The past one-hundred and twenty-three years following confederation has seen considerable change in both attitude and methodology of education for visually and hearing impaired Atlantic Canadians.
Introduction
The past one-hundred and twenty-three years following confederation has seen considerable change in both attitude and methodology of education for visually and hearing impaired Atlantic Canadians. Trends within special education since the 1950’s have dictated a swing away from traditional segregated institutionalization toward a policy of overall integration. Institutions have been replaced by centralized Resource Centres with outreach services and a plethora of special Education personnel providing assessment and interventional tools designed to assist a student with a “low incidence” handicapped” to complete an elementary and secondary education.
“…From 1950 to 1970 special classes became the
preferred choice of instructional settings for those with mild cognitive impairments while residential institutions and special schools continued to be utilized for blind, deaf and physically handicapped students. Since 1970, the trend in educating exceptional students has been moving toward integrating them as much as possible in the regular classes with non-handicapped pupils. Additionally, special classes have been developed for those who were formerly restricted to residential settings and special schools (Turnbull and Schultz,1979).
Special education in Canada has witnessed dramatic growth during the past thirty years, due to many reasons. First, the post war baby boom led to an increase in the number of exceptional children. Second, the polio epidemic of the 1950’s and the rubella epidemic of the 1960’s led to an increase in the demand for special education services. Third, during the 1970’s Canadian educators have become more concerned with their rights. Typically
special education in Canada has followed the model set by the United States (Winzer, Rogow and David,1987).”
In this paper I shall attempt to capsulize the transformation of the Inter-provincial School for the Deaf and the Sir Frederick Fraser School [formerly the Halifax School for the Blind] in Nova Scotia, from private semi/independent institutions to modern Resource Centres under control of the Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority. And indeed with the establishment of [APSEA] in 1975 the education for the Blind and Deaf in Atlantic Canada would move in a new and profound direction.
Background
The Halifax School for the Blind (Sir Frederick Fraser School) was a privately operated corporation that had been in existence since 1870,. The school, formerly located at 5752 University Avenue was a fifteen acre site comprised primarily of antiquated facilities. Reflecting upon my own experiences as a student at Sir Frederick Fraser school during the early seventies I was fortunate enough to be involved in some of the most profound changes which were taking place at that time. A student council was established; a mobility training programme was started – lectures on safe sex, a fulltime educational counsellor and a part-time in-house paediatrician – all heralded change. A greater emphasis on a social form of integration was brought about with greater participation by students in organizations such has High-Y, We were in a since “coming out”. Over the years we had heard rumours of a new school being built, there was talk of plans, swimming pools and other facilities – perhaps the most ridiculous of which was a proposal to move the School for the Blind to Amherst making it a joint structure with the inter provincial school for the deaf – for those of us who were totally blind it would have presented some unusual communicational opportunities – but then as already stated changes began to take place at a furious pace. If one is to understand some of the thinking behind the birth of the Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority it is important in my view to understand that internal changes were occurring within the schools themselves.
The following quote taken from the 1973 Kendall report gives us a glimpse of the situation for visually impaired and hearing impaired students in Atlantic Canada during the early seventies.
“Services for visually handicapped children are provided almost exclusively by the Halifax School for the Blind, … most of the buildings are old, and unsuitable for their present purpose. Enrolment in 1971-72 was 165 (0.03% of the total school population) with 55 children from New Brunswick, 30 from Newfoundland, 78 from Nova Scotia and 6 from Prince Edward Island. Fees for these children are paid by the provinces in the form of per-capita grant. The school population included both blind and partially sighted children, with children between the ages of 0-18 in the four provinces number close to 300 iv, of whom about 100 of school age are known not to be receiving any education at present. *v Blind children attending ordinary schools receive relatively little in the way of supportive services, either from Departments of Education, the Halifax School for the Blind (except in the Halifax-Dartmouth area), or the CNIB. We have no good estimate of the number of partially sighted children in the need of special education.
iv. From figures supplied by the C.N.I.B.
v. From information supplied by the Halifax School for the Blind.
Services for Hearing Handicapped children are provided in Newfoundland by the School for the Deaf at Torbay (enrolment 147) operated under the Department of Education, in Prince Edward Island by the two classes for the deaf at Charlottetown, (enrolment 12), operated by the Department of Education, and in the provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia at the Interprovincial School for the Deaf at Amherst (enrolment 296), jointly operated by a Board set up by the two provinces. The total in these three programs was thus 455 (0.08%). The Torbay School is situated entirely on one campus in temporary buildings. The program at Charlottetown provides for the combination of day students and students in residence in short-stay foster homes, and is located in an elementary school. The ISD (inter-provincial School for the Deaf)consists of both a modern residential complex, including a small vocational program, and a network of out classes’, as well as other services to preschool children and their families in the two provinces.
The above quote points out that the education of visually impaired students from all four atlantic provinces was provided through the Halifax School for the Blind. Further when I was a student there was no formal itinerant outreach service through halifax although students did attend the Convent of the Sacred Heart, Queen Elizabeth High and St. Pat’s. As well the Halifax School possessed no vocational program other than piano tuning. In contrast the inter-provincial School for the Deaf in Amherst provided education to deaf children primarily in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. They did however, possess a small vocational program and an outreach itinerant service. Our two island neighbours had their own independent programs for instruction of the deaf while depending upon the Halifax School for the Blind for the instruction of known visually impaired students.
Public school enrolment in the Atlantic provinces in 1973, According to Dr. Kendall, was estimated at approximately 566,000 children. Further in 1971/72 approximately 1.16% of the total educational population were dependent on special education services in the Atlantic provinces. In total 170 visually-impaired and 455 hearing-impaired children were being provided with special education services in 1971/72.
Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority
Let’s get on With It
In April 1972 a committee to study the needs of children in the Atlantic provinces requiring special education was appointed by the Ministers of Education of the provinces of New Brunswick,
New¬foundland, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island.
The terms of reference for the Committee were:¬
(1) to inquire into present facilities and programs available in the Atlantic provinces for children requiring special educational consideration; with particular emphasis on those with impairment of sight and/or hearing
(2)to recommend programs of study and training for such children
(3) to recommend procedures for assessment of these children
(4) to recommend to the governments of the Atlantic provinces future direction in this field, bearing in mind the educational systems of the four provinces.
The Original report recommended:
That the governments of the Atlantic Provinces recognize and endorse the right of all handicapped persons to be educated to the maximum of their potential, and develop a comprehensive range of services and programs sufficient to meet the educational needs of all handicapped persons.
In the 1973 proposal it was further suggested that the interprovincial bodies be established for the provision of special educational service to two main categories of persons.
Category I: The severely handicapped: those with low incidence, moderate or severe physical and/or mental dis¬abilities and long range needs (pre-school – post-school);
Category II: Educationally handicapped: those with mild or moderate disabilities, mostly affecting their rate of progress in the school system.
The proposition in my view which was being put forth in 1972 was radical in the since that many variables would have to be brought together in such a way that provincial education bodies would work cooperatively and yet, somewhat independently. First the Interprovincial body which was being proposed would be involved with four different provinces each with their own reasons for participating and each expecting something different from such a system. A second aspect was the diversity of children with low incidents handicaps visual, auditory, motor impairment, and cognitive disabilities. This diversity would involve access to a wide range of expertise and resources.
In my research for this paper I was particularly surprised by the candidness of those participants involved in the committee. It would be fair I think, to suggest that the views espoused in the initial Kendall report of 1973 were bold and courageous. The initial report put forth eight basic principals which even today in the view of the committee should govern special education programs in Atlantic Canada.
(i) All handicapped persons have the right to be educated to the maximum of their potential.
There should be no exception to this. In most cases it will require the provision of special education services. We believe that this provision should be mandatory,
(Recommendation 1) “That the governments of the Atlantic Provinces recognize and endorse the right of all handicapped persons to be educated to the maximum of their potential, and develop a comprehensive range of services and programs sufficient to meet the educational needs of all handicapped persons.” (Kendall, 1973, p10)
(ii) Special education services must be comprehensive,
That is, they must cater to all types and degrees of disability, at all ages and stages of development, and must pay attention to all aspects of development. Comprehensiveness implies not only a wide range of educational services but also (among other things) efficient identification and diagnosis, parent guidance, counselling and vocational services.
(iii) Special education services must be of high quality.
Special education services necessarily cost more than those of ordinary education: We are concerned here with three objectives:
(a) that the services provided are of the highest quality consistent with the social policies of the governments; (b) that children receive maximum benefit from them; (c) that governments and taxpayers get the greatest value for their money. We are convinced that these objectives can only be ensured by the frequent and systematic evaluation of special education services.
(iv) The ultimate responsibility for the planning, provision and evaluation of all public education services, including those offered to the handicapped, rests with each provincial education authority.
Essentially this principle is derived from the British North America Act. Although we have argued in favour of developing some programs for the handicapped on an inter-provincial basis, we believe that the basic provincial responsibility cannot, and should not, be eroded by or become lost in inter-provincial structures, and must be reflected in the form of these structures.
(v) The maximum, and most effective, use of costly and scarce human and physical resources is most likely to occur when special education services are planned, coordinated and operated on an inter-provincial basis.
This is especially applicable to services for severely handicapped (low-incidence) children. We are thinking here not only of schools and diagnostic centres, but also of training programs for teachers and other personnel, the setting of standards and adoption of other measures for evaluation programs, and the operation of vocational training programs, In the text we devote some space to the proposal of an Inter-Provincial Special Education Board, with its related Executive Committees.
(vi) Wherever possible, handicapped children should not, for purposes of their education, be separated from their homes nor segregated from their non-handicapped peers.
As the CELDIC report (“One Million Children”) argues, in most cases special education should be a last resort rather than the only provision that is offered. Of course there are some very severely handicapped children who will have to receive all or most of their education in a segregated setting. It must also be recognized that many handicapped children will need short periods of segregated instruction. The main implications are however that we need to examine modifications in the regular school systems which will enable handicapped children to be integrated without detriment to themselves or others, and that special services should be planned to be as accessible as possible to their consumers.
(vii) The local school district should have the responsibility for ensuring that the educational needs of handicapped children are properly provided for, and should have administrative control over the special education services offered in, or in association with its school system.
This implies that the First approach will be to provide for the special needs of the child at the local level; the school district must, of course, have access to specialized facilities operated at a provincial or inter-provincial level.
(viii) Consumers–parents, representatives of voluntary associations and citizens–should be represented at all levels on policy making and advisory groups concerned with services to the handicapped.
We believe that the “consumer input”, presently missing from so many decision making and advisory bodies, in a democratic society supplies an essential and invaluable ingredient in the planning, operation and evaluation of services for the handicapped.
