is really appreciated. Some times I feel like I am the most unresonable person on earth and this has to be me because no one else that I know fights this hard. I talked to the coordinator from the health region who spoke to the reg dir for SK learning this morning. She knows me and has worked with the school personnel at that school for 14 years . She comes to meetings that we have with the school and she assurred him that my representation of the situation is accurate. I also had a meeting with the youth counsellor my dd sees and she assured me that the school is an unhealthy place for most of the kids that attend and that she herself only sees kids in her office at the hospital because she can not take being in a toxic environment and does not want to be present in the school to witness what takes place. I will continue on in my quest to get my mutiply challenged, very bright dd educated in the least stressful environment, which is at home and hope that what I have done in standing up in the last 3 and half years has somehow made a difference for other children. Karen
|
|