report on the education/20072008/07-08 sep final report.pdfchecklists observation anecdotal rubrics...

Report on the 2007/2008

Special Education Program

Prepared by the First Nations Education Steering Committee

and the First Nations Schools Association

British Columbia Region

July 2008

Special Education Program Final Report July 2008 of 71

Introduction The First Nations Education Steering Committee (FNESC) and the First Nations Schools Association (FNSA) are once again pleased to provide this summary of special education activities undertaken in the 2007/2008 year. FNESC/FNSA continue to provide First Nations schools with an allocation of SEP funding that is accessed by the submission of a workplan. This flexibility enables schools to focus on local priorities from a strength-based perspective rather than a deficit model. This philosophy is best highlighted in the following quote. Children should not be seen as having “special needs”. Rather, they should be considered people with special gifts and talents. Every effort should be made to build upon their strengths and abilities rather than focusing on what they are lacking. This requires a team effort. It is a concern of all school staff, parents and community members, and not just specialists. In 2007/2008, FNESC/FNSA began two key initiatives to further strengthen the accountability of the SEP program in BC First Nations schools to communities and other stakeholders: one to address the need for measuring student outcomes, and the other to address the SEP portion of INAC compliance directive. More detailed information regarding student Individual Education Plans (IEPs) was collected with the school SEP final reports, and a summary is provided in Part One of this document. In Part Two, is the summary of the SEP reviews that were conducted as part of the FNSA School Assessment Process this year. In the 2007/2008 school year, $9,471,200 of the Special Education Program (SEP) funding was available for special education programming in BC. First Nations schools and communities in BC continue to support FNESC and FNSA management of the special education program for First Nations schools in the province. The majority of SEP funding continues to flow directly to First Nations schools for the provision of service to children with special needs. First Nations schools continue to outline their activities in the collectively established and approved workplan and reporting documents. The following chart highlights the division of SEP funding where 84% goes to First Nations schools in the form of allocations and is accessed by the submission and approval of the SEP workplan. The remaining 16% is used for collective, regional level services and also includes the administrative funding required by FNESC/FNSA. Funding Amount SEP funding in BC region $9,471,200 Funding allocated directly to First Nations schools $7,911,014 (84%) Funding used for collective, regional-level activities $1,560,186 (16%) In addition to the SEP funding allocated to BC region, many schools continue to combine grants from other sources of funding to enhance the special education services available to students. The following chart shows the total funding used by First Nations schools for special education initiatives. An additional 1.6 million of funding from other sources was used to leverage the SEP funding, meaning that many schools have made special education a priority at the expense of other programs. The majority of funding (96%) continues to be used for direct services.


Total Funding Used by First Nations Schools in BC $9,476,941 • For direct services $9,092,773 • For indirect services $384,168

Total Special Education Program (SEP) Funding $7,899,122

• For direct services $7,601,481 • For indirect services $297,641

Total Funding Accessed by Schools form Other Sources $1,577,819

• For direct services $1,491,292 • For indirect services $86,527

The following chart outlines the sources of other funding that were used for special education initiatives. Source of Other Funding Funding

Amount School core funding $1,064,170 First Nation $186,425 New Paths for Education $125,599 MCFD Supported childcare $33,793 First Nations Education Society/School Board $4,487 First Nation Child and Family Services $8,500 Other FNESC/FNSA programs $34,225 TRR:PD $11,000 School District $20,129 Head Start $25,594 Success by Six $22,480 Health $32,155 Local Fundraising $2,274 Part One: Overview of School-Based Activities This summary describes the general programs implemented using the special education funding, as well as the outcomes that resulted. Attached, as Appendix A, is the First Nations Regional Managing Organization Annual Report that contains further information as requested. 1. Profile of the schools 1.10 General Information All First Nations schools were given the opportunity to access special education funding. School allocations were determined using a base-plus-per capita formula ($20,000 base plus a per capita amount based on the Full Time Equivalent (FTE) student figure listed on the INAC nominal roll). In 2007/2008, 128 schools were notified of their allocation amount. In order to access the SEP allocation amount, schools were once again required to submit a workplan for approval outlining the planned special education activities. As in other years, individual and conference calls were made available to assist schools with the application process. 126 schools (98%) submitted workplans and accessed their SEP funding allocation.


Once again, the FNSA membership made the decision to reserve 5% of the school allocation funding amount for schools that cannot meet the needs of some of their High Cost Special needs students with their school allocation amounts. The need for this additional pool of funding continues to be identified by the FNSA membership as necessary given the inadequate SEP funding available overall in the BC region. In 2007/08, $390,910 of funding was available for this purpose. Twenty-three schools submitted requests totalling $1,034,834. As a result, only 17 schools received partial funding for their requests. In June, 122 schools submitted final reports to FNESC/FNSA outlining all the special education initiatives and expenditures for the 2007/2008 year. This constitutes 97% of the schools that accessed SEP funding. The information in the SEP final reports continues to be entered into a database in an effort to meet the necessary accountability and reporting requirements. 125 schools also completed the INAC First Nations School Annual Reporting Form constituting 99% of the schools that accessed SEP funding. 1.11 Individual Education Plans (IEPs) In the 2007/2008 First Nations School Annual reporting form, schools reported having 1,224 students with Individual Education Plans which is 68% of the total reported high cost special needs population. Of these, schools reported that students are meeting or exceeding the objectives in their IEPs which constitute 70% of the total IEPs. A year to year comparison of this is not possible due to changes to the reporting form. This year, First Nations schools were asked to provide more detailed information regarding the student IEPs in an effort to demonstrate the impact of the SEP funding. Due to the fact that IEPs by their very nature are not easy to aggregate, schools were asked to report on the number of goals set and the number achieved in some broad categories of goals. In addition, schools were asked to itemize the measurement tools they used to demonstrate the achievement of the goals. In order to aggregate this information, the tools have also been categorized. Of the schools that completed the IEP section of the final SEP reports, 68% reported having IEPs. Specifically, 66 schools reported having IEPs, 30 reported no IEPs at their schools, and 26 did not complete this section of the report. Literacy Number of Goals Set Number of Goals Achieved Percentage of Goals Achieved

1517

1042

69%

Tools used to measure the achievement of literacy goals include the following: Specific Tests/Measurement Tools: Gates MacGinitie Canadian Achievement Test -3 DIBELS Brigance Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement PM Benchmarks FSA Jerry John’s Reading Inventory DART Dolch Word lists Canada Test of Basic Skills Woodcock Johnson DRA BC Performance Standards WRAP


Canada Quiet Alberta Reading Diagnostic Psych-ed Assessments EOWPVT ROWPVT TAPS-R WIAT Primary Success Assessment Tools Bracken Sounds Abound Yopp Singer test of Phonemic Segmentation Dawn Reithaug tools Program Assessments: ReadWell Reading Mastery Reading A-Z SuccessMaker Step up to Writing Other tools: checklists running records observations feedback pre/post tests anecdotal portfolio Numeracy Number of Goals Set Number of Goals Achieved Percentage of Goals Achieved

664

500

75%

Tools used to measure the attainment of numeracy goals include the following: Specific Tests/Measurement Tools: Canada Achievement Test -3 Canada Test of Basic Skills Key Math Brigance BC Performance Standards Kindergarten Survey WRAT-3 Lifeskills Math Assessment Canada Quiet Kaufman Test of Ed. Achievement WIAT Ages and Stages Diagnostic Math Assessment – Vancouver IslandNet Nippissing Developmental Screen Program Assessments: JUMP Math Saxon Math Singapore Math Minute Math Scores SuccessMaker Program unit tests Curriculum based assessments Other tools: Checklists Observation Anecdotal Rubrics Number charts Feedback Communication/Language Number of Goals Set Number of Goals Achieved Percentage of Goals Achieved

689

473

69%

The tools used to measure the attainment of communication/language goals were primarily Speech Language Pathology reports. All tools are listed below.


Specialist Reports Speech Language Pathologists Learning Assistance Teachers Occupational Therapists Physiotherapists Specific Tests/Measurement Tools: Brigance BC Performance Standards KLST Linguisystems Sounds Abound OWLS DIBELS ReadWell Bracken Basic Concepts Goldman Fistoe 2 CELF PPVT Ages and Stages Nippissing Developmental Screen EVT Preschool Language Scale School Records: Teacher assessments progress reports observations anecdotal Behaviour/Social/Emotional/ Number of Goals Set Number of Goals Achieved Percentage of Goals Achieved

549

380

69%

The most commonly reported tools for documenting improvements in behavior were observations, anecdotal reports, and checklists. All of the methods used are included below. Behaviour Monitoring Tools: Checklists Teacher assessments Tally sheets Participation Observation Anecdotal Charting Feedback School Records: Attendance Office Referrals Incidence Reports Appointments with Elders Specialist Reports: Psychologist Speech Language Pathology Counsellor Therapist Motor Skills/Physical Number of Goals Set Number of Goals Achieved Percentage of Goals Achieved

110

86

78%

The tools used to measure the attainment of motor skills/physical goals are listed below. Specialist Reports: Occupational Therapists Physiotherapists


Other tools used: Observations Checklists Anecdotal Feedback from parents Printing Samples Developmental profile Lifeskills Number of Goals Set Number of Goals Achieved Percentage of Goals Achieved

213

137

64%

The tools used to measure Lifeskills goals are as follows: Observation Course completion Office referrals Attendance records Anecdotal Self assessments Rating scales Participation Completion charts Practical use of skills Journals Work completed Other Academic Number of Goals Set Number of Goals Achieved Percentage of Goals Achieved

135

115

85%

A wide range of tools were used to measure the IEP goals in several other academic areas. Modified course completion Kindergarten Screening Tool Canada Achievement Test-3 Curriculum tests PM Benchmarks Step-up to Writing DIBELS Student portfolios Work completed Structure of Intellect test Observation 1.12 Needs Not Met Each year, schools have been asked to give a detailed account of the types of needs of those students who are not receiving adequate special education services. Schools have also been asked to list the services they require along with the funding required to provide those services. Although there has been more funding each year to provide services, there has also been a growing awareness of the types of programs and services required. This has resulted in an increase in the perceptions of students not having any of their needs met and in those students only having their needs partially met. The increase in funding in the 2007/2008 benefitted students as there was a slight decrease in the number of students whose needs were not met. This trend is highlighted in the following chart. 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 Number of students that did not have any of their needs met

306 216 231 273 215

Number of students that only had their needs partially met

749 985 983 1062 875


The unmet needs section of the First Nations School Annual Reporting Form contains data representing the funding amount required to provide adequate services to children with special needs. The chart below lists the various areas that schools have reported needing additional resources. A year to year comparison shows that schools consistently assert that approximately $13,000,000 - $14,000,000 of funding is needed in the BC region to adequately meet the needs of students with special needs attending First Nations schools. It is important to note that this is the funding required at the school level and does not include the management of the program nor the provincially coordinated services provided by FNESC/FNSA.

Reason for lack of service

03/04 Funding Required





Staff $4,808,837 $3,867,655 $3,553,400 3,094,766 $3,506,130 Capital (building modifications to provide access)

$230,900 $361,500 $178,500 208,530 $255,366

Transportation $366,000 $206,250 $228,850 102,610 $193,904 Programs $685,100 $1,049,860 $634,000 452,950 $502,068 Professional Development $574,000 $790,500 $396,500 360,003 $480,875 Other (Assessments) $400,400 $494,560 $600,700 552,000 $534,000

Total $7,065,237 $6,770,325 $5,585,950 4,770,859 $5,472,343

BC SEP funding $6,017,400 $6,554,988 $6,709,486 $8,071,200 $9,471,200

Total funding required for BC region

$13,082,637 $13,325,313 $12,295,436 $12,842,059 $14,943,543

The graph below provides a visual depiction of the growing SEP funding that has been provided to First Nations schools over the past four years combined with the additional funding required for a consistent total requirement of approximately $13,000,000 in SEP funding. This past year, the additional funding required as expressed by schools increased slightly. This can be attributed to a growing awareness of the programs and services needed and the costs associated with service delivery.


