http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1285311—dyslexic-boy-was-discriminated-against-by-b-c-school-district-supreme-court

Ah, but its a victory of momentous proportions. Think of what SQE, the associations dealing with children’s learning issues, the private concerns in tutoring, and the developers of reading, writing and numeracy programs can do to advance the case of preventive learning problems, a solid foundation in the 3 Rs, and the data streams that state staying the status-quo of whole language, no spelling or grammar, lousy curriculum makes for high costs in society and the personal lives of children who struggled.

I think SQE is in a very unique position, with political and social capital that can be used to advance the case of choice and alternative education avenues. The noise from the public education stakeholders, are quite revealing in their comments. I would say walking a fine line between showing their true bias colours of what they truly think about the capabilities of students with weak reading, writing, and numeracy skills. Quite frankly, from my own experiences, they are educating children according to the SES income ladder and funding as well. A child whose parent is a lawyer, will likely received the help at school, the cooperation from the school, and more importantly, parents of the professional classes willing to give the school a free pass, and paid out the private monies to address their children learning weaknesses. How neat it was, it took a father who was is a bus driver. That itself, has told the public education system who likes to bill themselves as professionals and experts, they can no longer educate by the social-income rankings. Or any other SES variables, concerning children with disabilities. And there is no excuse considering the science and advances in the research when it comes down to the education of all children, to reach their full potential.

But you right on one thing - it will be an uphill battle. Toronto seems to be one leading the charge on staying the status-quo.

In one Globe and Mail article - “The court appears to have been blind to the practical effects of its ruling. How could those effects be anything but massive after the court perhaps unwittingly defined adequacy, or ?meaningful access? to education, in a way that few if any school boards meet? ?Realistically, we don?t have the supports we need in every single school,? a Toronto principal said after the ruling, mentioning a lack of psychologists, social workers and special-needs assistants.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/editorials/supreme-court-ruling-on-special-education-opens-pandoras-box/article5169193/

The excuses are starting to come, for what is the denial of education services of corrective remediation in the 3 Rs.

From coast to coast, the SE children in the public schools are denied consistently the remediation in the 3 Rs. Eighty percent of the SE children are mild to moderate, and even though each are different in their weaknesses, all remediation can be targeted to meet the individual concerns. For the Moore boy he was offered a desk, to sit and colour but not the tools to access the curriculum.

In the next paragraph, the would be professionals of naysayers, uses the old trick employed on a daily basis of what they have done for their students. Making dumb-down, second class education offerings, look like a quality education that is more than what other kids are receiving. In reality, a grand baby-sitting service where the kids don’t progress. “The court would have a case if Jeffrey Moore?s special needs had been ignored, but they emphatically were not; he received half-hour, one-on-one sessions three times a week with a learning assistance teacher, and two 40-minute sessions with a volunteer tutor, in Grade 1. A psychologist later recommended he receive more intensive help at a special centre run by the North Vancouver school district. But then the district closed the centre. “

The data streams and the research data tells the real story on the state of education. And in it, its not the SES variables, but the education policies, practices, instruction and curriculum. Add the big one, the teacher training - who are not given the training in reading, writing or numeracy - and the outcomes is educating by the social-income ladder, downloading the responsibilities unto the parents, while the public education calls it a day at last bell, to chew the fat on improving motivation for their students.

At the bottom of the article, the number one excuse, used every year - ” It makes the court?s unanimous ruling more out of touch that the boy?s public education unfolded between 1991 and 1994, during and after a recession marked by across-the-board restraint, and finally, the overcoming of Canada?s deficit. Many political choices went into those years, and similar choices await today; governments, accountable to voters, should be the ones making those choices. The court overstepped its authority.”

Often times it’s not a lack of training that keeps students from getting the services they deserve. Last year, I taught grade 4 and had 30 students, 15 of whom had learning disabilities. I am a trained resource teacher with years of experience and a masters degree. I knew how to help those children but it was not physically possible for me to do so. In order to help one, I had to ignore another. When one succeeded, 14 others (not to mention the other 15 so called average students in the class) waited. People who say classroom size doesn’t matter have never been in a classroom. It was painful and futile. I ended up on sick leave and have since taken a leave absence.

Hello journalists.  Why aren’t you doing any sort of in depth investigative reporting about the state of curricula for ld children or the qualifications of teachers who are supposed to be teaching these kids.  Where’s the CBC?  Where’s Steve Paikin.  He makes over 250 K/annum, funded in part by taxpayers plus summers off.  Is he that busy?

You can read the court decision here:  http://scc.lexum.org/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/12680/1/document.do

I’m not a lawyer, but it sounds to me like the outcomes of this decision are more likely to be perverse than helpful.  Employees of the school district TOLD the family that their son needed intensive intervention, and that seems to be a big part of the decision.  I’m guessing that the cone of silence is going to be strict policy.