The initial 1973 report proposed that an inter-provincial special education board be created to administer programs and share resource information for “low incident” children comprised of:
(a) Ministers of Education of the four Atlantic Provinces
(b) Deputy Ministers of Education of the four Atlantic Provinces:
(c) Provincial consultants of special education;
(d) eight of officials of the departments of Health and Welfare of the four Atlantic Provinces
(e) the chief educational officer of each inter- provincial program for the handicapped’
(f) eight members at large appointed by the four departments of Education on a two year rotating basis, representative of the following groups, teachers associations, school trustees associations voluntary organizations representing parents of Category I persons
12. that the powers and duties of the Inter- provincial Special Education Board shall include all matters relating to inter- provincial programs for Category I persons except in the case of budgetary decisions, which shall be determined only by the fully participating provinces, these duties shall include the following:
(a) to make recommendations to the four governments about educational services for Category I persons;
(b) to recommend budgets to the governments participating in inter-provincial programs;
(c) to set up Executive Committees (see #17) for the organisation and administration of these programs;
(Recommendation 17) “that Executive Committees be established by the Inter-provincial Special Education Board to operate inter-provincial programs for Category I persons; and that such committees be appointed immediately for the inter-provincial programs far the visually handicapped and the hearing handicapped, …” (Kendall, 1973 p14)
(d) to appoint the chief educational officers if the inter-provincial programs;
(e) to receive reports from the Executive Committees relating to the operation of programs;
(f) to receive reports from provincial programs for Category I persons;
(g) to consider recommendations from individuals and agencies about services for handicapped persons;
(h) to issue reports to the governments, and to the public, about the operation of inter-provincial services for the handicapped;
(i) to evaluate interprovincial programs for Category I persons;
(j) to establish standards for the operation if services organized in an inter-provincial basis;
13. that the Inter-provincial Board shall have the power, subject to the approval of the participating governments, to commission studies in research projects concerned with the education of handicapped persons in the Atlantic Provinces;
Legal Entity
The Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority (APSEA) is an inter-provincial agency established in 1975 by joint agreement among the Ministers of education of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland. The agreement provided for the creation of the Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority and authorized it to provide educational services, programs and opportunities for persons between the ages of 0 and 21 years of age with low incidents handicaps. initially impairments of vision and hearing who are residents of Atlantic Canada
According to Ruth Kimmins, Consultant for Staff Training and Development The 1975 agreement signed by the four Atlantic Provinces is the only one of its kind in North America. Although the agreement is between the four provinces the Authority is incorporated under Nova Scotia law.
The agreement also makes provision for the payment of operational cost to Nova Scotia on a monthly basis as well as the base costs of the resource centres and the running of the authority.
The agreement specifies two campus programs a Technical/ Vocational and Academic program located at the Atlantic Provinces Resource Centre for the Hearing impaired and the academic program for the visually impaired at the Atlantic Provinces Resource Centre for the Visually impaired. Simply stated all costs are shared between the four provinces through formulas set down in the agreement. Further any monies coming to the authority from municipalities are apportioned to the cost of the provinces where the municipalities are located.
Title to the land and buildings on which the resource centres reside belong to Nova Scotia until such time as all provinces within the agreement pay there share of the cost. At that time according to the 1975 agreement title would revert in trust to the Atlantic provinces Special Education Authority. Under section 13 of the agreement any of the four provinces can opt out of the agreement providing that there is not less than two years written notice to the other provinces. Should there be a dispute arising within the agreement it will be resolved under Nova Scotia law. On October 28, 1980 an amendment to the original agreement was signed by the four provinces to expand (APSEA) services to severely learning disabled children. According to Ruth Kimmins, (APSEA) now serves approximately 5% of the total population of learning disabled children in Atlantic Canada.
The main thrust of (APSEA) therefore is primarily to provide special educational support services to children and youth with “low incidents handicaps” and those with visual or hearing impairments and severely Learning Disabled children in a total or partially integrated setting within the public school systems of each of the four Atlantic Provinces under a shared administration.
The Handicapped Persons Education Act
The Handicapped Persons Education Act received royal ascent on June 20, 1974 and was proclaimed on March 1, 1975. It was and still is the legislation which created and governs (APSEA).
The Handicapped Persons’ Education Act. 1974 R.S., c. 194, s.1.
The purpose of this Act is to provide through the co-operative efforts of the Provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland, educational services, programs and opportunities for handicapped persons in the said Provinces and for facilities and personnel for the operation and administration of the same and for the financing thereof. R.S., c. 194, s.2
The legal entity known as the Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority and it’s membership is described in Section 4. (1 & 2) of the Handicapped Persons Education Act.
4 (1) There is hereby established with perpetual succession a body corporate to be known as the Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority. Members of Authority
4 (2) The persons who from time to time are appointed to be directors of the Authority shall be members of the corporation. R.S., c. 194,5.4.
The Board of Directors of (APSEA)
In section 5. (1) of the Handicapped Persons Education Act, and the formal agreement establishing (APSEA), a structural description of the Board of Directors is set forth. In my reading of the 1973 “Atlantic Provinces Report of the Special Education Committee to the Ministers of Education” it would appear to me that the current Board of Directors would be tantamount to the above quoted Inter-provincial Board. When reading this section it is apparent that the board is structured somewhat differently than had been advised by the committee in 1973. (page 9 & 10 a – f)
5 (1) The administration, management, general direction and control of the affairs of the Authority shall be vested in a Board of Directors consisting of twelve members.
Members of Board
(2) The members of the Board shall be
(a) the Deputy Minister of Education for each of the Atlantic Provinces; and
(b) two persons appointed by each of the governors in council of the Atlantic Provinces.
Under the terms of the act the four Deputy education ministers are permanent members while the two persons appointed by each of the Governors in Councils are appointed for two year terms. However, these appointed persons cannot, according to the act serve for more than two consecutive years.
The executive committee is comprised of the four deputy ministers of education and may “consider and present recommendations to the Board on major matters having an overall impact on the management and operation of the Authority.”
The Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority is Incorporated under the statutes of Nova Scotia and the A.P.S.E.A. agreement referred to in section 22 and the regulations referred to in section 20.
Regulations
20 Subject to the approval of the Governor in Council, the Board may make regulations
(a) for the management, administration and conduct of the Authority;
(b) prescribing the duties of the Superintendent, the directors, the officers, teachers, employees and specialists of the Authority;
(c) generally respecting the conduct and management of the Authority and the care and custody of the handicapped persons admitted to its resource centres or enroled in its programs or for whom other suitable educational provision is made;
(d) defining any expression used in this Act and not herein defined;
(e) respecting any other matter or thing that is necessary to effectively carry out the intent and purpose of this Act. R.S., c. 194, s. 20
Agreements
22 (1) The Minister, with the approval of the Governor in Council, may enter into and amend from time to time agreements with the ministers of education of the Provinces of New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island to carry out the intent and purpose of this Act.
Further agreements
(2) In addition to the authority contained in subsection (1), the Minister, with the approval of the Governor in Council, may enter into and amend from time to time agreements with
(a) the Government of Canada;
(b) the government or governments of any other province;
(c) any municipality or municipalities;
(d) any person or persons,
to carry out the intent and purpose of this Act and may by such an arrangement establish intergovernmental or other committees to co-ordinate or implement programs relating to the objectives of this Act and to maintain continuing consultation and advice on policies and programs relating to the objectives of this Act. R.S., c. 194, s. 22.
Although there is no direct provision in either the Handicapped Persons Act or the 1975 Agreement to have consumer input on the Board of Directors representatives from both the visually impaired and Hearing-impaired communities have been appointed to the board and I sincerely hope that this trend will continue.
Buildings and Properties
With the establishment of the Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority there were a number of issues which needed to be addressed by the act, such as the maintenance of buildings, recognition of existing resource centres, future construction of resource centres and of-course funding of such projects and operation of facilities.
Powers of Governor in Council
6 (1) The Governor in Council may purchase, lease or otherwise acquire, hold and improve land and buildings, and may construct, alter, improve and equip buildings for the purposes of the Authority.
Powers of Authority
(2) With the approval of the governors in council of the Atlantic Provinces, the Authority may purchase, lease or otherwise acquire real and personal property and enter into contracts for the establishment, maintenance or operation of resource centres.
Source of funds
(3) All sums required for the acquisition and improvement of land and buildings for the Authority and for the establishment, maintenance and operation of resource centres shall be paid out of such sums as are from time to time appropriated by the Legislature for these purposes. R.S., c. 194, s.6.
Resource Centres
Establishment of resource centres
7 (1) There is hereby established in the Province
(a) on land now owned by the Province and situate, lying and being on the east and west sides of Willow Street in the Town of Amherst a resource centre for hearing-handicapped persons;
(b) on land now owned by the Province and situate, lying and being on the east side of Willow Street in the Town of Amherst a resource centre for the technological and vocational training of handicapped persons;
(c) on land now owned or to be acquired by the Province and designated by the Minister, such land to be situate, lying and being in the Cities of Halifax and Dartmouth, a resource centre for visually handicapped persons.
Buildings and equipment
(2) The Province will with all possible dispatch utilize and equip any buildings on the land referred to in subsection (1) or construct or cause to be constructed on the land referred to in subsection (1) suitable buildings and acquire or cause to be acquired suitable equipment to furnish and establish the said land and buildings as appropriate resource centres.
Further resource centres
(3) The Authority may establish in the Atlantic Provinces such further resource centres as are deemed necessary by the Authority and approved by the governors in council of the Atlantic Provinces.
Approval of plan
(4) All plans and specifications for each resource centre shall be submitted by the province establishing the same to each of the other Atlantic Provinces for approval before entering into any construction agreement or undertaking. R.S., c. 194, s. 7.
Subsequent to the 1975 act the building at 5722 University Avenue was demolished and replaced by a new school building in 1983 and several years later a residence located at 1949 South Street in Halifax.
Under the (APSEA) agreement all real and personal property possessed by the Inter-provincial School for the Deaf, and the Halifax School for the Blind, and that possessed by committees or boards relating to the schools was turned over to Nova Scotia to be used for the benefit of the Authority. Under the Handicapped Persons Act provisions were also made through monies in trust for the pensions of retiring teachers from the two schools and for Deaf-blind children. Liabilities for all debts and obligations of the two schools were transferred to the province of Nova Scotia under the act
Recognition by Other Provinces
The province of New Brunswick formally recognizes the Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority in the 1990 “Schools Act”
Under the act “handicapped persons” means a person who;
(a) is handicapped visually or aurally,
(b) has a related or associated handicap, or
(c) is handicapped as determined by an agreement referred to in paragraph 8(1)(b); R.S., c. S- 5.1, p. 1
8(1) The Minister, with the approval of the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, may enter into agreements
(b) with any province for the joint establishment and operation of special education authorities, resource centres, programs and services for the education of handicapped persons, and may confirm, ratify, alter and amend any agreement provided for under the Education of Aurally or Visually Handicapped Persons Act,…” Have to site her. This than makes reference to the agreement signed in 1975 between the four Atlantic Provinces for the establishment of (APSEA). R.S., c. S-5. 1, p. 80
I was unable to find any reference to the Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority in either of the education acts of Prince Edward Island or Newfoundland. My initial findings were later confirmed in a brief discussion I had with Arnold Joans, Superintendent of (APSEA).And according to The Special Education Information Sharing Project Summary of Responses Report prepared by the CMEC Secretariat in March 1989.