1.2 Student Assessments A substantial portion of the SEP funding continues to be used for student assessments. Funding for assessment purposes is used to purchase assessment materials, hire specialists to conduct assessments and to provide release time for school staff to conduct assessments. The following chart shows the different categories of assessments reported by schools and the amount of funding used by schools in each category.

Assessment Type 2002/2003 2003/2004 2004/2005 2005/2006

2006/2007

2007/2008Developmental Screening Tools

$12,788.96

$8,748.56

$13,000.00 $1,800.00

$1,200

$1,000

Reading Assessments $17,393.03 $25,960.59 $42,712.00 $21,700.00 $1,650 0 Speech-language Assessments $75,652.82 $191,650.62 $77,402.07 $106,375.56 $131,548.73 $85,064.27 Psycho-educational Assessments

$291,204.56

$245,279.20

$187,394.57 $147,412.92

$175,940.53

$145,734.46

Medical Assessments* $7,309.00 $12,504.17 $8,200.00 $1,801.13 0 0 Achievement Assessments $102,654.88 $61.552.78 $50,868.81 $63,700.55 $31,473.49 $65,802 Other Assessments $5,848.80 $51,165.08 $23,040.00 $80,764.09 111,044.40 $108,728.39Total $512,852.05 $535,308.22 $402,617.00 $423,554.00 $452,857.15 $406,329.12 *schools still indicated that medical assessments were conducted, but funding was not used, therefore they do not appear in this report. The trend this past year shows a decrease in the use of funding to purchase speech-language assessments and psycho-educational assessments. This coincides with an increase in the provision of these services by FNESC/FNSA. The category of Other Assessments continues to be high largely because of the continuation of schools using a portion of their funding to provide substitute teachers while a staff member conducts assessments in the schools. 1.3 Early Intervention In addition to student assessments, a significant range of early intervention programs and services continue to be implemented in schools. The activities continue to be grouped into categories to enable reporting. The following table shows the amount of total funding spent by schools each year since 2002 (combined SEP and other funding sources).


2002/2003 2003/2004 2004/2005 2005/2006 2006/2007 2007/2008

Community workshops: special education/parenting

$49,687.03

$142,813.58

$74,667.99 $20,756.24

$33,289.08

$39,279.86 Community workshops: child development/behaviour

$11,913.65

$34,231.06

$60,658.79 $7,800.53

$59,500.00

$77,009.64

Community workshops: language development/literacy

$3,948.79

$40,323.64

$7,500.00 $1,000.00

$1,210.00

0

Purchase of special education materials/resources

$5,551.73

$48,514.67

$44,547.60

$22,388.30

$36,115.54

$111,035.34

Programs/materials for language development/reading

$170,729.91

$59,361.36

$149,735.98 $37,864.97

$20,886.48

$64,339.16

Enhancing school staffing/structure

$142,850.00

$204,892.13

$325,146.21$297,001.26

$332,549.07

$326,011.96

Total $384,681.11 $530,136.44 $662,256.57 $386,811.30 $483,550.17 $617,675.96 Details of Each Activity Category for Early Intervention Activities Each of the following charts corresponds to a category in the above table. The number of schools reporting each type of activity along with the number of participants/students who were involved in the activity is outlined. In addition, the amount of SEP funding and other funding used is also provided. Community workshops: special education/parenting Schools

Participants SEP Funding Other Funding

Community workshops -parenting 4 75 $12,883.92 $1,834.29 Community workshop – special needs 1 23 $3,500 0 Drug and alcohol prevention/wellness 4 153 $21,061.65 0 Total 9 251 $37,445.57 $1,834.29 $39,279.86 Community workshops: child development/behaviour Schools Participants SEP Funding Other FundingCommunity Training - child growth and development/early intervention 1 70 $65,000 0 Community workshop- behavior management 1 50 $10,009.64 $2,000 Total 1 120 $75,009.64 2000.00 $77,009.64 Purchase of special education materials/resources Schools Participants SEP Funding Other FundingBehaviour incentives 1 35 $3,720.00 0 Lifeskills Program 2 70 $30,850.00 0 Numeracy 2 41 $9,000.00 0 Resources 12 284 $59,714.08 $7,751.26 Total 17 430 $103,284.08 $7,751.26 $111,035.34

Programs/materials for language development/reading Schools Participants SEP Funding Other Funding Reading program 5 149 $28,668.88 $970.28 Language resources 4 77 $17,275.26 $16,224.74 Parents as Literacy Supports (PALS) 1 26 $1,200.00 0 Total 10 182 $47,144.14 $17,195.02 $64,339.16


Enhancing school staffing/structure Schools Participants SEP Funding Other Funding Art Therapy 1 8 0 $8,500.00 Counsellor 1 6 $2,026.48 $6,000.00 Occupational Therapist 1 7 $9,481.00 0 SLP 4 40 $52,660.00 0 Teacher - specialized 3 65 $68,463.00 $41,410.15 Teacher Assistant 10 187 $118,971.33 $6,000.00 Elders 1 10 $12,500.00 0 Total 21 323 $264,101.81 $61,910.15 $326,011.96 The usefulness of the early intervention programs is further highlighted by the following quotes from the special education program reports from First Nations schools in BC. We appreciate that the FNESC/FNSA special education program strongly supports early intervention activities. We believe that working with parents to become confident first teachers is key to prevention and critical for consistent early education practices at home. The Drug and Alcohol Prevention Workshop hosted by the two schools was a huge success and the attendance broke all records of previous workshops held in the community. Community members courageously spoke of their learning difficulties resulted by drug use. There were some emotional moments, but the community had to hear the stories, and it was definitely an eye opener for the younger/teenage participants. 1.4 Individual Student/Small Group Programs and Services

Schools used the greatest portion of their SEP grants to implement a range of activities and services for individual students and small groups of students with special needs. The activities generally fell into the categories listed below. The following table shows the amount of total funding spent by schools each year since 2002 (combined SEP and other funding sources). Once again, the majority of funding has been used to hire school staff and specialists to work with children with special needs. A detailed breakdown of activities within each category and the funding sources used is provided in subsequent charts. Year to Year Comparison of Individual Student/Small Groups Programs Type of Program/Service 2002/2003 2003/2004 2004/2005 2005/2006 2006/2007 Therapy/child development/life skills programs

$51,133.66

$156,653.19

$72,028.45 $45,299.42

$146,111.57

Student behaviour programs/services $122,960.54 $189,849.96 $206,639.05 $84,350.00 $71,373.58 Language development/reading programs $111,628.84 $63,272.61 $386,508.34 $357,236.44 $413,216.02 Other academic programs/services $553,203.60 $45,734.00 $88,367.79 $34,613.85 $1,000.00 Various resources for SEP $67,245.21 $481,931.35 $37,406.45 $90,782.05 $114,004.30 Enhanced staff resources/capacity and specialists

$1,872,374.70

$3,496,860.65

$4,064,712.90 $3,811,743.18

$4,648,273.60

$2,778,546.55 $4,434,301.76 $4,855,662.98 $4,424,024.94$5,361,405.90


Type of Program/Service 2007/2008 Therapy/child development/life skills programs $49,922.17 Student behaviour programs/services $139,046.00 Language development/reading programs $250,588.95 Other academic programs/services $11,266.00 Various resources for SEP $256,011.27 Enhanced staff resources/capacity and specialists $5,384,842.30 $6,091,676.50 Details of Each Activity Category for Individual Student/Small Group Programs Therapy/Child Development/Life Skills Programs Schools StudentsSEP Funds Other Funds Art Therapy 2 33 $5,135.00 0 Lifeskills program 3 68 $25,156.79 $4,480.38 Music Therapy 1 16 $2,000.00 0 Occupational Therapy 1 33 $5,500.00 0 Physiotherapy 2 9 $7,650.00 0 Total 9 159 $45,441.79 $4,480.38 $49,922.17 Student Behaviour Programs/Services Schools StudentsSEP Funds Other Funds Social Skills Program 1 6 $500 0 Youth Alternate Program 6 121 $133,611.06 $4,934.94 Total 7 127 $134,111.06 $4,934.94 $139,046.00 Language Development/Reading Programs Schools StudentsSEP Funds Other Funds Other Literacy Programs 4 40 $11,347.37 0 Parents as Literacy Supports (PALS) 1 50 0 $6,000.00 Read Well 1 9 $3,374.36 0 Speech Language Pathology 18 299 $222,196.10 $7,671.12 Total 24 398 $236,917.83 $13,671.12 $250,588.95

Various Resources for SEP Schools StudentsSEP Funds Other Funds Assistive Devices 2 48 $16815.00 0 Brain Gym 1 7 $5,000.00 0 Resources 45 1202 $232,959.20 $1237.07 Total 48 1257 $254,774.20 $1237.07 $256,011.27

Other Academic Programs/Services Schools StudentsSEP Funds Other Funds Computer Learning Program 2 95 $11,266.00 0 Total 2 95 $11,266.00 0 $11,266.00


Enhanced Staff Resources/Capacity and Specialists Schools StudentsSEP Funds Other Funds Child Care Worker 2 22 $55,603.00 0 Counselling 8 381 $183,851.51 $39,181.58 Elders 2 45 $11,487.42 0 Learning Assistance 15 409 $594,362.12 $33,465.48 Special Education Consultant 3 145 $5,451.05 $13,195.00 Special Education Coordination 3 137 $34,775.00 0 Special Education Teacher 10 361 $424,487.57 $34,335.76 Support Worker 25 384 $463,480.27 $103,328.62 Teacher 18 611 $637,178.73 $289,089.09 Teacher- Hearing Impaired 1 12 $15,000.00 0 Teacher Assistant 125 2057 $2,148,073.07 $309,984.67 Total 212 4,564 $4,562,262.10 $822,580.20 $5,384,842.30 The usefulness of the programs for individual students is further highlighted by the following quotes from the special education program reports from First Nations schools in BC. A student diagnosed with FASD is able to function with the help of our special education teacher assistant who works with the student one-on-one on the modified program. The ability to provide the one-on-one support needed to students is critical in the success not only of the students receiving the services, but also to the entire class, as a positive learning environment is maintained. 1.5 School Wide/Large Group Programs and Services

In addition to the individualized attention to students with special needs, the special education funding enabled First Nations schools to implement a range of best practice programs and services that benefit a greater range of students, including students with special needs. The following table shows the amount of total funding spent by schools each year since 2002 (combined SEP and other funding sources). The majority of funding has been used to hire school staff and specialists to work with children with special needs. As with the previous sections, a detailed breakdown of activities within each category and the funding sources used is provided in subsequent charts. Year to Year Comparison of School Wide/Large Group Programs and Services Type of Program/Service 2002/2003 2003/2004 2004/2005 2005/2006 2006/2007 Therapy/child development/life skills programs

$22,620.84

$88,285.04

$14,392.20 $35,195.66

$32,566.12

Student behaviour programs/services $30,970.82 $26,074.17 $38,356.51 $45,955.40 $48,900.68 Language development/reading programs $173,115.74 $309,774.25 $119,763.18 $76,626.58 $93,356.00 Other academic programs/resources $38,514.74 $57,231.00 $16,049.95 $151,742.19 $189,138.26Accessing resources for special education programming