“The Tribunal found that the family was told by District employees that J required intensive remediation. As a result of the closing of the Diagnostic Centre, a private school was the only alternative that would provide the intense remediation that J required….  It was the combination of the clear recognition by the District, its employees and the experts that J required intensive remediation in order to have meaningful access to education, the closing of the Diagnostic Centre, and the fact that the family was told that these services could not otherwise be provided by the District, that justified the Tribunal?s conclusion that the failure of the District to meet J?s educational needs constituted prima facie discrimination.”

Yes, where are the experience teachers who know a thing or two about reading, writing and numeracy. And even know a few terms like dyslexia, and the problems associated with it.

It has been my experience, they disappeared into the woodwork, when it comes to confronting the school and school board administrators. Sometimes they are complicit in preventing and delaying remediation of the students. And in a lot of IEP meetings, they remain quiet. Probably don’t want to get fire, like the teacher in Alberta handing out zeroes to his students. I can’t wait till I bumped into the local teachers who actually has the training for dyslexia, and they paid it themselves. Trouble down here, once the child improves, it is taken away from them. And they go back to the inclusive classroom, never progressing and the fear of regressing. School board doesn’t want to provide it. Claims that it is not effective. Where are the teachers? 

I like that suggestion Bev? Toronto Star is the worst one at the moment compared to the NP. And the Toronto Star had done an investigation series back in 2007. At least they could have reported no change in Ontario and at the biggest school board, Toronto. Last week Kidder was on Canada A.M., putting her two cents into parent-teacher interviews. Apparently parents gossips to the teachers and should rather be asking questions. Than came the patronizing lines of preparing 3 questions in advance within the allotted time frame of 10 minutes. Its gotten worse, because back in the 80s, I never had to wait, nor was I pushed out, nor was I talked down to, as if I did not have two brain cells to rub together. Attitudes really have to change, when it comes to parents and students and how they are treated by the ones packing an education degree.Kidder doesn’t help and by the way P4E doesn’t have the biggest news of 2012 on the site either. Not even in the latest news. I guess P4E will be revising their advice that is on the site for the SE parents. A lot of it leads to dead end streets and heartache for parents. Besides on the edge of discrimination.

It is a lot more than what Teacher has stated. And then again, it has a lot to do with it, but that is part of the systemic discrimination that is occurring inside the public education system. The Supreme Court ruling link, provides a sound reason for it, but the good news, the Supreme Court left it wide open for the Canadian class actions suits, where the only conclusion a judge can arrive at - systemic discrimination across the country, every nook and cranny, no matter rural to urban. It is why this is the biggest news and now has become the biggest opportunity for choice and alternative education pathways and more importantly, the public education systems across Canada will have to change.

I tend to agree with Nancy on this one.  The Supremes have opened the door wide enough to encourage the first major “contingency fee” class action suits to start forming. Look for the newspaper ads within the next 12 months…it will only take a couple of these actions to stir utter terror into all corners of the institutional education business. A very big crowbar has been delivered, now we will have to wait to see who picks it up.

I’m confident that the celebration in this case is earned.

Firstly, this case took way too long to process.

Secondly, we have a post here by “teacher” someone who by their own account is able to help the special needs students but can’t, listing the reasons, but we’re not listening.

Thirdly, I know of a family in Ontario who have a disable son who the system admitted it could not educate. The parents fought and won their case very quickly and the system paid to have the parents send their son to a school of their choice which could help the boy.

Finally, I’m with Malkin on this one. Not too much will change in the greater scheme of things.

Oh and as for media covering education issues. Boring as hell on the best days and too predictable at other times. Nothing too much new and out of the box wrapped in language that stands out among the hundreds of other newsy items media have to choose from.

Good education news for parents and students doesn’t sell papers, viewership or listeners.

Conflict and doom and gloom does.

I agree Frank.I`m also sorry to see how Malkin handled this incredible victory in her memo.When else have we ever seen a school board have to pay a family for neglect in teaching a child to read,this will be a massive step forward.

Tom,the psychologists and speech pathologists identify kids like this in droves and put in recommendations,too bad the business of identification is so huge and costly when the grade 1 teacher could have set these 10 kids need help fast.The IEP`s are written,then begins the injury to the parent and child,the neglect is entrenched-the IEP provides the excuse for the child falling behind and other than the IEP they don`t really do anything for them.Cancer in special ed,may I mention 90 percent of students in SE have language processing difficulties as the core problem.Educational malpractice.

Frank, a crow bar - a good term to use. I envision it being used this way. In the court ruling - ““Adequate special education is not a dispensable luxury,” Justice Rosalie Abella wrote in the unanimous decision. “For those with severe learning disabilities, it is the ramp that provides access to the statutory commitment to education made to all children in British Columbia.”
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dailybrew/supreme-court-decision-favour-dyslexic-b-c-student-224858176.html

It is all about the ramp. Where does the ramp go? To the highway of learning. How does one get on the ramp? The fundamentals of reading, writing and numeracy.