There are a number of acts and regulations, currently under review, which have implications for or pertain exclusively to exceptional students.” In particular parts of the Newfoundland “Schools Act” (I could not find any consolidation of the Newfoundland “Schools Act”).
Organizational Structure of (APSEA)
The organizational structure of APSEA, it’s sub committees, and other related staff can be found in Appendix A.
28 Employees 1. All persons employed by the board who are not eligible to make contributions to the Nova Scotia Teachers Pension fund shall
(a) be classified in their duties and responsibilities by the board in accordance with classifications established by the Nova Scotia Civil Service Commission for persons having similar duties and responsibilities who are employed in the Civil Service of Nova Scotia.
(b) be compensated for their services at the same rates as are established under the Nova Scotia Civil Service Act for civil servants employed in similar classifications
(c) otherwise be employed by the board on the same terms and conditions relating to working hours, sickness benefits, vacation benefits and leave of absence benefits as are applicable to such civil servants employed in similar classifications.
2. In any case where the board considers that it is not practical or not in the public interest that subsection (1) shall apply to any person or persons mentioned therein the board may exclude such person or persons in whole or in part from the operation of sub-section (1) and employ the person or persons on such terms and conditions as it deems advisable.
All teachers employed by (APSEA) have an agreement between the minister of education for the province of Nova Scotia and the Nova Scotia Teacher’s Union regardless of the province in which they work.Provisions for the employment of teachers are set forth in section (29) of the (APSEA) regulations
29 Teachers (1) All persons employed by the board who are eligible to make contributions to the Nova Scotia Teachers Pensions funds shall
(a) be certified by the registrar department of education province of Nova Scotia inn accordance with the skeme of certification prescribed in the regulations made pursuant to section (3) of the Nova Scotia Education Act.
(b) be compensated for their services at rates of salary not less than the scales of teachers salaries paid by the board of school commissioners of the city of Halifax to teachers employed by the school board and
(c) otherwise be employed by the board on such terms and conditions as the board deems advisable.
(2) Not withstanding sub-section (1) On or immediately before the first day of March 1975 a person who was permanently employed as a teacher by the Board of Directors of the Inter-provincial School for the Education of the Deaf or by the Board of Managersof the Halifax School for the Blind, the board may continue to employ the person on the same terms and conditions respecting salary and other benefits as were previously enjoyed by the person.
According to Ruth Kimmins the Residence Counsellors working at (APSEA-RCHI) IN Amherst belong to the Nova Scotia Governments Employees Union. However, the residence Counsellors at (APSEA-RCVI) do not have a union but receive all of the benefits. As stated in the above regulations non teaching staff follow the Civil Service Guidelines.
Programs and Services
Section (12) of the Handicapped Persons Education Act sets for the responsibilities of the parent and the superintendent of Schools in relation to child placement, and/or transportation.
12 (1) The parent or guardian of every person considered to be a handicapped person shall notify the superintendent of schools serving the area in which the person resides of the name, address and age of such handicapped person.
Duties of superintendent of schools
(2) The superintendent of schools upon receipt of a notice under subsection (1) shall
(a) immediately arrange for an educational assessment of the handicapped person;
(b) notify the Authority of the name, address and age of such person;
(c) recommend placement of such person in a suitable educational program in the school district in which he resides if it is available and notify the parent or guardian of the handicapped person of such placement; and
(d) if no suitable educational program is available handicapped in the school district in which the person resides, have the circumstances of the handicapped person brought to the attention of the chairman of the school board for the municipal unit in which the handicapped person resides so that a request may be made to the Board for admission to a resource centre or enrolment in a program of the Board or some other suitable educational provision can be made by the Board.
Transportation and notice of provision of education
(3) The Board shall notify the parent or guardian of a handicapped person and the superintendent of schools in which he resides of the admission of such handicapped person to its resource centre or the enrolment in its program or the educational provision made and, if transportation is required to effect the same, the school board for the municipal unit in which the handicapped person resides shall make such arrangements as are necessary to provide for such transportation and pay the cost thereof. R.S., c. 194, s.12.
Another avenue for referral or placement might fall under “Duties of teachers” s. 54. (i) of the “education act of Nova scotia S54. (i) report to the inspector as promptly as possible the names of children who, from defective sight, hearing or other physical or mental condition, are incapable of receiving effective instruction in public school; R.S., c. 136, s.54.
The first question which one should consider is who is eligible for services through (APSEA)?
The board shall admit to it’s resource centres or enrol in its’ programs, or make other suitable educational provision for any handicapped person resident in the atlantic province who has been recommended by the school board responsible for providing educational services for that person if a request for admission or enrolment has been made by the chairman of the school board of the municipal unit in which the handicapped person resides. R.S., c. 194, S. 11(1)
Handicapped Canadians from outside the Atlantic Provinces may also benefit from the services and programs of (APSEA) provided the payment is received in advance by the Authority. The board can also accept persons over the age of twenty-one years of age again providing that the cost of education and care are received. It should be noted that in the resource centres there are some persons with very severe handicaps other than visual or hearing impairment this group would benefit most from such a provision.However, the board does not have to admit such persons to the resource centre if suitable educational provision is available in their school district. This reaffirms the principal of primary district responsibility for the education of handicapped persons.
The school districts are recognized as having the responsibility for the education of the school age population. This is where the integration aspect of apsea comes into play. There are approximately 900 children integrated into the public school system who benefit from the services of (APSEA). (Appendix B – enrolment statistics 1984/1990).
