Minutes of the April 15, 2008 SEAC Meeting (excerpt)

The following minutes relate to discussion about SEAC representation on the current Accommodation Review Committee.

3. Notice of Motion: SEAC Representation on Accommodation Review Committees (ARC)

Resolution No. SE-33, re Notice of Motion: SEAC Representation on Accommodation Review Committees (ARC) was deferred at last month's Special Education Advisory Committee meeting to obtain clarification on process and timelines. Referring to the circulated information about Policy #45, Board Chair McDougald outlined the four stages that must be completed when considering closing schools: identification stage determines schools to be considered; review and analysis stage creates opportunity for community involvement; ARC presents recommendations to the Board for debate and decision; Board staff help ensure a smooth transition for affected students. She explained that schools are identified for review in the Annual Planning Document if their enrollment is less than 60 per cent of their Ministry rated capacity (MRC), and if forecasts indicate that enrollment will not increase or will continue to decline. Board Chair McDougald advised that next, as per Ministry of Education guidelines, a review area is identified, relating to Stage II. The review area consists of the schools identified, and neighbouring schools that might be affected. The schools that have been identified are: Byngmount Beach, Lyndwood and Neil C. Matheson Public Schools, and Allan A. Martin Senior Public School.

Board Chair McDougald highlighted the membership of the Accommodation Review Committee, which includes school council chairs and parents from each school, a business leader and a municipal leader. She noted that the majority of the membership is comprised of parents and the public. The ARC's four public meetings and timelines were described by Board Chair McDougald. Stage III is when ARC presents recommendations to the Physical Planning and Building Committee and then to the Board. It was explained by Board Chair McDougald that Stage IV involves Board staff helping to ensure a smooth transition for affected students. Controller Randy Wright added that if the process moves along well, it would take about 18 months from initiation to the potential closure of a school.
  
Questions responded to and information provided by Board Chair McDougald and Randy Wright pertained to: whether ARC will address special education program placements; accommodation and transportation needs of special education students; whether a SEAC member can be included on ARC.

Further information provided by Board Chair McDougald and Randy Wright included that a parent of a special education student is on the membership of the recently formed ARC and that, for the Annual Planning Document, space requirements are monitored for the placement of programs. Debra Krutila, Superintendent of Special Education Support Services, added that special education programs are reviewed on an annual basis for accommodation needs, and she gave examples of how placement and accommodation are achieved.

SE-42, moved by Don Stephens, that the Special Education Advisory Committee now deal with Motion No. SE‑33, which was deferred at the Special Education Advisory Committee meeting of March 18, 2008.

 …........... carried

SE-33, moved by Barbara Cyr, that the Special Education Advisory Committee recommends to the Board:

Whereas:

a) SEAC notes that the Board is reviewing the possibility of school consolidation due to excess classroom capacity, and that consideration is being given to the input of members of school councils and others, through their future participation in the Accommodation Review Committees (ARC);

b) SEAC recognizes that the schools being considered for closure typically have a significant proportion of congregated classes of students with special needs and have effective special education practices. However, SEAC notes that many of the students with special needs are not from the catchment area of the present schools, and are often part of regional and superintendency programs;

c) While SEAC acknowledges that the ARC will look at the options and give guidance on the question of closures, SEAC notes that those committees do not include representatives from the school communities from which many of the students are drawn, or from any SEAC associations;

d) SEAC members have previously commented that many of these congregated classes are located at the periphery of their regions or superintendencies and that one-way travel times by school bus can be as much as 60 minutes for many students in Grade 4 and younger;

 e) SEAC also notes that regional programs for French Immersion, the Arts and International Business usually have continuing commitments to their locations, with at least one example of more than 20 years, while many regional programs for special education have had three locations in far shorter time periods.

Therefore, be it resolved that, the assessment and review of the location of congregated classes for students with special needs and the selection of future location must:

1) Include recognition of the home school location of the students concerned and of their future paths for promotion and transition to higher grades.

2) Consider equity, travel times, and the age and maturity of students, as well as factors such as convenience and access to family and their social supports.

3) Recognize the skills, experience, relationships and resources provided to individual students and classes by their present teachers, as well as in-school, itinerant, and regional support staff.

4) Recognize the benefits of a continuing learning experience that would be provided if those staff, where expedient and meeting their own wishes, could transfer to the schools at which the congregated classes are moved, in preference to transferring the programs to new teaching and support teams in those new locations.

5) Include a nominee of SEAC to each of the Accommodation Review Committees (ARC).

 …........... defeated