Screenshot 2019-10-28 at 10.14.13 AM

2 Comments on “Screenshot 2019-10-28 at 10.14.13 AM

  1. Thank you for this article. My son had spinal meningitis at age 1 and was, briefly, in a coma. He had several medical tests before entering school and sailed through all of them. I was, however, cautioned that when he started school, learning disabilities might be an issue. He did K twice (big mistake) because the school thought that it was probably maturational. When they finally got around to giving him a psych-ed assessment, the district psychologist got his birthday wrong and the test indicated that he was mentally challenged. Exhausted and fed-up, I moved the entire family to Vancouver where there were more services. Luckily, because of his medical history, Children’s Hospital did the assessment. Yes, he was severely learning disabled (auditory and visual impairments) but he got the help he needed all through school because of his medical history. I later became a special education teacher. At first it was great and my students all had assessments and I could get support services when necessary. As soon as special ed. funding from the Ministry was put into the general operating funds, special ed services deteriorated to the point of nearly non-existent. Now they have thought of a way to further reduce spending. The prevalence model is not based on individual need. Children who need support are in every neighborhood, regardless of income. Parents should be very alarmed about this model. How can you determine the level of funding when the waiting list for district assessments are at least two years? Exactly what data will they use to determine prevalence?

    • Thanks for sharing your story

      I’m reading through some working papers- this one addresses the special needs aspects

      Some good things but mostly big concerns..including the one that if this was implemented without a big cash infusion it would be a failure.

      That’s the biggest issue still today. The BC Libs practiced a Doug Ford style of governance which involved slicing and dicing everything from the moment Campbell came into power.

      The prevalence model is literally a Douc Ford kinda cut, dressed up to make it sound nice and progressive, when really it’s another form of death by a thousand cuts. I dont think it works even in a fully funded and lush system

      This document is an important read.

      Click to access inclusive-education-working-group-report.pdf

      It states:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.