$43,886.90 $118,632.02 $96,397.75 $0.00 0.00

Workshops for improved community awareness

$5,622.50

$23,625.00

$19,584.00 $12,448.91

$65,857.43

School staffing/resources/increased capacity

$343,409.00

$846,986.74

$899,875.52 $1,208,172.58

$1,475,960.40

$658,140.54$1,470,608.22 $1,204,419.11 $1,530,141.32$1,905,778.80


Type of Program/Service 2007/2008 Therapy/child development/life skills programs $64,998.70 Student behaviour programs/services $75,235.77 Language development/reading programs $178,558.27 Other academic programs/resources $91,095.19 Workshops for improved community awareness $60,405.87 School staffing/resources/increased capacity $1,409,305.20 $1,879,599.00 Details of Each Category for School Wide/Large Group Programs and Services Therapy/child development/life skills programs Schools Students SEP FundingOther Funding Lifeskills 4 174 $21,299.09 $28,646.91 Music therapy 1 45 $3,000.00 0 Social Skills 1 60 $12,052.70 0 Total 6 279 $36,351.79 $28,646.91 $64,998.70 Student behaviour programs/services Schools Students SEP FundingOther Funding Alternate Education program 1 13 $14,130.00 $11,576.76 Behaviour Incentives 1 16 $1,645.50 0 Bully Proof Program 1 30 $4,333.57 $1,677.94 Effective Behaviour Supports 1 92 $8,123.00 0 Emotional Literacy 3 36 $32,363.00 $1,387.00 Total 7 187 $60,595.07 $14,640.70 $75,235.77 Language development/reading programs Schools Students SEP Funding Other Funding Boardmaker 1 54 $1,901.00 0 Family Literacy 1 60 $6,000.00 0 Literacy Program 3 124 $64,941.00 0 Open Court 1 50 $19,349.00 0 Reading Mastery 1 100 $5,498.57 0 Reading Program 3 144 $25,868.70 $55,000.00 Total 10 532 $123,558.27 $55,000.00 $178,558.27 Other academic programs/resources Schools Students SEP FundingOther Funding Computer Learning Program 1 75 $3,000.00 0 Other resources 17 886 $75,069.12 $9,084.87 Saxon Math 1 124 $1,740.81 $1,550.39 Successmaker 1 7 $650.00 0 Total 20 1,092 $80,459.93 $10,635.26 $91,095.19


Workshops for improved community awareness Schools Students SEP FundingOther Funding Community workshop –behaviour management 4 135 $27,496.87 $1,200.00 Community workshop-health and nutrition 1 100 $10,833.00 0 Community workshop –literacy 1 64 $4,950.00 0 Community workshop- parenting 1 25 $6,421.25 $1,204.75 Community workshop - special needs 1 175 $6,000.00 $1,100.00 Youth workshop 1 25 $1,200.00 0 Total 9 524 $56,901.12 $60,405.87 School staffing/resources/increased capacity Schools Students SEP Funding Other Funding Counselling 2 263 $17,467.00 $44,125.93 Elders 3 105 $19,458.55 0 Learning Assistance 7 338 $191,861.42 $32,152.19 Special Education Consultant 2 157 $20,298.00 0 Special Education Coordination 1 243 $58,481.00 0 Special Education Teacher 5 265 $297,071.05 $2,000.00 Support Worker 2 33 $20,000.00 $21,448.52 Teacher 4 241 $71,627.41 $33,470.69 Teacher Assistants 19 585 $320,886.73 $255,456.78 TOC costs 2 27 $3,500.00 0 Total 47 2,257 $1,020,651.10 $388,654.11 $1,409,305.20 The usefulness of the school wide and large group programs is further highlighted by the following quotes from the special education program reports from First Nations schools in BC. The addition of a counsellor has exponentially increased our ability to meet the needs of all the students at our school. We know this will make an incredible long-term impact in the community. Our school has benefitted so much with SEP funding. Our students’ progress has been quite noticeable to all. Parents have made positive comments. The materials we were able to access assist staff and students immensely. 1.6 Professional Development

Schools continue to use a portion of their SEP funding to provide professional development opportunities for schools staff and parents. Although efforts are made to make training accessible, schools have to balance the provision of professional development opportunities with direct service delivery for students. This continues to be an area of great need and proves to be a challenge for many schools due to the high costs of travel. There continues to be a focus on community based training opportunities. The following table shows the amount of total funding spent by schools each year since 2002 (combined SEP and other funding sources). A detailed breakdown of activities within each category and the funding sources used is provided in subsequent charts.


Year to Year Comparison of Professional Development Activities

Description of Training 2002/2003 2003/2004 2004/2005 2005/2006 2006/2007Specific special needs $53,841.57 $144,380.30 $151,829.25 $151,481.13 $37,380.40Behaviour/life skills programs $54,478.29 $30,234.70 $15,302.87 $26,390.00 $8,305.18 Language development/reading $45,687.28 $50,852.28 $42,807.75 $32,675.00 $35,073.25Math $2,300.00 $3,650.00 $10,015.60 $0.00 $15,500.00Parent/board training $12,532.81 $22,316.64 $58,199.13 $16,300.00 $41,578.18Other conferences/training workshops

$180,135.62

$224,072.43

$139,418.91 $204,221.01

$288,112.70

Total $348,975.57 $475,506.35 $417,573.51 $431,067.14 $425,949.71

Description of Training 2007/2008 Specific special needs $11,109.93 Behaviour/life skills programs $17,050.90 Language development/reading $32,000.00 Parent/board training $46,253.82 Other conferences/training workshops $666,034.22 Total $772,448.87 Details of Each Category for Professional Development

Specific Special Needs Schools Participants

SEP Funding

Other Funding

ADHD 1 2 1,233.40 0 Autism 1 4 $1,918.72 0 FASD 2 13 $4,700.81 0 Substance Abuse 1 16 $1,287.10 $1,969.90 Total 4 19 $9,140.03 $1,969.90 $11,109.93

Behaviour/Life Skills Programs Schools Participants

SEP Funding

Other Funding

Behaviour Management 1 12 $5,169.90 $600.00 Elder honorarium 1 6 $1,517.00 0 High Risk Kids workshop 1 30 $6,514.00 $2,750.00 Lifeskills Facilitation training 1 17 $500.00 0 Total 3 48 $13,700.90 $3,350.00 $17,050.90

Language Development/Reading Schools Participants

SEP Funding

Other Funding

Literacy training 2 59 $2000.00 0 Reading Program training 1 20 $2,531.20 $17,468.80 Speech Language training 2 4 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 Total 5 83 $6,531.20 25,468.80 $32,000.00


Parent/Board Training Schools Participants

SEP Funding

Other Funding

Parent/Board Training 1 8 $1,400.00 0 Parent/staff/community workshop 8 308 $43,371.03 $1,482.79 Total 9 316 $44,771.03 $1,482.79 $46,253.82 Other Conferences/Training Workshops Schools Participants

SEP Funding

Other Funding

FNESC/FNSA conference 12 85 $113,001.81 $35,833.56 Occupational Therapy training 1 14 $1,000.00 0 Resources 1 0 $8,000.00 0 Special education conference 11 64 $35,694.79 $7,885.00 Special education training/certification 6 18 $11,869.41 0 Structure of Intellect training 1 2 $1,000.00 0 Successmaker training 1 3 $400.00 0 Teacher training 12 193 $128,321.82 $17,740.00 TOC costs 1 5 $3,000.00 0 Total 46 384 $302,287.83 $363,746.39 $666,034.22 The usefulness of the professional development activities is further highlighted by the following quotes from the special education program reports from First Nations schools in BC. This year we provided more in-class training to our teacher assistants so they were better able to assist students with their individual needs. The SEP allows us to do the necessary professional development to allow staff in our small school to be in charge of delivering special education services to each student that needs this attention. 1.7 Summary of School Based Initiatives The majority of the school-based initiatives continue to be focused on hiring specialists and additional staff for the provision of services. Schools continue to make every effort to address the special needs of children attending their schools, but continue to struggle with limited resources. The fact that most children are able to receive services to some extent is indicative of the benefit of the intervention-based approach to funding special education; however, the adequacy of the services schools are able to provide still falls short of what is required. The importance of the SEP funding to communities is highlighted in the following quotes from First Nations schools. The impact that the SEP funding has had on our school, our programs and our community is tremendous. To be blunt, I am not sure that our school would be able to operate without this funding. Our resource are taxed to the limit with assessments, programming, IEPs, and working with staff, students and families to ensure the needs are met. Our kids are meeting with success and developing the academic, social and personal skills necessary to survive in the world.


The flexibility of the SEP funding is extremely important. It enables us to target students’ needs in a very efficient manner. .SEP funding and services has allowed our school to slowly build capacity with our Special Education Program, from the grassroots approach. The flexible ongoing support allows our programming to truly reflect the needs of our unique community. Part Two: Overview of Provincial Level, Collective Activities A portion of the SEP funding available in BC was retained at the provincial level for collective activities. These initiatives are described briefly below, and the funding allocated for each activity as well as for the administrative activities of FNESC and the FNSA, is identified in the following table. The Special Education Schedule of the FNESC audited financial statement is included as Appendix B. Coordinated Assessments $179,400 FNESC Special Education Resource Staff $121,703 Travel $48,147 Toll-free Special Education Line $90,409 Toll-free Speech Language Line $44,831 First Nations School Professional Development $81,729 Community Support $95,861 Resources/Equipment $60 Special Education Technology - BC $120,000 Staff professional development ($40) SLP Project $278,492 Administration $500,000 Total $1,560,592 2.1 Coordinated Student Assessments Many schools continue to report difficulties in accessing specialist services. For this reason and to create economies of scale, FNESC/FNSA has continued to organize provincially coordinated psycho-educational assessments. The Final Report for this project is included as Appendix C. This year, 152 students were assessed within the Coordinated Student Assessment process. Of the assessed, 76% met the criteria for at least one special education category. In addition, 10% of the students assessed met the criteria for more than one category, further supporting the findings in the special education evaluation that many students within First Nations schools have complex issues requiring a higher level of support and resources. The FNESC psychologist services have enhanced the understanding of students and appropriate and user friendly teaching/learning strategies. 2.2 Providing Special Education Professional Services This year, the FNESC/FNSA special education consultant and the toll-free resource line coordinator continued to provide much needed in-school support.


Activities of the FNESC/FNSA Special Education Resource Teachers 2008 Total number of school visits 31 Total number of different schools visited Total number of assessments and reports completed 75 Total number of IEP’s facilitated/written 16 Total number of Special Education Consultation reports completed 69 Total number of IEP workshops facilitated 45 Total number of Special Education topic workshops facilitated 24 FNESC staff have been welcomed additions to our staff through phone and email contacts as well as visits. 2.3 Speech Language Pathology Building on the model of speech-language service delivery instigated in the 2006/2007 year, twelve SLPs were contracted to visit the participating communities twice during the school year. The purpose of the initial visit was to conduct assessments, establish the needed programming for the students and to mentor and train a community member who then provided the regular therapy sessions. These contracted SLPs provided services to 30 schools. In order to increase the speech language services provided to schools, FNESC/FNSA also hired 1.5 SLPs in 2007/2008. One of the SLPs was hired solely to provide in-school support, whereas the .5 position was hired to run the Speech Language Toll-Free Line as well as provide some in-school support.

Activities of the FNESC/FNSA Speech and Language Pathologists 2008 Total Number of schools visited 52 Total number of different schools visited 15 Total number of children assessed 102 Number of parent/teacher consultations 39 Number of workshops 7 The greatest improvement in our school was the implementation of speech-language services with the SLP provided by FNESC. SLP services provided by FNESC have been a great relief to our school. We crave the knowledge to know how to work with our many students with speech delays and with all of our students in the are of language development. Next year, our next goal is to consistently use the SLP Toll-free Resource Line. 2.4 Supporting the new Toll-Free Speech Language Line Based on the need to have access to an SLP to consult with expressed by communities at the 2006 regional sessions, FNESC initiated the SLP Toll-Free Line in September 2007. The position began as half-time and, as indicated in the previous section, included some travel to communities for the provision of in-school support. At the beginning of the year, introductory calls were made to schools to introduce the line. As more schools are aware of the line, it is anticipated that the demand will grow.


