"Hi Heather:
First of all, I too feel that Maslow's hierarchy has much to offer. I have never liked the term hierarchy here as Maslow describes it more as though it were a continuum which we cycle through depending on where we are ion our lives,…"
An Inclusive Education System
Do the equity and inclusion education strategies outlined in the Ministry’s document support the goals for schools in the 21st Century?
In the former Minister’s opening message in the Equity and Inclusion Strategy she refers to the goal of this initiative, “….to strive to remove all systemic barriers that impede student achievement and student success”, and states that our schools need “to help students develop into highly skilled, knowledgeable, and caring citizens who can contribute to both a strong economy and a cohesive society.”
The Ministry’s vision:
“We envision an inclusive education system in Ontario in which:
• all students, parents, and other members of the school community are welcomed and respected;
• every student is supported and inspired to succeed in a culture of high expectations for learning.”
Here is the link to “Ontario’s Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy”:
http://cal2.edu.gov.on.ca/april2009/EquityEducationStrategy.pdf
In the Ministry’s document it states, “Equity does not mean treating people the same without regard for individual differences.” (p.4) It also states that the strategy “reaffirms the values of fairness, equity, and respect as essential principles of our publicly funded education system.” (p.12)
It also states that, “In order to achieve equity and inclusive education in Ontario schools, we must pursue the following three goals, which are rooted in our three core education priorities”:
1. Shared and committed leadership by the ministry, boards, and schools will play a critical role in eliminating discrimination through the identification and removal of bias and barriers. Achieving equity is a shared responsibility; establishing an equitable and inclusive education system requires commitment from all education partners.
2. Equity and inclusive education policies and practices will support positive learning environments so that all students can feel engaged in and empowered by what they are learning, supported by the teachers and staff from whom they are learning, and welcome in the environment in which they are learning. Students, teachers, and staff learn and work in an environment that is respectful, supportive, and welcoming to all.
3. Accountability and transparency will be demonstrated through the use of clear measures of success (based on established indicators) and through communication to the public of our progress towards achieving equity for all students. Accountability is necessary to maintain and enhance public confidence in the education system.
These goals are to be achieved by each school board by addressing the following 8 areas of focus in their policy by this fall: Board policies, programs, guidelines, and practices; Shared and Committed Leadership; School-Community Relationships; Inclusive Curriculum and Assessment Practices; Religious Accommodation; School Climate and the Prevention of discrimination and harassment; Professional Learning; and Accountability and Transparency.
There are action items outlined for schools, boards, and the Ministry on pages 18-23. The guiding principles are listed on p.11, if you haven’t already given input on the development of your board’s policy.
Will this policy help ensure safety, as well as the strengthening of educational opportunities to all students, and create the conditions needed for “success”? Is the focus on equity different than equality?
Tags: Education policy, Ministry of Education, School boards
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Sheila Stewart on -
The idea for this discussion started with a conversation! I must thank Anthony Wright for all his insight and time during our collaboration in the review of various documents and the sharing of thoughts around this initiative.
And I know, it is June!! We took a break from weeding! :)
-
Permalink Reply by Gay Stephenson on -
You two (Sheila and Anthony) have really put your heads together here! So many good questions to ponder...
The province has tried to do this before (read the 1993 anti-racism and equity policy). Back then they were given a whole department and funding - for two years. Then it was all taken away by a new government.
So much time has passed since then. What a shame!
I like the way this policy outlines the actions that the province, school boards and schools are supposed to take. (Although we could talk about whether they are the best actions...) I don't think there is enough funding attached. Changing your thinking doesn't necessarily cost money, but educating people to help them question their beliefs and assumptions, and then changing systems does have a financial cost. Money is needed.
I think that equity is different from equality in that what we all need to receive isn't necessarily the same or equal. Now I've got the words "differentiated instruction" popping into my mind :) All for now - letting what you've written/asked in this discussion sink into my brain a bit...
-
Permalink Reply by Sheila Stewart on
-
Thanks for joining in Gay and Marion. Good thoughts!