Conceptual Models
There are conceptually two models through which (APSEA) must operate “The Centralized [APSEA model serving Nova Scotia and New Brunswick”. This model is comprised of two resource Centres [APSEA-RCHI] and [APSEA-RCVI] the hubs providing core staff and services.
“Both resource centres operate complex residential and teaching programmes, and thus include on a central campus a Cadre of individuals with highly specialized technical and teaching skills as well as specialized equipment and materials and a variety of resource services.”
b. “Outreach staff are hired by, and belong to [APSEA] and are supervised by and report to [APSEA] staff.”
c. “The resource centres and their staff provide the professional base or family for outreach staff.”
d. “The resource centres collaborate with each province in planning the out reach services and supply administrative direction and logistical support an infrastructure for the operation of the system.”
e. “Direct cost of outreach services [salaries, travel materials Etc.] as well as administrative costs are recovered from the province in which the services are provided.”
f. “The [APSEA] policy relating to [APSEA] teachers working in local schools, especially day class teachers, has been clearly stated by the resource centres and expects teachers to play a full part in the professional routines of the school [E.G. taking their share of duties, participating in extra curricular activities, attending meetings etc.”
“The Newfoundland model, by contrast is administratively more decentralized at the outreach [itinerant] teachers hired by the local school boards. Because of the low density of the population distribution in Newfoundland and the complex nature of the public Educational system and a proliferation small school boards an itinerant teacher is likely to have to serve several school boards. Funding for the positions is provided by the departments of education which thus exerts fiscal and administrative control of the system. For teachers of the visually impaired there is a position of consultant at the department level. In the case of teachers of the hearing impaired there is not an equivalent position.at the department level.Instead the school for the Deaf which is also operated by the department of education carries out through its principle some, but not all of the functions of provincial consultant and/or coordinator. Thus it serves as a professional [technical breakup was the description of the principle] for teachers of the hearing impaired in the sense of a logical source of professional help, advice and stimulation. And in the case of teachers in the St. John’s area it has a more direct role in the administration and supervision of their work.
Provincial Differences – Hearing and Visually Impaired
“In Newfoundland hearing-impaired are primarily served not by [APSEA] but rather by the Newfoundland School for the Deaf and by local arrangements funded by the Department of Education and administered by the school boards.
In Prince Edward Island there is a provincial programme for hearing-impaired children which is housed in public schools and includes Itinerant and Consultative arrangements for hearing impaired children in all areas of the province as well as support from [APRCHH]
In New Brunswick [up to 1987] local services for hearing impaired children – pre-school Itinerant,in classes were part of the outreach services of [APRCHH] funded and administered by [APSEA] and were available for both anglophone and francophone children. Currently the responsibility for the delivery and administration of the local services for Francophone children has been assumed by the Department of Education and school districts. with support services from [APRCHH]. Services for anglophone children are however, still being operated by the [APSEA]. [APRCHH] also provides a provincial residential facility for New Brunswick Anglophone hearing-impaired anglophone children.
In Nova Scotia hearing impaired children are served through the [APSEA] outreach programme and as in New Brunswick [APRCHH] is the principal residential facility for hearing impaired children.
Arrangements for the local outreach services for visually impaired children are also somewhat different in each of the four Atlantic Provinces. Newfoundland employs a consultant for the visually impaired and the department of education and itinerant teachers at the local school board district level. Newfoundland also draws upon consultants SUPPORT from [APRCVI]. Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick [up to 1987] have been included in the outreach arrangement administered by [APSEA]. As in the case of hearing impaired pupils responsibility for the delivery and administration of local services for francophone visually impaired children in New Brunswick has been taken over by the Department of Education and school districts with support services from [APRCVI]. Outreach services for anglophone visually impaired children continue to be provided by [APSEA].
In 1987 as the Kendall review was being produced the province of New Brunswick assumed total responsibility for services to visually and hearing impaired Francophone children although consultative arrangementS exists through (APSEA).
The Atlantic Special Education Authority has several components which enable it to provide a number of services to children with a variety of educational requirements. Services are offered through resource Centres, outreach services, itinerant and tutorial services. The degree of service provision as I have already stated in this paper varies from province to province with Nova Scotia and New Brunswick utilizing the total spectrum of programs and services. There are those who may ask “Why, if there is one educational authority do we need separate resource Centres and outreach services? Common sense and special education experience as the following quote demonstrates provide the answer to this question.
” … But over the past years the experience of APRC/visually Impaired along with other public educational administrations in north america has clearly demonstrated that visually impaired children of normal intelligence and without other educationally significant handicaps can be successfully integrated academically with non-handicapped peers in public school settings provided that adequate support systems are in place and the attitudes of school staff are positive. By contrast, in the regular school system hearing impaired children, particularly those with severe hearing impairments, not only encounter difficulty with personal oral communication within the classroom, and with their peers because speech is not an efficient means of communication for them. But far more than this it is their difficulties with mastering the vocabulary and syntax of verbal language. which creates the greatest educational handicap and requires long careful and skilled teaching before they can begin to gain access to, let alone master the aspects of curriculum that in our schools are formulated and presented in ways that assume pupils start with and continue to develop a sophisticated knowledge of the mother tongue. For many severely profoundly hearing impaired pupils these difficulties cannot simply be fixed up by placement in regular classes supported by the provision of tutors and interpreters. The majority of these students need what is in effect a revamped curriculum at all grade level. One that recognises and addresses deaf children’s difficulties in achieving even a minimal standard of literacy and utilizes teaching methods that exploit and capitalize upon pupils true cognitive potential.”
