Title: Frequently Asked Questions about the Transformation of Special Education in Saskatchewan
1Frequently Asked Questions about the
Transformation of Special Education in
Saskatchewan
2What are the key conceptual changes that have
occurred in Special Education in Saskatchewan?
- PAST
- Focus on . . .
- Administrative process of approvals
- Individual
- Entitlement
- Reaction
- Access to special education
- NOW
- Focus on . . .
- Student learning outcomes and assessing progress
- Changes in service delivery
- Needs based and accountability driven
- Response to intervention
- Access to early identification
3(No Transcript)
4What are the national and international evidence
based practices from research?
- Response to Intervention
- Movement to Inclusion
- Special education as a service for all
- Increased focus on the role of the administrator
- Collaborative and inter-professional teams
5What is the Provincial Trend?
From 2000-2001 to the present, the number of
students with intensive needs has doubled.
6What is the National Trend?
7How must we transform our thinking?
Two Prong Approach
Intensive Support
Individual Students
RTI Service Delivery Model
Systemic Change
Strengths Procedures
Performance Supports Outcomes
Differentiated Objectives
Collaborative Parental
Staffing Model Sufficiency
Efficiency Effectiveness
Appropriateness
8What processes have influenced the changes in
special education?
- Special Education Review, April 2000
- Review of funding approaches across Canada,
November 2004 - Local funding mechanism review(Directors of
Education, Superintendents November 2004) - Government alignment, May 2004
9What were the key findings from the provincial
special education review reports?
- Develop funding protocols to focus on childrens
needs - Adopt, implement and support the philosophy of
inclusive schools - Develop a framework of effective practices
10What did the traditional model of special
education look like?
Special Education
Sea of Ineligibility
General Education
11What will the future of student services look
like?
General Intensive Resources
General Supplemental Resources
Amount of Resources Needed to Solve Problem
General Resources
Intensity of Problem
12What is the philosophical shift inspecial
education?
- Shift away from a medical model (entitlement) to
an impact (needs) model - What is the impact of the students presenting
need on accessing curriculum? .. Not what is
the students disability
13What does this paradigm shift look like for
schools?
- Assessment for funding
- Interventions focused on changing the student
- Planning focused on the individual student
- Remediation students already failing
- Emphasis on disabilities and deficits
- Working independently
- Assessment for educational programming
- Interventions focused on changing the environment
- School wide planning first, then planning for at
risk students, then the individual student - Prevention students who are at risk
- Emphasis on strengths what the student can do
- Educational specialists
- working as part of a team
- providing services with the school
14What have the funding policy changes been?
- Movement to block funding recognition from
individual funding - Movement to needs based model
- New terminology student requiring intensive
supports - Upfront funding based on prevalence rates
- Movement to undefined individual funding dollar
recognition - Amalgamation of assistive technology with
intensive supports funding recognition - Movement to vulnerability factors
- Increased accountability
15What does systemic change require?
RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION
- Approach or framework for redesigning
establishing teaching learning environments
that are effective, efficient, relevant,
durable for all students, families educators - NOT program, curriculum, strategy, intervention
- NOT limited to special education
- NOT new
16What are the elements of systemic change?
RtI
17How does Response to Intervention support all
learners?
Few
Some
All
18How can we design school-wide systems for student
success?
Academic Systems
Behavioral Systems
1-5
1-5
5-10
5-10
80-90
80-90
19How are students identified?
The Impact Assessment Profile supports the
identification ofstudents with intensive needs.
Impact ? Supports So What ? Now What
20How many students are being identified?
- 6,742 students with intensive needs were
identified - Represents 4.11 of student population
- Represents 35 increase during medical to
needs-based transition - (2007-2008 data as of December 20, 2007)
21How is programming developed for students with
intensive needs?
- Formative, Summative, Diagnostic Assessments are
completed - Impact Profile is completed
- Personal Program plan is developed
- Supports are put into place
22What is the accountability framework for students
with intensive needs?