Marion, I am glad you mentioned the possible implications to fundraising and consideration of economic status. This overall policy may have implications for many policies--from fundraising and school councils to curriculum and programs, and instruction, as Gay has starting to think about. Here's to more "sinking into the brain..." :)
-
Permalink Reply by Anthony Wright on -
The more I read and discuss the implications of the Equity and Inclusion Strategy the more that this policy appears doomed to failure. First, the policy seeks to implement too many initiatives. It focuses on issues under 'inclusion' such as bullying and discrimination on the basis of gender, race, religion, etc., and on issues under 'equity' such as developing education programs to cater to individual student needs through the use of individual education plans. All of this I think is part of the province’s "Growing Success" strategy. The reason why I think this initiative is fated for failure is because it appears to be the old "make gold from straw" approach to education. I have spoken to a child psychiatrist and to teachers and parents and the question that everyone has is: Where are the resources for these initiatives? Schools now have "success teachers" that are suppose to advocate on behalf of students to identify their individual educational needs. It is my understanding that this person is not an education psychiatrist. In order to provide a child with an individualized education plan they should be accurately assessed by an education psychiatrist. I have been informed that most boards only have one education psychiatrist for 6 or more schools and that the wait time to see one through the school can be as long as two years. An individualized education plan might also require an occupational therapist to help in designing an individual education plan. Some children require personal case workers. Common complaints around the present implementation of individualized education plans surround the wait time for having a child’s education needs assessed, the lack of school resources to provide these services, and the lack of resources for teachers to adequate cope with individual children's needs. Given the present failings of the public education system to adequately assess individual student education needs, children with educational needs that are not being met can over time (even one school year) severely compromise a child’s educational experience. And what might be an educational problem for a student can escalate into behavioural problems that can lead to disruptive behaviours in the classroom which can negatively impact his/her relationship with their teacher, the school’s administration and their classmates.
It seems to me that our schools are focusing more on student behavioural problems instead of on their educational needs. I propose that this is driven by a rationing principle but that this rationing principle goes contrary to the principle of equity and is still largely focused on a principle of equality whereby schools are given so much money based on student enrolment and not based on student educational needs.
So I think that the funding policy of schools needs to be addressed if the Ministry is sincere in promoting the tenets of this strategy. I would like to see addressed the targeted wait time for students to obtain an individual educational needs assessment by a qualified education psychiatrist? I would like to know what measures will be taken to inform parents of the availability of these resources? Lastly, I would like to see the creation of an independent advocate for parents that can support parents' requests for these resources, or to address their concerns of discrimination, when schools and boards fail to live up to the responsibilities set in the Equity and Inclusion Strategy. Too often, it seems, a catch-22 scenario plays out between boards, schools, parents, and the Ministry of Education when the Ministry passes policies down to boards but then waives responsibility for the implementation of those policies by the boards based on the status of a board's legal, corporate autonomy while the boards waive responsibility based on a lack of resources and their legal obligation to operate within their budget. To avoid this type of scenario, I would like to see this Strategy included in the Education Act in order to protect students' rights and guarantee their equitable access to the resources they require to succeed in our public education system.
-
Permalink Reply by Anthony Wright on
-
I just want to hone my discussion: First question: Will the Equity and Inlusion Strategy address the needs of most students on an equitable basis?
The Special Education Advisory Committee report - Unit 5 (http://www.seac-learning.ca/unit5.htm) - states:
The Special Education Per Pupil Amount (SEPPA) recognizes the cost of providing additional assistance to the majority of students with special education needs. SEPPA is allocated to boards on the basis of total enrolment.
The SEPPA amounts for 2009–10 are:
•$755.47 per JK to Grade 3 student
•$581.57 per Grade 4 to 8 student
•$383.80 per Grade 9 to 12 student
Since individual needs are 'individual' and will vary based on the required resources to meet the individual student's education needs, to set a limit of funding per student is to treat these students with 'exceptional' needs as equal and not 'equitably'.
Second point: Also according to the Special Education Advisory Committee report - Unit 1 (http://www.seac-learning.ca/unit1.htm):
The Ministry of Education provided $20 million to the Ontario Psychological Association (OPA) to reduce current waiting times for students who require assessments and to enhance teachers’ capacity to provide effective programs, based on assessment information, for students in Junior Kindergarten to Grade 4. School boards determined their professional assessment needs, along with classroom-based assessment, which may have included: psychological, speech language and occupational therapy. Although the project completion date was scheduled for August 31, 2008, projects are being extended to August 31, 2009.
Has this funding been further extended? Why was assessment done only on students in JK - Grade 4? Why were students in other grades ignored?