SLP Toll-Free Calls Staff of First Nations Schools 249 Parents 15 Other SLPs 73 Head Start 17 Other 41 Total Calls 157 Total Emails 238 Total Contacts 395 2.5 Supporting the Toll-Free Special Education Resource Line A portion of the special education funding continues to be used to support the Special Education Toll-Free Resource Line. For eight years, the telephone and email support has connected First Nations educators and parents with a special education teacher who is able to answer questions and share information about special education materials, professional development opportunities, relevant support organizations, and specific programs. A newsletter, Connections, is also distributed monthly, and a special professional development issue is released each fall to assist schools with their professional development planning for the school year. There is also an email listserv where subscribers can post questions related to special education and get responses from other educators working in First Nations schools. Toll-Free Calls Staff of First Nations Schools 356 Staff of public schools 77 Parents 53 Inter-agency organizations 105 Others 307 Total calls 285 Total e-mails 613 Total Contacts 898 2.6 Collective Professional Development Activities First Nations schools determined that a portion of the special education funding available in B.C. should be used to sponsor collective professional development opportunities. This use of funding was thought to be an appropriate way to provide the training as cost-effectively as possible, and to ensure that the training programs were designed to address the specific interests of First Nations schools. Supporting Diverse Learners/Learning Facilitators Certificate FNESC/FNSA has continued to partner with SFU and TRU to deliver the two-year graduate diploma, Supporting Diverse Learners, and a two-year certificate, Learning Facilitator’s Certificate. Two neighbouring communities have partnered to cost share to delivery of the


program within the community. Nine school staff members are taking the graduate program and 6 are taking the Learning Facilitator Certificate. First Nations Speech Language Assistant Program Over the years, FNESC/FNA has provided training in the summers towards a speech language assistant certificate. In the past, courses were only available during the summer months, making the achievement of the certificate a very long process. In 2007/2008 with partial funding made available through MCFD, FNESC/FNSA partnered with NVIT to develop a two-year, part-time First Nations Speech Language certificate. The program is being offered in three locations: Terrace, Kamloops and Nanaimo. Fifty-six students applied to the program, and 45 registered for the first introductory course in April. The Canadian Association of Speech Language Pathologists and Audiologists (CASLPA) has indicated that graduates from the program will be eligible to register as members of the supportive personnel professional association. The training of the First Nations Speech Language Assistant has developed a keen and now increasingly knowledgeable staff member. This is a great program from FNSA which will provide us with the help of many of our children who require services that are difficult to access. 2.7 Community Support Regional Workshops Based on feedback from the previous year’s special education regional sessions, requesting the continuation of regional special education meetings, FNESC/FNSA hosted 13 regional workshops on specific topics requested by the regions. In total there were 138 participants. Workshops topics are listed below.

- Assessment and Literacy Strategies for “Grey Area” Students - Language Development Strategies for the Classroom - Strategies and Materials for Adult Literacy - Individual Education Plans, a Framework for Success - Step up to Writing (an explicit Direct Instruction Model)

Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) Training With partial funding made available by the First Nations Inuit Health Branch, FNESC/FNSA was able to provide two training sessions on the topic of FASD, one in November 2007, and the second in February 2008. In the two session combined, there were 88 participants. Feedback from communities highlights the need for ongoing training in this area. Regional workshops and professional development opportunities including the Speech Language Assistant Program through NVIT have allowed many of our staff to build knowledge and confidence to perform their jobs more effectively. We have been fortunate to obtain training in FASD Awareness, Strategies for Grey Area Learners, and speech and language for two support workers.


2.8 Special Education Technology – BC (SET-BC) An exciting initiative this year was the establishment of a partnership with SET-BC, a provincial organization that provides assistive technology and support to students with specific special needs. Twenty-seven students received a range of specialized equipment, hardware and software to enable them to access the curriculum and participate in school activities. In addition, school staff and communities members had access to training related to the equipment the students received. A detailed report on the project is included as Appendix D. SET-BC Assistive Technology were amazing to work with. The new knowledge and training we received through this program was well delivered and we were excited to begin using it. Two of our students received services from SET-BC this year. I want to thank the FNESC/FNSA staff for their part in making these services available. 2.9 FNSA School Assessments and SEP reviews At the 2006 and 2007 FNSA AGMs, there were extensive discussions regarding the INAC Compliance Directive that was released in October 2005. The result of those discussions was the passing of a motion directing FNESC/FNSA to work with the INAC regional office to accommodate the Intervention-based approach within the directive. The result has been to include a review of school special education workplans as part of the FNSA Schools Assessment process. To further strengthen this process, the FNSA membership, at the 2008 FNSA AGM, passed a motion making a satisfactory SEP review a requirement for school certification. In 2007/2008, 20 schools partook in a school assessment as part of the FNSA process. One of the schools did not access their SEP funding this year so were not part of the SEP review. In the spring of 2008, external assessors comprised of experienced educators from other First Nations schools visited the schools. As part of the SEP review, the assessors were given the school workplan information, including the activities, outcomes and data collection methods. They were asked to document evidence of the workplan activities, outcomes and data sources, and to highlight observations, successes, and any challenges. Of the 19 schools that had a SEP review, 16 were reported as having implemented all of the activities and achieved the objectives outlined in their SEP workplans. The three remaining schools were reported as having partially implemented the activities on the workplans. This is partly due to the timing of the external review. Follow-up School #1 – had not implemented one professional development activity, but have since done so. School #2 – had not yet purchased assessment material, but receipts were submitted with the SEP final report. School #3 – split their funding into multiple activities and combined each of them with core funding making the need for an efficient method of data collection. This school will receive follow-up in this area. Several of the assessors made recommendations to the schools to access various SEP service provided by FNESC/FNSA including assessments and resource staff. There were also recommendations and suggestions made to build on/modify existing services and supports in an effort to enhance them.


One of the unanticipated benefits of this process is the highlighting of strong schools that are implementing quality programs and services and whose students are experiencing successes. A method of sharing these practices with other schools will need to be developed. 2.10 Summary of Provincial-Level Initiatives The effectiveness of the collective special education initiatives continues to be demonstrated in several different ways. First Nations schools have consistently expressed their appreciation for the programs and services offered through FNESC and the FNSA, and demand for the services available continues to be significant. The professional development opportunities were all well attended, and evaluations from those events were extremely positive. The SEP program in BC continues to expand each year by building on existing initiatives and with the forming of new partnerships. The SET-BC partnership has shown to a valuable and much needed service that has made assistive technology and support available to students that otherwise would not have access to. The delivery of speech language services has consistently been highlighted by schools as a priority area. In the attempt to meet some of the needs expressed, FNESC/FNSA has expanded on the SLP services available through contracts, staff, a toll-free SLP line, and through the development and delivery of the FNSLA certificate program. Finally, the commitment of First Nations Schools to the accountability of the SEP funding is evidenced by the changes made to the First Nations School Assessment process. This process will assure First Nations communities and other stakeholders that the SEP funding is being used appropriately.


Appendix A

First Nations Regional Management Form


First Nations Special Education Program Annual Report for First Nation Regional Managing

Organizations (FNRMOs) INSTRUCTIONS 1. Due annually on July 30 from First Nation Regional Managing Organizations (FNRMOs) 2. Submit to the INAC Regional Office. GLOSSARY Eligible Students: Students eligible for funding under the Special Education Program (SEP) are those whose special education needs cannot be met within the resources intended for the general student population and who are on the Nominal Roll or eligible to be on the Nominal Roll based on the First Nation Education Program Guidelines. Broadly speaking, special education needs of students fall within a continuum of mild to moderate, moderate to severe and severe to profound. Special education needs that are at the lower end of this continuum are expected to be addressed within the resources intended for the general student population. Only special education needs that are more costly to address (generally ranging from moderate to profound) are eligible for funding under the SEP. Students receiving programs and services under the Special Education Program(SEP)* are to be identified as High Cost Special Education Students on the Nominal Roll. Formal Assessment: An assessment of a student’s special education needs conducted by specialized professionals. Informal Assessment: An assessment of a student’s special education needs conducted by a teacher in the student’s school. Contact the Special Education Program Guidelines or your INAC Regional office for more information. Note: Part E of the form is under review. Changes will be communicated as required.

First Nations Special Education Program Annual Report for FNRMOs

Identification Information

Regional Managing Organization Name First Nations Education Steering Committee/First Nations Schools Association

Regional Managing Organization Number INAC use only

School Year Being Reported: September 2007 - June 2008

Telephone 604-925-6087

FAX 604-925-6097

Address #113 100 Park Royal South West Vancouver, BC V7T 1A2

eMail [email protected]

TYPE OF SERVICES

DELIVERED: X 100% Direct and Indirect Services □ 25% Indirect Services Only

# schools

First Nation schools

126

Provincial public schools

0 SCHOOLS SERVED THROUGH THE

REGIONAL MANAGING ORGANIZATION

Provincial private schools

0

Number of schools affiliated with your organization that SUBMITTED the First Nations Special Education Program Annual Report for Schools

125

Part A: Student Identification # Students

1a. How many eligible HCSE students in the schools are RECEIVING Special Education Services from SEP funds?

1513

1b. How many eligible HCSE students in the schools receiving Special Education Services from SEP funds HAVE AN IEP?

1050

2a. How many eligible HCSE students in the schools are NOT RECEIVING Special Education Services from SEP funds?

288

2b. How many eligible HCSE students not RECEIVING Special Education Services HAVE an IEP?

174

3. How many students in the schools have been IDENTIFIED THROUGH FORMAL ASSESSMENT as having HCSE needs?

977

HIGH COST SPECIAL EDUCATION (HCSE) NEEDS STUDENTS

4. How many students in the schools have been IDENTIFIED THROUGH INFORMAL ASSESSMENT as having HCSE needs?

844

# Re-assessments

# New Cases

5. How many students were REFERRED for a formal assessment within the school year?

239 553

6. How many students were FORMALLY ASSESSED within the school year?

425 186

7. How many FORMALLY ASSESSED students were IDENTIFIED during the school year as having high cost special education needs?

258 139

STUDENT REFERRALS AND ASSESSMENTS

8. How many students were INFORMALLY IDENTIFIED during the school year as having high cost special education needs?

n/a 678

9. How many students are MEETING OR EXCEEDING the learning objectives of their IEP?

852

10a. How many schools review IEPs ANNUALLY 27 10b. How many schools review IEPs TWICE A YEAR 35

STUDENT INDIVIDUAL EDUCATION PLANS (IEPs)

10c. How many schools review IEPs THREE OR MORE TIMES PER YEAR

45

Part B: School Staff

# FTEs 11. Full time equivalent (FTE) Teaching staff that are PROVINCIALLY CERTIFIED TEACHERS but not qualified special education teachers

392.65

12. FTE Teaching staff that are QUALIFIED SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHERS

51.2

13. FTE Teaching staff that are CERTIFIED para-professionals, teacher assistants or inclusion facilitators

103.4

FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE) TEACHING STAFF WORKING WITH HIGH COST SPECIAL EDUCATION NEEDS STUDENTS 14. FTE Teaching staff that are UNCERTIFIED para-

professionals, teacher assistants or inclusion facilitators 295.9

# Staff PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

15. Teaching staff involved in at least one SPECIAL EDUCATION professional development activity during the year

657.75

16a. Indicate the NUMBER OF SCHOOLS that reported providing the following types of SPECIAL EDUCATION PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT activities to teaching staff working with High Cost Special Education Needs Students this past year:

In School Training __59___ Workshops __106___

Conferences __92___ University/College Courses __31___

Coaching/Mentoring __55___ Other __8___

16b. Indicate the number of schools that participated in the following SPECIAL EDUCATION PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT activities made available by YOUR REGIONAL MANAGING ORGANIZATION:

# schools that participated

# schools that participated

In School Training 61 Workshops 94

Conferences 78 University/College Courses 26

Coaching/Mentoring 45 Other, please specify: 6

Part C: Special Education Policy

# schools 17. How many schools have a formal written Special Education Policy?

125

18. How many schools have an appeal process?

119

19. How many schools updated their Special Education Policy in the last year?

34

FIRST NATIONS SCHOOLS

20. How many schools have policies that address the provision of services to High Cost Special Education students from other jurisdictions?