Commonalities in Service Provision
It should be noted for purposes of clarification that there has been a name change in the designations of the two resource centre. Initially they were: “Atlantic Provinces Resource Centre for the Hearing Handicapped” (APRCHH) and “Atlantic Provinces Resource Centre for the Visually Impaired” (APRCVI). Their names have now been changed to “Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority – Resource Centre for the Hearing Impaired” (APSEA-RCHI and “Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority – Resource Centre for the Visually Impaired” (APRCVI).
The following quotation taken from the (APSEA) booklet describes some services and terms common to both visually and hearing impaired populations.
Preschool Population
In addition to programs and services for school age children and youth, APSEA offers a preschool program. A preschool teacher or parent educator assists parents, guardians, preschool and daycare personnel to provide appropriate preschool experiences and learning opportunities for visually and hearing impaired children. The program emphasis is on the social,emotional and intellectual development of the children. The preschool itinerant/parent educator provides consultation to, and liaises with, other professionals involved with the preschool child.
Staffing
Consultant Teacher of the visually Impaired/Supervisor of
provincial for the hearing impaired the Consultant/advisor supervises all APSEA Off campus programs for visually and hearing impaired children (0 21). The Consultant/Supervisor provides consultation to school board personnel, principals, teachers, and parents to help them meet the needs of visually and heard impaired children and youth.
Itinerant Teacher
The itinerant teacher is responsible to the provincial consultant/ supervisor and resides in the area being served. The itinerant teacher provides support services for local education programs and personnel. Support services include direct instruction in compensatory skills required to accommodate a visual or hearing
loss, and the development of an awareness of the implications of visual impairment and hearing impairment.
Tutor
A tutor provides support services for local education programs. The tutor, under the supervision of the consultant/supervisor and/or the itinerant teacher, worD directly with the pupil to reinforce specific skills.
Day Class Teacher
The day class teacher is responsible to the provincial supervisor in carrying out the educational program as approved by the Resource Centre for pupils assigned to the class.
Paraprofessional Staff
Staff may be assigned to day classes to assist day class teachers with specific pupils.
Services Currently Available to Hearing Impaired Children
On Campus Programs
The on campus Academic programme consist of a continuous progress program following Nova Scotia Curriculum although in some cases the curriculum is modified to facilitate reading and language ability. Students who are able to achieve successful completion of the on campus program are placed in Amherst Regional highschool with the assistance of an interpreter and are fully integrated into the regular high school program. Other on campus academic programs include the fear on unit for deaf-blind students, special classes, and the pre vocational training co op program. This vocational training program involves older students and can utilize the Atlantic Provinces Vocational Training Centre (ATVC) facilities.
Co operative placements can be provided both on and off campus.
These placements are tied into vocational assessments. of the students – periodic vocational assessments which can take from 4 to 5 days to conduct. (APSEA-RCHI) have a number of sample work stations and other assessment tools that assist in determining career aptitude and goals.
(APSEA-RCHI) currently assesses students periodically throughout there educational program tying the information received from the vocational assessments into the overall educational program. Career exploration is carried out through THE co operative education program with the hope that by the time the student reaches highschool he/she has a possible career goal.
Parent Participation
According to David Tingley, Supervisor of Off Campus Services for Nova Scotia, most if not all hospitals in the Atlantic Provinces have high risk screening programs for detection of hearing loss in children. It would be at this point that involvement with (APSEA-RCHI) occurs. APRCHI will intervene in terms of the child’s education whatever the age at the point of diagnosis.
(APSEA-RCHI) has since 1989, a parent education centre. where a part-time parent-educator, and a full-time co ordinator are available to parents. Parents can accompany their newly diagnosed children to the (APSEA-RCHI) and spend a week at the resource Centre. This enables them to become familiar with the facilities, programs, and staff.
A parent association has also been established and has become a very active group involved in a variety of activities
Since 1974 a joint MED program through (APSEA-RCHI) and the University des Moncton has been graduating teachers of the Deaf.
Off Campus Services
I inquired as to the current position of (APSEA-RCHI) in relation to the use of Oral versus Total Communication methods as mediums of communication for deaf children. according to Mr. Tingley (APSEA-RCHI) now provides parents with information regarding both forms of communication allowing them to make their own decisions.
Several levels of support are available to hearing impaired students in a total integration setting. The first level of students can receive services such as teacher consultation, amplification equipment for those who require it. The second level of students might require FM systems (a duel unit device comprising a transmitter which is warn by the teacher, and a receiver warn by the hard-of-hearing student. The hearing-aid picks up the signal from the receiver), plus notetaking. The third Level involves direct service with Itinerant teachers Consultation FM equipment. Direct service is provided by the teachers of the deaf and there is also remedial tutoring.
In areas where itinerant teachers are not available (APSEA) hires tutors who meet with the itinerant teachers on a regular basis to plan instructional direction and strategies.
For students who are integrated into the regular school system There are annual placement meetings with the school boards. The purpose of these meetings is to discuss how particular students are progressing in there districts. Agreements are made as to Individualized Education programs (IEP) program for the following year. Included in these meetings are school board representatives, APSEA, and the parents of the child under discussion.
A recently adopted service is the provision of an Educational Assistant – Interpreter in the high school. The Criteria for this service is that the youth must be linguistically functional at a level enabling them to cope with regular high school level material. The service is Presently available to students in grades ten through twelve the service was first offered in New Brunswick in 1989 and as of this year is now available in Nova Scotia. For those students receiving interpreter service there is a consultant of Interpreter services who meets with the interpreters four times a year providing in service and consultative services to the school. Efforts are also being made at the high school level to expose students to positive role models. In the past they have hired a deaf person to discus deaf culture and teach sign language. Current Services to Visually impaired
On Campus Services
Over the past ten to fifteen years the vast majority of visually impaired children have been integrated into the regular public school system. This is in large part because generally speaking the regular academic programs do not need to be significantly altered. It is the provision of outreach services and technical aids that enable visually impaired children to interact to interact successfully with their academic environment. Thus the population using the residential facility has changed considerably placing more emphasis on accommodating those children who are multi-handicapped for which vision is only one disability. Therefore there are special classes for children who are developmentally delayed, located on campus. There also a number of children who are severely mobility impaired requiring very specialized care.