Where are the students with learning issues? Have been banned, kicked off, or spinning their wheels at the side of ramp, or still on the ramp, but stuck in a traffic jam. I remember back in 2004 or so, a conversation that lasted two months or on the American LD forum, of a describing the journeys of the LD students before and after being identified as LD. Than the autism and ADHD and the non-verbal folks joined in. We ended up realizing how many students are off the ramp, spinning their wheels on the ramp but none of the kids are making it to the highway of learning. Far too many traffic cops, inspectors patrolling the ramp, preventing students from reaching the highway of learning. And for the few that do reach the highway of learning, they are followed by a new set of traffic cops, who don’t like slow pokes, speeders, or anyone that goes differing speeds other than the posted speed limit. Why? That would be unfair and give unfair advantage.  No more or no less. The traffic cops on the highway of learning have no problem seeing who the students are, because the students have labels in bright neon lights.

What starts off as low percentages being off the ramp in the beginning of school, by high school, there is approximately   60 percent that have joined the students off the ramp, on the ramp and the students with the bright neon lights trying to make it on the highway of learning. The other part that emerges, which would be different for all students, is the moving forward one step, and being driven back by the traffic cops two steps backwards. Many different versions.

The Supreme Court justices has now given all students a crow bar. The traffic cops will no longer have the ability to kick off students off the ramp, pushed them back on the ramp and the students on the highway of learning can smash the bright neon lights.

The ramp is all about access to the skills and tools of reading, writing and numeracy. The highway of learning is all about improving the reading, writing and numeracy levels as one travels learning new knowledge that will lead to full potential. The Supreme Court has now told the traffic cops (the public education system), reading, writing and numeracy are the top priorities. They are no longer allow to sideline students by not allowing them the tools and skills of the 3 Rs. If they don’t, they are discriminating, just like when the school does not offer wheel-chair access based on undue financial hardship.

“But as Abella wrote, the issue is not whether a student like Jeffrey is entitled to this or that special program but his right to an access ramp to the education that is the right of all children.
“If (Jeffrey) is compared only to other special needs students, full consideration cannot be given to whether he had meaningful access to the education to which all students in British Columbia are entitled,” Abella wrote. “This risks perpetuating the very disadvantage and exclusion the (Human Rights) Code is intended to remedy.”
As Dalhousie University law professor A. Wayne MacKay told the Globe: “In my opinion, this may be the most important human-rights case in the last decade or so.”

I should not be hearing anymore of the mumbo-jumbo coming from the local school board and school administrators, stating no alternative setting, giving reasons based on bias and discrimination. It has been a long journey starting off spending some years off the ramp, spending another number of years on the ramp and the last few years moving forward on the highway of learning, only to be pushed back to the end of the line.

I have them cold. The real reason why the school and school board is not approving alternative accommodation, is the expense of hiring one more examiner for the public exams, to babysit one sole student. Just one, out of the labeled ones at the high school, who made it to the highway of learning, and was punished by the traffic cops, by taking away the accommodations, and pretend that she does not have a reading disorder that was never corrected by the traffic cops.

Oh by the way, how do parents fit in?  Some will use the crow bars and put them to good use. The traffic cops…..boy oh boy, will I have a fun time raising up the spoken words of the past of the traffic cops. They really do hold bigoted opinions of children and their abilities. Especially when they do not give the tools and skills of the fundamentals in reading, writing and numeracy, and start kicking off the students off the ramp starting in grade 1. I don’t need to be told how hard it was to get my child on the ramp, and stay there, without the support of the traffic cops, who was always looking for a reason to kick my child off the ramp.

Over on ARCH - “The school cannot simply say, ?this is what we will offer the student?.  The Court has clearly stated that school boards must make a full assessment of all the alternatives that could be available in accommodating the needs of students with disabilities.? As Michael Bach, Executive Vice-President of CACL has stated, ?Special education has been a ?dead end? for far too many students with disabilities.  This judgment makes it clear once and for all.  The real test of special education services is whether they provide the ?ramp? to educational services to which all children are entitled.  And, as required under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, such services must, by definition, be inclusive.  Special education has to be designed to make that happen for all.?

For the Moore boy and my child, it was the simple, traditional access to the tools of reading, writing and numeracy. Instead, dumb-down work….and being kicked off the ramp.

“More than a burst dam is needed”

That’s what Malkin entitled this post.

We’ve witnessed court victories before. What’s changed?

We can hope that this puts a spark in parents and students and scares off the usual suspects but reality tells me Malkin’s more in-line than you’d like to believe.

Chuck, that was said about the Moores when he started out, and throughout the processes of court, and even up to the last day before the Supreme Court release it on Friday.