14

21. Does your organization have a formal written Special Education Policy? X Yes □ No

22. Does your organization’s policy include an appeal process? X Yes □ No 23. When was your organization’s policy last reviewed and updated? April 21, 2006

Month/Day/Year

24. Does your Special Education policy address the provision of services to □ Yes □ No

High Cost Special Education Needs students from other jurisdictions? X Not applicable 25. Indicate the NUMBER OF SCHOOLS who reported parental/caregiver involvement in the following ways:

# of schools

Parents/Caregivers are INFORMED ABOUT the Special Education Policy and services available to their children in the schools and community agencies

89

Parents/Caregivers are PROVIDED WRITTEN DOCUMENTATION about the Special Education Policy and services available to their children

54

Parents/Caregivers are given the opportunity to be INVOLVED in the development, implementation and evaluation of their children’s IEP

103

Parents/Caregivers are PROVIDED with a copy of their assessment reports

96

Parents/Caregivers are required to AUTHORIZE IN WRITING any assessments, planning and transmission of assessment reports to other agencies

94

Parents/Caregivers are given the opportunity to be INVOLVED in pre- and post-assessment consultation with professionals

102

Parents/Caregivers are asked to PROVIDE THEIR FEEDBACK to the school administration about their level of satisfaction about the progress of IEPs

71

Part D: Other Agencies

26a. Indicate the NUMBER OF SCHOOLS who reported links to the following types of agencies and programs inside and outside the community for support and services to High Cost Special Education Needs students and their families:

Child and Family Services __84___ Social Services 71_

Health Services __101__ Income Assistance 27__

Day Care / Headstart __66___ Provincial Education Ministries 25__

Provincial School Boards / School Divisions ___25__ Inter-agency Organizations _46__

Traditional/Spiritual Advisors __46___ Others: _30__

26b. Indicate the types of agencies/organizations that YOUR REGIONAL MANAGING ORGANIZATION collaborates with to provide support and services to High Cost Special Education Needs students and their families:

First Nation Provincial Federal

Health Organizations X X

Ministries of Education X

School Boards X

Child and Family Services Agencies X X

Post Secondary Institutions X X

Advocacy Groups X

Other, please specify: _______________________

Part E: Needs Not Met Note: Please compile the information received from First Nations Schools. This information is for planning purposes only. INAC will use it to build a business case for increased program funding.

# Schools 27a. How many schools were ABLE to provide appropriate services for all students identified as having High Cost Special Education Needs?

42

27b. How many schools were UNABLE to provide appropriate services for all students identified as having High Cost Special Education Needs?

83

# Students 28. How many students identified as having High Cost Special Education needs and eligible for services under SEP funding DID NOT HAVE ANY OF THEIR NEEDS MET?

215

29. How many students identified as having High Cost Special Education needs and eligible for services under SEP funding HAD THEIR NEEDS PARTIALLY MET?

875

30. How many students with High Cost Special Education needs are in the schools but INELIGIBLE for services under SEP Funding?

107

31. Of the students identified in questions 28 and 29, HOW MANY:

Have been assessed by a specialist 563 Received a medical diagnosis 127 Have been assessed through teacher observation/screening

764 Have NOT been assessed 120

Other: specify_________________ 17 32. Of the students identified in questions 28 and 29, HOW MANY REQUIRE THE FOLLOWING SERVICES: a) Special Education Teacher 727 i) One-on-one part-time support 482 b) Psychologist 183 j) Speech/Language Pathologist 419 c) Pyysiotherapist 61 k) Professional Counseling 423 d) Occupational Therapist 103 l) Psychometrician 54 e) Dietician 121 m) Opthamologist/Optometrist 161 f) Medical Diagnostician 69 n) Assistive Devices 39 g) Supported Technology 129 o) Other 102 h) One-on-one full-time support 192

33. Of the students identified in questions 28 and 29, specify the approximate amount of additional funding needed for the following, if applicable: $$ Required a) Staff (e.g.TAs, Teachers) $3,506,130 b) Capital (e.g. wheelchair ramp or other modifications to the building to accommodate special needs students)

$255,366

c) Transportation $193,904 d) Programs $502,068 e) Professional Development $480,875 f) Assessments # outstanding: 162 $479,700 g) Other $54,300

34. Indicate any other reasons for lack of service:

• long waitlists for specialist services • Parents cannot afford to take their children away to access services, and there is

difficulty getting specialists to come to community. • Transportation is a big obstacle when needing to take children off-reserve. Young

parents need support when going to specialists, but there is no funding for this. • Grandparents looking after grandchildren often do not have the resources to get to

appointments, 35. Describe the resources and strategies used to address needs not met by Special Education Program funds:

• Other funds are used which means a gap is created in another program. • Partnership with communities • Address school wide issues and needs • Attempt to keep class sizes small and multi-grade classes to no more than 3 grades

Part F: Services Provided by FNRMO

# schools that

received the service Resource / Help Phone Line 126 Publications on specific issues (e.g. FAS/E) 126 Newsletters 126 Website or email support networks 126 Regional Conferences 126

36. INFORMATION SERVICES PROVIDED

Other, please specify: ________________ N/A

# Issues in the year 11 Special Education Newsletters # Distributed in the year 5,500

# Issues in the year 1 Special Education Publications # Distributed in the year 300

# Registered participants 200 Special Education Email Support Networks

# Support Networks 1 # Downloadable documents 118 Special Education

Website Information # Links to other resources/sites 22 # Regional Conferences 14

37. SPECIAL EDUCATION INFORMATION SHARING PROVIDED

Special Education Regional Conferences # Participants 75

38. ASSESSMENT SUPPORT SERVICES PROVIDED

Educational Psychologists

Speech and Language Specialists

Special Education Consultants

Other, please specify: __________

# Assessments conducted by:

152 200 34 N/A

# Schools that received services by:

36 41 21 N/A

# Assessments for which follow-up support was provided by:

152 200 34 N/A

# schools that

received the service Common purchase of resources (e.g. books, assessment tools, software)

129

School staff recruitment

0

Curriculum Adaptation/Support

68

39. ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES PROVIDED

Other, please specify: ______________

N/A

# calls received Resource / Help Phone line

898

Regional Managing Organization office staff

4000

Speech Language Specialist

395

Special Education Consultant

Not collected

Educational Psychologist

Not collected

40. TELEPHONE SUPPORT SERVICES PROVIDED

Other, please specify:

N/A

The information provided is accurate to the best of my knowledge: Name of Individual Completing the Report Kelly Kitchen

Title Director, Special Education

Signature

Date July 22, 2008

Appendix B

Special Education Schedule of the FNESC Audited Financial Statement

Appendix C Coordinated Assessments Final Report

A report to the First Nations Schools Association and the First Nations Education Steering Committee

Arthur J. More, Ph.D., More & Associates, Consultants, Inc., Revised, July 8 2008

This Report was prepared for the First Nations Schools Association and the

First Nations Education Steering Committee, 113 - 100 Park Royal South, West Vancouver, BC, V7T 1A2

Revised July 2008

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................1

Purposes of the Assessments ...................................................................................................... 1 Definitions................................................................................................................................... 2

Table 1. Funding and special needs categories, BC Ministry of Education ...........................2 The assessment process............................................................................................................... 4 Coordinated Student Assessments as part of SEP ...................................................................... 4

II. METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................................................5 Selection of schools and students ............................................................................................... 5 Assessments ................................................................................................................................ 5 Links to FNSA support services. ................................................................................................ 6

III. RESULTS .................................................................................................................................7 The schools ................................................................................................................................. 7 Results by category..................................................................................................................... 7

Table 2. Schools, communities, psychologists, and number of assessments, 2007/2008.......8 Table 3. Number of assessed students by age and by sex and for 2007/2008 ......................10 Figure 1: Percentage of the assessed students who met the provincial criteria for special needs, by category, in 2007/2008. .........................................................................................11 Table 4 - Percentage of the assessed students who met the provincial criteria for special needs, as well as number of assessments, mean number of assessments per school and median age of children assessed, for the past three assessment periods................................12

Factors affecting the results ...................................................................................................... 14 Students with special needs not identified by the Project......................................................... 14

IV. CASE STUDIES......................................................................................................................15 Mike .......................................................................................................................................... 16 Anne.......................................................................................................................................... 17 Alice.......................................................................................................................................... 17 Samson...................................................................................................................................... 19 June ........................................................................................................................................... 20

IV. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................21 REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................24 USEFUL LINKS............................................................................................................................25 TEACHER RESOURCES.............................................................................................................26

COORDINATED STUDENT ASSESSMENTS - 2007/2008

Final Report Revised, July 2008 Arthur J. More More & Associates Consultants, Inc.

I. INTRODUCTIONThe 2007/2008 Coordinated Student Assessments for the First Nations Schools Association (FNSA) and the First Nations Education Steering Committee (FNESC) were conducted by a team of psychologists working with Dr. Art More of More & Associates Consultants, Inc.

The goal of the Coordinated Student Assessments (CAP) was to conduct individual psychoeducational assessments in the First Nations schools in BC to determine students’ needs, and to work with participating schools and the FNESC/FNSA Special Education department to establish follow-up procedures, interventions and support for students as appropriate.

The First Nations schools are independent schools, under the direction of First Nations communities. There are 137 First Nations schools throughout BC, enrolling approximately 6000 students from Nursery to Grade 12. The schools receive funding from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC). However, they only receive limited

funding for students with special needs from INAC, through FNESC/FNSA.

The number of students in First Nations schools with moderate to severe special needs is 29.8% of the student population. About half of these special needs students have formally identified, and about one-quarter of these meet the criteria for more than one special needs designation (FNESC/FNSA, 2007, p.7).

FNESC/FNSA has organized provincially coordinated psycho-educational assessments of children with special needs in the First Nations schools. This provides economies of scale and quality control that might not be achievable by individual, more isolated schools. Purposes of the Assessments The purposes of the Coordinated Assessments are: a. to determine the special educational

needs of students attending First Nations schools in BC;

b. to assist in developing effective intervention plans to meet the immediate needs of students with special needs; and

c. to develop a basis for FNESC/FNSA to plan future initiatives and

d. to support a request for appropriate special needs funding from INAC.

Definitions Throughout the Assessment Projects, the following definitions have been used. “Children with special needs” are children who, because of their individual differences, are unable to realize their individual educational potential from the educational resources provided to most children. Note that this definition includes gifted children. “Special education” is the provision of educational resources that are different from the resources provided to most students in response to the special needs of specific children. “Funding categories” are categories used by the BC Ministry of Education to determine special needs funding (see Table 1). “Special education categories “ and “special needs categories” refer to the categories

used by the BC Ministry of Education to categorize special needs. These are more detailed than the funding categories. There is concern amongst the First Nations schools, and many others who work with First Nations students, that the use of provincial categories and criteria does not effectively identify the special needs of many First Nations students. This problem was described in the 2003/4 SEP funding report:

“First Nations in BC continue to challenge the appropriateness of the Provincial Special Needs categories for First Nations students. The current requirement to use provincial criteria when determining the incidence rates of students with High Cost Special Needs does not take into account numerous factors that are unique to First Nations communities such as community remoteness, high staff turn-over, lack of resources, social issues, behavioural challenges and mild to moderate learning difficulties that are more costly to address. The resultant incidence rates based on provincial criteria are not accurate, but are low due to the restrictive categories.” (FNESC/FNSA, 2006, p 5).