- Ministry of Education conducts audit of impact
assessment profiles and personal program plans
based on collaborative standards - Funding recognition is influenced by success rate
of school division in audit - Ministry of Education provides recommended
staffing ratios for Student Services and service
delivery rubrics - School Division identifies Areas of Development
for improving Student Services - Personal Program Plans and outcome rubrics are
developed for all students with intensive needs
23What students are being identified?
07/08 Impact Assessment Prevalence Categories 07/08 Impact Assessment Prevalence Categories 07/08 Impact Assessment Prevalence Categories 07/08 Impact Assessment Prevalence Categories 07/08 Impact Assessment Prevalence Categories 07/08 Impact Assessment Prevalence Categories 07/08 Impact Assessment Prevalence Categories 07/08 Impact Assessment Prevalence Categories
Blind or Visual Impairment Deaf or Hard of Hearing Intellectual Disability Mental Health Impairment Orthopaedic Disability Pervasive Development Disorder Pervasive Development Disorder
Level I 46 139 486 181 128 262 262
Level II 138 157 1359 262 414 688 688
Sub Total 184 296 1845 443 542 950 950
Percentage of Total 2.41 3.88 24.17 5.80 7.10 12.44 12.44
Physical Health Impairment Prenatal Substance Exposure Substance-related Disorders Other Diagnosed Other Undiagnosed Other Total Total
Level I 236 177 14 568 868 1436 3,105
Level II 486 200 13 349 464 813 4,530
Sub Total 722 377 27 917 1332 2249
Percentage of Total 9.46 4.94 0.35 12.01 17.45 29.46
Total 2249 7,635
24What supports are in place for students?
Staffing Profile Staffing Profile Staffing Profile Staffing Profile
2006-2007 FTE 2007-2008 FTE Percentage Change
Superintendent(s) Student Services/Special Education 21 20 -4.67
Coordinator(s) 44 45 2.49
Consultant(s) 40 44 8.73
Classroom Teachers 9,599 9,537 -0.64
Special Education Teachers 887 945 6.44
Education/Teacher Assistants 3,536 3,554 0.50
Psychologists 61 64 4.97
Physical Therapists 1 1 0.00
Occupational Therapists 13 17 28.84
Speech Language Pathologists 92 97 5.62
Counsellors 129 134 3.32
Social Workers 64 69 7.03
Other 135 155 14.70
Total 14,624 14,682 0.40
25What provincial funding recognition is provided
to school divisions?
- 67 Million Intensive Supports
- 74 Million Diversity
26Saskatchewan versus other jurisdictions
Province Student Population (Approximate) Special Needs Population (Approximate) Percentage Special Needs (Approximate) Special Needs Funding (Approximate) Identification Process
British Columbia 582,691 57,349 9.84 32,000, 16,000, and 8,000, per student Medical Model
Alberta 560,563 67,025 11.96 24,316, 16,465, and 2,413, per student Medical Model
Manitoba 182,185 6531 3.58 18,000, and 9,000, per student Primary Medical Model - Some Impact
Saskatchewan 160,763 6742 4.19 67 million (intensive supports), and 74 million (diversity) Impact Model
27Why are parents feeling challenged with the
transition to a needs-based model?
- Change is difficult for parents and school
divisions. - Change challenges the status quo.
- Movement from a dependency-based paraprofessional
model to an independent-focused professional
model. - Previous model was based on individual specific
funding recognition this empowered parents to
say, That school is receiving 12,800 dollars
for my child, so they better have an educational
assistant. NOT FOCUSING ON OUTCOMES - Movement away from an entitlement model.
- Inconsistent communication
- Parents want what they have always had.
28Assumptions
- We assumed that there would be a direct
relationship between the number of students
identified and an increase/decrease in the
staffing profile.
29What have we learned?
- The previous Department of Learning historically
focused on TRACKING STUDENTS THAT WERE DESIGNATED
AS DISABLED, and not on the accountability of
staffing in place to support learner needs or
learner outcomes. - We have focused on inputs instead of outcomes.
- We are in transition.
30How was funding recognition from 2007/2008 to
2008/2009 affected?
31Why did funding recognition change?
- Funding recognition changed from school division
to school division based on several factors
including - the provincial allocation of intensive supports
investment in the context of the individual
school division prevalence rate - the number of students identified
- the service delivery model employed