Lastly, in order for a student to receive an individual education plan they must first be approved by an Individual Education Plan Committee (see http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/general/elemsec/speced/guide/resource/...) who can refuse the request if the committee does not find that the student needs satisfies the definition of 'exceptional'. This seems rather arbitrary. What if a student has educational needs but they do not fall within that category, does this mean that their needs don't warrant a similar attention? Also, the process seems incredibly cumbersome and time consuming. Is there not a way to expedite the process? Finally, there might be some parents that might not have the level of education to know to take advantage of this service for their child or they might be concerned about their child or themselves becoming stigmatized because their child might be identified as having "special" needs. However, many students who are marginal students probably could benefit from additional education resources that they could obtain through this program (i.e., IEP). However, the focus of the Ministry is to get parents more engaged with their children's education and helping their children with their homework. But this pactice doesn't treat parents equitable and, consequently, doesn't treat children equitably, if their parents either do not have the time or the necessary education to help their children (both factors being influenced by SEC). Hence some children are given obstacles to achieving their potential in our public education system because they are unfairly discrimintated against because of their SEC. It is unclear how the new strategy will address this.
Okay, really last point: There seems to be a lot of literature out there but I question whether it is reaching the parents. The information is not presented in lay terms and this can limit the population that can actually use it. To use terms such as "special education" or "exceptional" to identify students with particular needs be the needs educational or other narrows the breadth of the net cast and, consequently, will exclude many marginal students who would benefit from an individualized education plan. This begs the question: Is it truly our goal to promote equity and inclusion in or public education system?
-
Permalink Reply by Jacqui Strachan on -
Anthony raises a good point about "the creation of an independent advocate for parents that can support parents' requests for these resources, or to address their concerns of discrimination, when schools and boards fail to live up to the responsibilities set in the Equity and Inclusion Strategy." Based on the number of calls we get from parents who are at the end of their rope trying to deal with the complexity of education bureaucracy, there is a real need for someone that they can turn to for help.
-
Permalink Reply by Sheila Stewart on
-
Good point about special education, Anthony. If special education funding is allocated according to a board's overall enrolment, and not actual special education needs/numbers, how does that fit with equity?
And with both Anthony's and Jacqui's points about parent advocacy I thought about how this strategy suggests that parents, as well as all education partners, would have a role in its implementation and support and success........but there may be a lot to try and understand first about how the system works.
-
Permalink Reply by Sheila Stewart on
-
Just adding another document here. This one is very comprehensive, but provides more specific "Guidelines for policy development and implementation". Some key areas are highlighted well though in this document, and there are a number of user-friendly charts and timelines which might save a lot of reading.
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/policyfunding/inclusiveguide.pdf
Latest Activity
A discussion started by Gay Stephenson was featuredThe State of Ontario's schools - what do you think?
On Monday May 28, 2012 at 10:30 am, People for Education will release its 15th Annual Report on Ontario’s Publicly Funded Schools.The report is an audit of Ontario’s education system and contains new data on everything from the state of elementary…See More
Sam replied to Annie Kidder's discussion 'The credit cap - what do you think?'"Has anyone heard about the principle of mastery. Ideally it is that a student progresses through a particular discipline as she or he reaches various degrees of mastery in that discipline. The idea of a credit would not depend on having…"
Gay Stephenson posted a discussionThe State of Ontario's schools - what do you think?
On Monday May 28, 2012 at 10:30 am, People for Education will release its 15th Annual Report on Ontario’s Publicly Funded Schools.The report is an audit of Ontario’s education system and contains new data on everything from the state of elementary…See More
Annie Kidder posted a status"2 P4E husbands receive Order of Canada Friday. We're not only smart, we pick good partners. @metromorning http://ning.it/KkGy8S"
Jacqui Strachan left a comment for Susan Bain"Ahhh moving - always crazy, and when it is so far, I imagine it is even worse. Good luck, and we'll look forward to seeing you in here once you get settled."
Susan Bain left a comment for Jacqui Strachan"Hi Jacqui,
Thanks for the warm welcome! I'll not be very active here for a while, as I'm in the throes of moving from Ontario to Cape Breton, but I look forward to having more time to browse here. Lots of interesting discussions, it…"
Ken Tone replied to Annie Kidder's discussion 'The credit cap - what do you think?'"I don't know about this issue but your comment about staying in high school until age 40 caught my eye. I think this points to much bigger issues. One issue is the way boys are falling behind girls at a very fast rate. …"
Sheila Stewart replied to Frank Loreto's discussion 'Getting rid of EQAO'"I hear you, Ken. Three was a local radio poll after the presentation. It is not a "scientific poll", but if it gives some hope... :) The results so far can be…"
M.P. replied to M.P.'s discussion 'Summer School for special needs students'"Thank you...I hope more people come forward to let me know...I would like to know if this is just a local issue or if it's the same throughout all school boards across Ontario.
"
© 2012 Created by People for Education.
Powered by