Table 1. Funding and special needs categories, BC Ministry of Education Level Funding Special Needs Category

Level 1 $32,000 A. Dependent Handicapped B. Deaf/Blind Level 2 $16,000 C. Moderate to Severe/Profound Intellectual Disability D. Physical Disability/ Chronic Health Impairment E. Visual Impairment F. Deaf/ Hard of Hearing G. Autism

Level 3 $8,000 H. Intensive Behaviour Interventions or Serious Mental Illness

Included in Student Base Allocation $3,132 J. Learning Disabilities K. Mild Intellectual Disability M. Behaviour Disorders Supports/ Mental Illness N Rehabilitation programs, now included in “M”, above

$341 P. Gifted

The assessment process The assessment process followed seven steps which are briefly described below. 1. Students were identified by each school

and referral forms submitted to FNESC/FNSA.

2. Schools selection was coordinated by Kelly Kitchen, Special Education Manager.

3. Dr. More arranged with the schools and psychologists for the assessments to be carried out.

4. Some schools were able to obtain funding from other sources, for additional assessments. The team of psychologists also carried out most of these.

5. The report for each assessment was sent to the school and a copy to Dr. More.

6. Individualized education plans (IEP) were developed at the school with assistance from the FNESC/FNSA support personnel, based on recommendations of the psychologists.

7. Province-wide results were compiled by Dr. More for this Report. No results on individual children or individual schools were included in the compilation.

Coordinated Student Assessments as part of SEP The Coordinated Student Assessments are part of the Special Education Program (SEP), which is a much larger initiative by FNESC/FNSA. The purpose of SEP is to provide effective support in First Nations schools, for students who have special needs. Approximately $9 million has been provided for SEP in the current school year. The Program provides a broad range of services:

• School allocations for individual schools for special needs programming (about 90% of the funding);

• Special Education Manager for FNESC/FNSA;

• Coordinated Student Assessments; • Toll-free Speech Language pathologists

Line; • Toll-free Special Education Resource

Line; • Toll-free Special Education Consultant; • Community support in accessing SEP

funding; • Parent feedback sessions on assessment; • The First Nations Parents Club Special

Education Resource Library; • Research; • Other related projects and programs

including: o Early intervention programs, o Individual/ small group programs, o School/ Large group programs, and o Professional development activities.

• A more complete description of the

special education initiative of FNESC/FNSA is found in the SEP Final Report 2006/7.

II. METHODOLOGY Selection of schools and students The process of selecting schools and students for participation in the project consisted of two parts.

Schools that wished to have students assessed submitted a referral form for each student. The referrals were reviewed and prioritized by Kelly Kitchen, Manager of Special Education; Dr. More; Madeline Price, Special Education Resource Teacher; Lisa Ellis, Special Education Resource Line Coordinator and Deane Zeidler, Speech Language Consultant. Then schools and number of students per school were selected on the basis of this review, also considering type of school, school size, culture/language groupings and geographic region.

Once the number of students for each school was determined, each school staff, in cooperation with FNESC support staff, did the selection of individual students within schools.

Additional assessments were arranged by schools directly with Dr. More, and funded from other school-based sources. One of the most difficult parts of planning the Coordinated Student Assessments was the decision regarding special needs criteria and categories. The decision, made by FNESC/FNSA in consultation with First Nations schools when the assessment program first began, was to use the criteria, categories and procedures of Special Education Services, BC Ministry of Education.

The decision to use BC Ministry categories was made for practical reasons related to negotiations for funding. Other approaches, categories and criteria could have been used. However, the BC Ministry of Education approach results in specific categories and numbers from which individual intervention plans can be developed appropriate to each student’s difficulties and, in the First Nations schools, appropriate to the individual and cultural needs of each designated student. The main advantages of this approach are that a stronger case can be made for funding which is equivalent to funding levels in the provincial schools and, concurrently, appropriate intervention and support plans can be developed for each child with special needs. The main disadvantage of this approach is that it uses relatively inflexible criteria that may not be the most appropriate or effective for First Nations students. Indeed the categorical approach and the labelling it fosters are being increasingly questioned.

Assessments The assessment component was the heart of the Project. The goal was to conduct as many assessments as possible within the available budget and time limitations, while maintaining high standards for the assessments. The primary goal of the assessment was to provide a basis for individual, effective and appropriate learning support for each child. Categorization was a secondary goal.

The psychoeducational assessments were conducted between October 2007 and June 2008. They were carried out by an assessment team, all of whom were fully qualified to conduct psycho-educational assessments, have considerable experience in working with First Nations students, and have considerable experience in doing assessments using the BC Ministry of Education categories and criteria. They were:

Dr. Art More Summerland Dr. Buff Oldridge Vancouver Dorothy Sawatsky Vancouver Dr. Leonard Stanley Qualicum Dr. Patrick Walton Kamloops Dr. David Williams Vancouver

The assessments involved instruments that were usually selected from the following, as appropriate.

Cognitive abilities: a. Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale for Children; b. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children; c. Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of

Intelligence (WPPSI); d. Woodcock Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities.

Cognitive Processing: a. Beery Developmental Test of Visual Motor

Integration; b. Bender Visual Motor Gestalt Test;

Adaptive Behaviour: a. Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scales.

Achievement: a. Expressive Vocabulary Test (EVT) b. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test- III (PPVT); c. Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT); d. Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement.

Behaviour: a. Conners’ Behaviour Rating Scales b. Behaviour Assessment System for Children

(BASC) A signed statement of informed consent from the parent or guardian was required for

each assessment and results were strictly confidential. After the assessments were completed, the school psychologist met with the teachers and, when possible, the parents. In addition, a written report was provided to the school. A copy of each report was also sent to the Project Coordinator for use in compiling this Final Report. The commitment was given and kept, that results for individual students and individual schools would not be identified in any way in the Coordinated Student Assessments Report or provided to any other agency without permission from the school and the parents or guardians.

Links to FNSA support services. The assessments are linked to other support services from FNSA/FNESC. Prior to the assessment, the support staff helped the schools in prioritizing children for assessments and in gathering appropriate background information. Once the assessments are completed, support is provided for intervention planning, usually in the form of Individualized Education Plans (IEPs).

Special education support staff included: • Kelly Kitchen, Director, Special

Education [email protected]; • Lisa Ellis, First Nations Special

Education Resource Line at 1-877-547-1919 [email protected],

• Madeline Price, Special Needs Resource Teacher, 1-877-422-3672, [email protected], and

Deane Zeidler, Coordinator, of the FNESC Speech Language Support line at 1-877-547-5926

Additional information on special education support services from FNSA is found at http://www.firstnations-schools.bc.ca/specialed.htm

http://ca.f515.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?&[email protected]

http://www.firstnations-schools.bc.ca/specialed.htm

III. RESULTS

The schools The 2007/2008 Coordinated Student Assessments provided psychoeducational assessments for 152 students in 36 schools. The students ranged in age from 5 to 23. Median age was 8.6 years. The list of schools, enrolment and number of students assessed is presented in Table 2. Of the 152 students, 68 % were males and 32 % were females. The breakdown of the students by sex and by age is presented in Table 3.

Results by category In the initial two years of the assessment projects, it was possible to assess approximately 10 % of the enrolment of each school. From this we were able to estimate the proportion of students in the school population who met the provincial criteria for the various special needs categories. Since this is the ninth assessment project and some schools have had assessments more than once, it was not possible to estimate the proportion of students in each school who have special needs. So the results are based on the proportion of the 152 children who were assessed.

In addition, a significant number of children (about 10%) met the criteria for more than one special needs category. Rather than choosing just one of the categories for such children, we recorded each category, for each child. The result is that: • 152 children were assessed; • 116 children met the criteria for at least

one special needs category • the criteria were met 129 times by these

116 children. The percentage of the 152 assessed children, for each category is given below.

These results are also presented in Figure 1.

Learning Disability (Severe) .............. 26

Intellectual Disability (Mild) .............. 22

Behaviour Disorder (Moderate) .......... 20

Behaviour Disorder (Intensive)............. 7

Physical Disability/ Chronic Health...... 5

Intellectual Disability

(Moderate/ Severe/ Profound)......... 3

Visually Impaired.................................. 1

Hearing Impaired .................................. 0

Autism................................................... 0

Gifted .................................................... 0

Table 2. Schools, communities, psychologists, and number of assessments, 2007/2008

School Town Psychologist Assessments

Aatsie Davie School Ft Ware Leonard Stanley 8Chalo Fort Nelson Buff Oldridge 5Chehalis Community School Chehalis Art More 5Chief Matthews Massett Art More 3Eliza Archie Memorial School CanimLake Patrick Walton 1Eugene Joseph Elem Ft St James Leonard Stanley 2Gitanmaax School Hazelton Leonard Stanley 1Gitanyow Kitwanga Leonard Stanley 7Gitsegukla Comm. School South Hazelton Leonard Stanley 16Gwa'salaNakwaxda'xw Port Hardy Leonard Stanley 7Haahuuupayak School Port Alberni Leonard Stanley 2Haisla Community School Kitamaat Village Art More 2Hartley Bay Community School Hartley Bay Art More 3K'ak'ot'tatsi School Coal Harbour Leonard Stanley 3Kispiox Community School Kispiox Art More 1Klappan Independent Iskut Buff Oldridge 5Kuper Island Band Chemainus Leonard Stanley 11Lach Klan School Kitkatla Art More 2Lower Nicola Band School Merritt David Williams 3Lower Similkameen Keremeos Patrick Walton 2Maaqtusiis Community School Ahousat Leonard Stanley 5Moricetown Elem. Moricetown Leonard Stanley 5Nakalbun Elem. Ft St James Leonard Stanley 3Outma School Penticton David Williams 5Quw'utsun Smuneem Elem Duncan Leonard Stanley 3Rosie Seymour Elem Clinton Patrick Walton 3Saanich Adult Education Centre Brentwood Bay Leonard Stanley 3Seabird Island Community School Seabird Island Art More 3Sen*Pok*Chin Oliver Patrick Walton 2Skeetchestn Community School Savona Patrick Walton 4Stein Valley - Nlakapamux School Lytton Patrick Walton 5Stein Valley - Nlakapamux School Lytton David Williams 3Stu'Ate lelum Sec. Ladysmith Leonard Stanley 6Sxoxomic Community Williams Lake Patrick Walton 3Tsawataineuk School Kingcome Inlet Leonard Stanley 4Xit'olacw Comm. School Mount Currie Dorothy Sawatsky 4Yaqan Nukiy School Creston Art More 2

Totals 152

Table 3. Number of assessed students by age and by sex and for 2007/2008

Age M F Total

5 1 1 26 1 1 27 12 10 228 14 4 189 9 8 1710 16 6 2211 11 6 1712 9 3 1213 11 2 1314 5 1 615 6 1 716 2 1 317 2 1 3

Other 5 3 8

Total 104 48 152

Figure 1: Percentage of the assessed students who met the provincial criteria for special needs, by category, in 2007/2008.

Gifted

Autism

Hearing Impaired

Visually Impaired

Intellectual Disability-Moderate/Severe

Chronic Health

Behaviour Disorder-Intensive

Behaviour Disorder-Moderate

Intellectual Disability-Mild

Learning Disability-Severe

26 %

22 %

20 %

7 %

3 %

5 %

0 %

0 %

1 %

0 %

The reader is reminded that these figures do not show all students with special needs. They show only those students who were assessed and who meet the criteria for special education funding set by the BC Ministry of Education. They do not include such categories as: • moderate Learning Disability ; • significant academic difficulties (usually

in reading) for students who scored low enough on cognitive ability to exclude them from an LD category, but not low enough to include them in an intellectual delay category.