A variety of core services which are conducted at the (APSEA-RCVI) resource centre impact directly on children relying on the outreach services.
The transcription of textbooks into Braille is a vital service provided to the minority of visually impaired students who are Braille users. Braille production is both costly and time consuming. Braille instruction for children can be provided directly at the resource centre or in the regular school system by itinerant teachers. And in 1992 it will become mandatory for all teachers working with the visually impaired to learn Braille. As a Braille user I am encouraged by this long overdue policy change. (APSEA-RCVI) also provides children with all materials in large print or taped format.
Children are periodically brought into the resource centre for assessment in the use of a variety of technical aids. The type of aid provided will depend upon the childs’ use of vision, grade level, and aptitude. Devices include a variety of Brailling equipment, large print and speech accessible Lap top computers, Closed Circuit television Systems (CCTV)s and other forms of magnification equipment. Technical aids are provided to visually impaired children in the public school system based on these assessments. Itinerant teachers are periodically trained in the use of these devices.
A Co-operative Education Program provides opportunities to blind and visually impaired; visually impaired multi-handicapped children to received work placements. The work placements are integrated into their general educational programs.
An annual event “Career Week” has been taking place over the past several years. Under this program pupils are brought in from the four Atlantic Provinces to the resource centre and are given a variety of lectures and exposure to career opportunities.
Conclusion
In writing this paper I had a difficult choice to make, should I take the philosophical or the practical approach. I hope that mine has been the practical. One thing rings through loud and clear however in both the 1973 and the 1987 Kendall reports. The overriding concern of the committee was the need for a consolidated and structurally sound special education program in Atlantic Canada for “Children with “low-incidence handicaps”. Further the four governments of the Atlantic Provinces should be commended for both their foresight and there continued commitment to this most unique special education system.
The Kendall report stresses the importance of insuring ongoing communications with parents and other concerned groups. Again and again the report expressed the need for more direct input from parents and consumers. It does appear that some progress has been made in this area. I am informed that there is now parent representation on the “Program Advisory Committees” of (APSEA-RCHI) and (APSEA-RCVI). The second report also stress the need for closer links with the district school boards. They are now also represented on the Program Advisory Committees. District School board representatives now meet with (APSEA) personnel and parents of hearing impaired children to map out education programs and strategies for children in their school districts. Parents are also consulted on a regular basis in relation to the progress of their visually impaired children. These are important aspects in that they force the authority to be accountable for there actions and as well hopefully force the parents to take responsibility for the welfare of their handicapped children.
Perhaps one of the most glaring problems lies in the area of service expansion which relates back to economics. At present the current budget of (APSEA) is approximately eighteen million dollars covering all related expenses. In terms of already existing services it has been suggested that there is a need to expand the current services provided to Learning Disabled (LD) children. At present less than a one hundred L.D. children are funded through (APSEA) to attend special schools such as Land Mark East.
(APSEA-RCVI) as yet does not have a joint degree program for the certification of teachers of the visually impaired. There have over the years been courses offered through Dalhousie but no formalized degree granting program.
Another issue endorsed by in the 1987 report is the need to include other “low-incidence handicaps” under the jurisdiction of (APSEA). For example, I recently received a call from an individual working in a district school board concerning a youth with a motor disability who, for reason of spastic movement had great difficulty reading print textbooks. However, because he was not a member of the “low-incidence handicapped” group served by (APSEA) he could not acquire the book he needed. What should one do for these children. Should the district School board record the books when needed. This is both a waist of manpower and a needless duplication of resources. Fortunately I was able to get him the book through another library service taking responsibility for the book myself. A representative from the district school board was very appreciative. I do not in any way suggest that it is the fault of the people working within the system. In my professional capacity as a vocational rehabilitation counsellor I have found myself in a similar position having to discriminate against a subgroup of persons because they do not meet the “Criteria” for service so they must do without. However, it may not change the fact of the existence of the disability. But my own experience raises some interesting questions?
1. Does the denial of materials to a person with a handicapped other than those specified in the “Handicapped Persons Act” by (APSEA) constitute discrimination?
2. The district school board has the primary responsibility of providing educational services to children in their district. If they fail to provide the needed material is this a form of discrimination by the district school board?
The 1987 report states that up to that time there had been no cases of mal-practice launched against a school board or educator based on “Learning Outcome.” To my knowledge this is still the case.
3. Could a mal-practice suit be launched on the grounds of “learning outcome” because of denial of access to materials necessary for the learning process to take place?
4. Because the school board is ultimately responsible for a persons who falls into a category of disability not covered through (APSEA) does the claim that they cannot acquire the needed material through the authority excuse their obligation to provide the needed materials to the students?
Dr. Kendall, in his 1987 report points out that because of the charter of Rights and Freedoms, and expanding Human Rights legislation that there is a need for a clear policy by (APSEA) regarding the procedural rights of parents, children, and staff. He goes on to suggest that close attention should be paid to the documentation of educational programs and that such individualized programs should be reviewed and updated annually. (APSEA) now has a policy manual which relate to these issues and the manual is periodically up-dated. I must confess that time constraints did not permit me to discuss policy.
December 17, 1991