• serious behaviour difficulties that did not meet criteria,

• some emotional and mental health categories,

• categories requiring a medical diagnosis which has not been conducted, or

• a range of special needs that may be much more appropriate to the needs of First Nations students.

Table 4 shows the trends in proportions of students in each category over the past four years. In 2007/2008, the pattern of frequencies for Severe Learning Disability decreased significantly, while the pattern for Mild Intellectual Delay increased. In addition was a large number of children (22) for whom the psychologists felt that a referral to a physician had a strong likelihood of resulting in a Chronic Health or other medical diagnosis.

Table 4 - Percentage of the assessed students who met the provincial criteria for special needs, as well as number of assessments, mean number of assessments per school and median age of children assessed, for the past three assessment periods.

Year Category 2008 2007 2006 2005

Learning Disability - severe 26 % 34 % 32 % 37 %

Intellectual Disability - mild 22 % 17 % 10 % 15 %

Behaviour Disorder - moderate 20 % 23 % 15 % 20 %

Physical disability/Chronic health 5 % 1 % 4 % 7 %

Other 10 % 7 % 10 % 6 %

-------------------------------

Number of assessments 152 100 144 113

Mean number of assessments per school 4.2 4.5 3.3 3.9

Median age of

assessed students 8.6 9.1 9.9 10.3

Factors affecting the results As with the previous assessments, a number of factors affected the results and must be taken into account when interpreting them.

1. Some schools had assessments in previous years, either through the Coordinated Student Assessments or through private arrangements. In these schools, many of the highest priority students had already been assessed. Consequently, the pattern of results in these schools this year would not necessarily be similar to those of previous years.

2. No dependent handicapped students were identified as part of the assessments. There are a few dependent handicapped children in the FNSA schools, but others live off reserve with parents, are placed in foster homes or the parents have placed them in the provincial school because the community school was unable to provide the support services they require.

3. No gifted students were identified by the assessments, primarily because potentially gifted students were given a much lower priority for assessment, according to communications from teachers and principals. The problem of identifying potential giftedness because of the cultural inappropriateness of the assessment instruments is also an issue.

4. The number of students in the Intensive Behaviour Support category is a significant underestimate because the category requires that the student is receiving intensive interventions by other community agencies beyond the school. Such interventions are often not available in smaller or more isolated

First Nations communities. This would apply to at least 5 students.

Students with special needs not identified by the Project There are two groups of students with very serious special needs that remain unidentified in these and previous assessments.

The first group includes students who would meet the provincial criteria for special needs categories but they were not identified for a variety of reasons, primarily because financial resources limit the number of assessments that can be carried out in a given year.

The second group includes students who would not meet the provincial criteria but still require significant special needs support. Included in this group are: • students with significant reading and

achievement difficulties, • students in urgent need of counselling, • students with significant behaviour

difficulties, and • students with significant intellectual

delay but who, because there is not a satisfactory measure, do not meet the requirement that they have a similar delay in adaptive behaviour.

.

IV. CASE STUDIES

The cases studies below are an important way of putting a human face on the numbers presented in this report. Only two of the five case studies (Mike and Anne) illustrate an assessment in which the goals of CAP were completely achieved, although CAP goals are fully achieved in most cases. The other case studies are presented to demonstrate some of the limitations and difficulties of the assessment program. Alice is representative of a large proportion of the students that we have assessed. These students share a significant gap between their verbal and performance ability scores and a significant delay in the verbal achievement. Samson and June are two students who do not meet provincial criteria for special needs. As a consequence their results do not attract the extra funding to provide urgently needed support. These summaries are based on detailed assessment reports which provide considerably more information than is presented here. Names and other identifying information have been changed or omitted to preserve the anonymity of the student and the school.

Mike Mike is 14 and in Grade 7. He was referred because of concerns about his behaviour as well as his achievement. Mike lives in a community of about 600 people. The village is not isolated; in fact, many Band members also live in nearby non-First Nations communities.

Mike is often rough and aggressive with other students, including younger female students. He seldom admits guilt even when caught in the act; nor does he express remorse when he hurts another student. He has some leadership skills but does not use them effectively. He is a good athlete. His behaviour has been problematic since he entered school, but it has gotten worse over the past two years. His teacher estimates Mike’s reading and writing level at about grade 5 and math about grade 6. He has had some academic difficulties since grade 3. During the assessment he was cooperative. He was not confident with some of the difficult tasks, but tried when encouraged. His verbal ability was very delayed but his performance abilities were in the middle range. His visual motor integration was at the advanced level. He was about 4 years delayed in reading and writing and about 1 year delayed in math. His behavioural assessment indicated “clinically significant” problems with aggression, anger-control, bullying and lack of resiliency. The primary purpose of the assessment was achieved in that we were able to provide his teachers with details of his strengths and weaknesses, and make recommendations for additional support from the school and from community services. At time of writing, his teachers are working with FNESC support staff and community agencies as well as Mike’s parents to develop a more effective support program for him. The secondary purpose of the assessment was also achieved in that we were able to

identify an appropriate special needs category, “behaviour support moderate”, which would attract additional funding for support for him.

Anne Anne was 17 years old when the assessment was completed about 5 years ago. She was referred because she was far behind in her reading achievement. Her teachers indicated the she was reading at about the grade 3 level but performance in math was about the grade 8 level. Anne lived in a First Nations community of about 500 people with larger non-First Nations communities nearby. She lived with her parents and 3 siblings. English was the only language spoken in the home. She had attended the same school since Kindergarten. She had a great deal of support from learning assistance teachers, much of it on an individual basis, since second grade. She got along well with her classmates. Her behaviour in class was good except for an occasional outburst when she was frustrated with reading or writing tasks. Anne’s assessment results showed that her overall cognitive ability was in the low-middle range. Her non-verbal cognitive abilities were much higher that her verbal abilities and she had memory difficulties with verbal content. Her results also confirmed that she was extremely delayed in reading and writing skills. Anne’s results met the criteria for severe language based learning disability.

As a result, her IEP support was modified significantly, with help from the FNSA Special Education Resource Line and the FNSA Special Needs Resource Teacher who also visited the school. Modifications were also made for her testing conditions following the guidelines of the Ministry of Education. At age 19 Anne completed a modified high school program and was accepted at a nearby community college for a trade training program that fit her abilities and interests. Anne has now completed that program, is successfully employed and living in her community. The purposes of the assessment program were achieved in every way. Indeed Anne is a good example of the best possible results of the assessment program, the support services available through the First Nations Schools Association and the expertise of so many of the teachers in First Nations schools.

Alice Alice is 12 years of age in grade 6. She was referred for assessment because she is seriously delayed in language development and in reading and writing skills. Alice lives in a First Nations community of about 400 people with larger non-First Nations communities nearby. Almost everyone in the community speaks English as a first language, except for a few of the elders. Alice converses easily but with a limited vocabulary. She has been delayed in

language and reading development since Kindergarten. She has been on an IEP for the past 5 years to help develop her language, reading and writing skills, and has made some progress. Her classroom behaviour and her attendance are both good. Her hearing and vision had been checked recently and both were in the normal range. During the assessment she was very cooperative and hard working; she responded positively to praise and encouragement. Her cognitive ability scores were very delayed (about 4 years) in verbal comprehension but just below average in perceptual reasoning, working memory and processing speed. Most of her achievement scores were delayed (about 2 years). These scores are significantly higher than would be predicted from her verbal ability score, which is usually the best predictor of school achievement. However her vocabulary level was still very delayed (about 3 years). The primary purpose of the assessment was achieved in that we were able to provide her teachers with details of her strengths and weaknesses, not all of which are described here. In addition, the assessment confirmed that the limited special needs support for Alice is working in the right direction, even though it is not completely overcoming her achievement delays. The secondary purpose of the assessment was not achieved in that we were unable to identify an appropriate special needs category which would help attract more special needs funding for First Nations school in BC, for Alice and students like her. She did not quite meet the criteria for either language based learning disability or intellectual delay.

Some comments:

• This case study warrants additional attention because Alice’s results represent a large proportion of the students who have been assessed1 - low verbal ability, near normal performance ability, delayed achievement in vocabulary and reading achievement. And, where the student has been receiving special support, the delay in achievement is not as great as the verbal ability score would predict. Sometimes these students meet the criteria for severe language-based learning disability and sometimes they do not, but their profiles are very similar.

• This profile is not unique to First Nations students. Delays in verbal ability and achievement are evident among a majority of students with special needs, regardless of their background. However the gap between verbal and performance abilities is often greater among First Nations students who are assessed.

• Many students like Alice may not have a strong English language background at home or in the community, so it is important to focus on language development at school and at home, as early as possible.

• One characteristic of “European” cultures is that the written word has a very high priority, and this is reflected in school curriculum and therefore in the testing. And greater strength in the written word requires greater strength in

1 Just a reminder that in this section we are referring only to students who have been referred for assessment, not students in the general population of First Nations students.

the spoken word. In addition, verbal tasks tend to be more “culturally loaded” than non-verbal (or “performance” tasks). It is for this reason that the psychologists look carefully at non-verbal abilities in estimating the true learning potential of many First Nations students, especially if the students come from a more traditional First Nations family or community.

• Like Alice, many of the students whom we assess have higher scores on achievement than would be predicted by their verbal ability scores. This reinforces the need to give more weight to non-verbal abilities in estimating the students’ school learning potential.

Samson Samson is 7 years old in grade 1. He was referred by his teachers for assessment because he was far behind in language development; he was easily distracted and had a great deal of difficulty sitting still. Samson lives in a small isolated First Nations community with his mother, a younger brother and an older sister. His mother indicated in an interview that he is fairly well behaved and happy, but she has difficulty getting him to listen. She also said that she had consumed “quite a bit” of alcohol while she was pregnant. Samson is small for his age and has missed a lot of school because of illness. Samson is a happy child who talks a great deal, but with very limited vocabulary. He has some articulation problems but has not yet seen a speech language pathologist because of the isolation of the community. He also has tubes in both ears because of ear

difficulties. Hearing assessment results were not available in the school records. Assessment results showed overall cognitive ability at the low end of the very delayed range, verbal ability slightly higher than performance ability and memory in the extremely low range. Behavioural assessment confirmed significant difficulty with inattention and hyperactivity. He was at the 1st percentile on visual motor integration. Interviews with teachers and his mother indicated that his cognitive abilities outside of school (“adaptive behaviour”) were also delayed, but not extremely so. Achievement was delayed by about 2 years, which is a significant amount at this age. His results did not quite meet the criteria for any special needs category. However in the opinion of the psychologist it is likely that as Samson gets older he would meet the criteria for intellectual delay, behaviour support or both. The primary purpose of the assessment was achieved in that we were able to provide his teacher with details of his strengths and weaknesses. We also recommended a referral for a pediatric assessment because of the strong possibility of prenatal neurological damage. We also recommended a referral to a speech language pathologist through FNESC. The secondary purpose of the assessment was not achieved in that we were unable to identify an appropriate special needs category for Samson. However, if the pediatric referral is followed up Samson may meet the criteria for chronic health impairment.

The result is that when the school or FNESC approaches funding agencies for special needs support, they cannot use Samson’s results, even though his difficulties are very serious. Similarly in the provincial school system his results would not trigger additional funding for special needs support.

June June is 12 years old and in grade 5. She was referred for assessment because her achievement is extremely delayed and her behaviour is a serious concern. Her teacher estimated that she is reading at about the grade 3 level. She is not motivated to do schoolwork or to pay attention. She just daydreams and doodles. She is not usually disruptive or oppositional, although occasionally she will refuse to do a task. She has had these difficulties since grade 1 but has become markedly worse in the past year. She was very reluctant to go with the psychologist for the assessment but went with encouragement from her teacher. She gave minimal response to questions from the psychologist as he tried to set the scene for the assessment tasks. During the first few tasks she sometimes gave responses that showed her ability and other times gave nonsense answers or didn’t respond at all. The session was terminated by the psychologist because it was non-productive. A day later he again tried to carry out the assessment but she refused to go. As an alternative the psychologist observed her in class, interviewed her teachers at length and attempted to meet with the parents with no success. He wrote a report

based on the limited information he had obtained and made some recommendations for support and other referrals. But it was not presented as a proper psycho-educational report. The primary purpose of the assessment was not achieved, although we were able to provide some ideas to her teachers. The secondary purpose was not achieved since there was insufficient information to compare to the criteria for special needs categories. It possible that if her behaviour continues to deteriorate she will meet the criteria for moderate behaviour intervention. This student’s results were not included in the statistics presented in this report. And fortunately this type of situation only occurs in about 1 in 100 assessments. It must be added that we always respect the right of a student not to participate in the assessment or to withdraw from it at any time during the assessment.

IV. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The Coordinated Assessment Program

appears to be having positive outcomes as indicated by student outcomes, services to special needs students, and more optimistic teacher outlook towards being able to help their students who have special needs.

In particular we continue to observe significant improvement in reading and writing skills and in appropriate student behaviour. These improvements, however, are just a beginning towards the improvements that need to occur. For example, as indicated in last year’s report, about 60% of the students whom we assessed had serious language, reading and writing difficulties (at least 1.5 standard deviations delayed). Serious behaviour problems are still a major contributor to poor student achievement. Language/reading/writing improvement includes strengthening existing student support and programs, professional development, and an emphasis on language development. This includes, at all grade levels: • oral vocabulary development, • reading to students, “reading”

pictures with young children, songs and chants, integrated throughout the day,

• reading by students, and • workshops with parents, helping

them to help their children develop their language (both First Nations and English) skills.

One of the most effective approaches to behaviour enhancement is for each school to develop a positive, structured behaviour plan for the school. It must be as consistent as possible across grades and include parent involvement in a manner that is as positive as possible. Some schools are using this approach very effectively and I recommend that all the schools take on the idea.

2. Each year the number of parents who want to meet with the psychologists to review the assessment results increases beyond the levels of previous years. This is a positive development that helps the child, the parent, and the psychologist. It also indicates an increasingly positive relationship between the schools and parents.

3. The proportion of assessed students who

meet the criteria for special needs did not appear to decrease noticeably. This suggests that the proportion of those who have identifiable special needs, but have not yet been assessed, is still significant.

4. As in previous years, teachers and

principals lauded the effectiveness of FNESC/FNSA staff in providing special needs support, in managing the special needs funding and in advocating for adequate funding for the schools. They particularly appreciated the willingness of support staff to travel to individual schools and to communicate regularly with the schools. Staff at a number of schools praised the increase in speech and language support.

5. There is still an urgent need for professional counsellors and therapists for a large number of the students who were assessed.

We saw some evidence of improvement in this type of support over the past year.

6. Speech and Language Pathologist

services were improved significantly this school year as a result of decentralizing speech and language support services. We saw evidence of the improvements in many schools.

7. As in previous reports, I recommend that

the psychoeducational assessments be continued until the percentage of students with assessed special needs decreases considerably. And, in line with recent research, I recommend that the assessments continue to focus on identifying and meeting student needs, and that categorization be given a lower priority.

8. Teachers spoke very highly of the help they had received from the FNESC/FNSA special needs resource people: • Kelly Kitchen, Director, Special

Education, • Lisa Ellis, First Nations Special

Education Resource Line, • Madeline Price, Special Needs

Resource Teacher, and • Various contract speech therapists

and Deane Zeidler, Coordinator of the Speech Language Support line.

These services are logical and cost-effective ways of providing the special needs support that is desperately needed in the schools.

9. I urge funding authorities to continue to

work towards increased, continuous, and secure funding for special needs so that long-term planning is possible at FNSA and in the schools.

Thank you!! Each year the cooperation and support of the students, their teachers, principals, staff and parents are a crucial part of the success of this program. Special thanks to each of you. It is gratifying to see the increasing interest and caring of so many parents. Schools and parents working together can only help increase the support to the students. I wish the teachers and support staff all the best as you convert the assessment results into effective support programs for your students. And do not hesitate to contact me if I can help in any way. Also, a special thank you to the psychologists who carried out the assessments. The timeline and the travel requirements are very demanding. But your enthusiastic involvement, and your focus on supporting individual children were very important to the success of this Project. The policy-makers, administrative staff and support staff of the First Nations Education Steering Committee and the First Nations Schools Association must be commended for your thoughtful, creative, well prepared, tireless, and tenacious manner in your pursuit of adequate and proper resourcing for special needs in the FNSA schools. Thank you for your leadership !

REFERENCES

British Columbia Ministry of Education (2006) Special Education Services: A Manual of

Policies, Procedures and Guidelines, (H.13 Summary: Funding Special Needs Policy), at http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/specialed/ppandg/13_summary_funding.htm

First Nations Schools Association (2002) Special Education Funding, First Nations

Schools Association website: http://www.fnsa.ca/specialed.htm SEP Final Report 2006/7. West Vancouver. See the First Nations Schools Association

website at http://www.fnsa.ca/, click on Special Education Programming, scroll to the bottom of the page and click on 2006/7 SEP Final Report.

First Nations Education Steering Committee and First Nations Schools Association

(2001) Special needs education funding implementation: Five year plan. West Vancouver.

First Nations Education Steering Committee First Nations Education Financing This

paper provides an overview of First Nations education funding issues, including information regarding how money is allocated to education by both the federal and provincial governments. West Vancouver.

McKibbin, E, 2004, A good start: An evaluation of the Special Education Program

administration in British Columbia. West Vancouver: FNESC/ FNSA (also available at http://www.fnsa.ca/specialed.htm, click on “2003/2004 SEP Program Evaluation”.

More, A. (2007) Coordinated Assessments Project, 2006/7. West Vancouver, BC: First

Nations Education Steering Committee.

http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/specialed/ppandg/13_summary_funding.htm

http://www.firstnations-schools.bc.ca/specialed.htm

http://www.fnsa.ca/

USEFUL LINKS BC Ministry of Education, Aboriginal Education Enhancement Branch www.bced.gov.bc.ca/abed Council for Exceptional Children http://www.cec.sped.org/ Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder resource, Alberta Learning http://www.education.gov.ab.ca/k_12/specialneeds/fasd.asp First Nations Education Steering Committee http://www.fnesc.ca/ First Nations Parents Club http://www.fnsa.ca/programs.htm#parents First Nations Schools Association http://www.fnsa.ca/ FNSA Special Education programming and services http://www.fnsa.ca/specialed.htm FNESC/FNSA Handbook for parents http://www Kids Stop, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ks/index_e.html Learning Disabilities Association of Canada http://www.ldac-taac.ca/english/ldac.htm Learning Disabilities resources http http://www.ldonline.org/ Medline Plus: US National Institutes of Health Conditions and Illnesses http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/healthtopics_p.html Medications http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginformation.html Otitis Media (Ear Infection) http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/otitism.asp Read Well, an excellent primary reading program http://www.readwell.net/ Reading Rockets, Launching young readers http://readingrockets.org/ Teachers Book Depository, Edmonton http://teachersbooks.epsb.net/tbd.cfm Use visual strategies.com http://www.usevisualstrategies.com/

http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/abed

http://www.education.gov.ab.ca/k_12/specialneeds/fasd.asp

http://www.fnsa.ca/programs.htm#parents

http://www.ldac-taac.ca/english/ldac.htm

http://www.readwell.net/

http://readingrockets.org/

TEACHER RESOURCES About Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder. Victoria: BC Ministry of Children and Families

resource website at http://www.mcf.gov.bc.ca/fasd/index.htm

Connections Newsletter, Newsletter of the First Nations Special Education Toll-Free Resource Line (877-547-1919) Also available from http://www.fnsa.ca/resource-line.htm#connections An excellent continually updated resource for teachers.

Learning to read; Reading to learn: helping Children with Learning Disabilities to Succeed (1996) The National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators. Available at http://artmore.ca/pfd/learning.pdf

First Nations Education Steering Committee Talking about Special Education. This is a series of 8 information handbooks developed for teachers and parents. Available free online or can be ordered from http://www.fnesc.ca/publications/index.php#publications

Kavanagh, B. 1998 *Talking About Special Education: Volume 1 Information Handbook

Kavanagh,B. 1998 (Updated by Price, M. 2006) Talking About Special Education: Volume 2 Talking about Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder

Kavanagh,B. 1998 *Talking About Special Education: Volume 3 Talking about Attention Deficit Disorder

Kavanagh, B. 2000 *Talking About Special Education: Volume 4 A Handbook for Parents

Horner, K. 2001 (Updated by Price, M. 2007) *Talking About Special Education: Volume 5 ** A Parent's Guide to Individual Education Plans (IEPs) Updated March 2007

Horner, K. 2001 (Updated by Price, M. 2007) *Talking About Special Education: Volume 6 A Guide to Individual Education Plans (IEPs) for Teachers Updated April 2007

2002 *Talking About Special Education: Volume 7 Gifted Students

Ellis, L. 2005 Talking About Special Education: Volume 8 A Parent's Guide to Special Education Assessments

More, A (2005) Dealing with Serious Behaviour Problems, Unpublished article, available from the author.

Oling, Tom & Sheridan S. M. (1995) The Tough Kid Social Skills Book Longmont, CO: Sopris West;

Reithaug, D. (1998) Orchestrating academic success by adapting and modifying programs (2002) Orchestrating success in reading, (2000) Orchestrating positive and practical behaviour plans

http://www.mcf.gov.bc.ca/fasd/index.htm

http://www.fnsa.ca/resource-line.htm#connections

http://www.fnsa.ca/resource-line.htm#connections

http://artmore.ca/pfd/learning.pdf

http://www.fnesc.ca/publications/index.php#publications

Excellent, practical teacher resources available from Stirling Head Enterprises, 5186 Alderfeild Place, West Vancouver, BC, V7W 2W7.

Rhode, G., Jenson, W.R. & Reavis, K. H. (1993) The tough kid book: practical classroom management strategies Longmont, CO: Sopris West;

Ryser, G & K. McConnell (2006) Practical Ideas That Really Work for Students with ADHD - Second Edition. Separate editions for Preschool-Grade 4 and Grade 5 - 12. Austin, Texas: Pro-Ed Inc. http://www.proedinc.com/Scripts/prodList.asp?idCategory=52

Provides teachers and IEP intervention teams with practical solutions for students’ problems with inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. Comes with a manual and evaluation forms

Shanker & Ekwall (2003) Locating and Correcting Reading Difficulties, 8th Ed. Extremely well organized, strategies, activity sheets ready to use. Prentice-Hall Career & Technology

Sprick, R. (1995) The Teachers’ encyclopedia of behaviour management Longmont, CO: Sopris West. An excellent resource, should be in every school’s professional library. Order online from http://www.safeandcivilschools.com/media/print_order_form.pdf

Students with Intellectual Disabilities: A Resource Guide for Teachers. BC Ministry of Education, Special Education, http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/specialed/sid/. Practical resources written by teachers.

SuccessMaker Newmarket, Ontario: Pearson Canada. A very popular and successful, individualized system for building core skills in reading/language arts, mathematics, and science. For more information go to http://www.successmakercanada.com/

http://www.proedinc.com/Scripts/prodList.asp?idCategory=52

http://www.safeandcivilschools.com/media/print_order_form.pdf

http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/specialed/sid/

http://www.successmakercanada.com/

Appendix D

Special Education Technology – BC Report

report on the education/20072008/07-08 sep final report.pdfchecklists observation anecdotal rubrics...

Documents