It is now discrimination. And it has been the working goal of the disability organizations for the last 30 years. The education system has been the target, because they have consistently discriminated from day one, with a list of excuses including undue financial hardship. Now they have to prove it.

” Laurie Larson, President of the CACL said ?Today is a watershed day for access to quality inclusive education in Canada.  The Supreme Court of Canada got it right.  It may be too late for many of our kids who are graduating from school this year and in the past.  But the direction to governments is unequivocal.  Special education in many parts of this country needs radical redesign.?  Michael Bach, Executive Vice-President said, ?Special education has been a ?dead end? for far too many students with disabilities.  This judgment makes it clear once and for all that children with disabilities are entitled to the educational supports they require to be fully included in school. The real test of special education services is whether they provide the ?ramp? to educational services to which all children are entitled.  And, as required under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, now ratified by Canada such services must, by definition and by law, be inclusive. All public education must be redesigned to ensure inclusion for all children in Canada.?

?The Moore family has been courageous in taking up the cause of a ensuring all students receive a quality public education.? says Faith Bodnar, Executive Director of the BC Association for Community Living. ?The Moores fought for fifteen years knowing that it would not impact their son, doing it on behalf of all students with special needs now and in the future. The public education system must be held accountable for how it meets the needs of students. We join CACL in applauding the decision of the Supreme Court in upholding the fundamental rights of students with special needs to access the supports they need to be fully included.?
http://www.bcacl.org/inclusive-education/whats-new/victory-supreme-court-canada-right-education

I think Malkin and others have underestimated the resolved of the organizations, the human rights lawyers, and the significance importance of the major changes that would have to be made within the public education system to abide by the legal parameters of the ruling.

IEPs will be followed for a change. And not like before, on the whims and wishes. For the first time, the SE parents will have a voice inside the school, that carries legal weight. The invisible disabilities will have a seat at the table at the school, and not regulated to the back of the line. Over the years, cuts have been made to software, and other remediation programs in favour of other measures that have little to do with the actual achievement of students. There will be one or two parents in every school, leading the charge and I do not doubt that for a moment. In the local school, there will be three, including myself. I have not talk to them, but it is ironic, because in the beginning they thought I was wrong. On ARCH - “The school cannot simply say, ?this is what we will offer the student?.”
http://www.archdisabilitylaw.ca/?q=supreme-court-canada-confirms-duties-school-board-meeting-needs-students-disabilities

And that my friends have been the crux of the problem for the last 30 years. What the school and the school board have been offering, is usually at the expense of the students, their futures and reaching their potential. The schools and school boards will no longer be able to do this.

All said, there have been compelling arguments supporting the flood gates opening up, and I sooo wish I could agree, but we have to remember that the politicians are on side with the psu’s.  Publically-run monopolies are very strong, and their bureaucrats seem to have ALL politicians in their pockets,(as well as CBC and Steve Paikin from TVO).  I think that the law suit which the Moore family bravely launched, has put a chink in the moe’s armour, but Goliath hasn’t fallen.  There will be more chinks, and, eventually Goliath will fall, but don’t hang by your thumbs; instead, just watch, and of course advocate for the benefit of innocent children and their futures.

As I had said in an earlier blog, where’s the media?  SQE is the only place where one can get unvarnished facts (in Canada, that is).  Why isn’t our media telling us the truth, and why aren’t they doing any real investigating?  Why do we have to rely on SQE, rather than our tax-supported networks, both national and provincial, to give us the facts?  Is this how our publically-funded news agencies handle ALL news coverage—with bias/propaganda?  Their refusal to present the public with the facts is swaying voters at the ballot box!  Do they care?  This may be a naive question, but who’s pulling their strings?

To sum it up, because the media does not jump into the fray and unrelentingly offer the facts, the failure of our educational system to educate our children is the media’s responsibility as much as the moe’s.  And, it’s going to take more than a single judicial ruling in the Moore family’s advantage to fall Goliath, but, in this case, I sure hope I’m wrong

Bev and others are correct to be cautious. The ruling has direct implications for SE students, where funding across the levels, cannot be cut without due consideration of the future implications and outcomes of the students with the SE labels.

However, it is at the school district level and not at the ministry level.

In any school district, across the country - SE standards are not set in stone. As a consequence, each school provides SE at different levels, different quality and different procedures. Where one school, is cheap, there is another school in the district providing SE at the highest level possible. At the school level, the first things to get cut are in special education. Another ploy, is to spend all the budget on the high-needs students that have physical disabilities and the rest of the SE students have to make do with far less. In the inclusive classroom, the expectations are lowered, and hence the colouring activities, dumb-down work, and low expectations is a given.

What is really perverse, is in the areas of technology, the software available, materials that aid in reading and writing, and other materials that are useful in learning. Below an example, that can be applied to all of the student population, but is very helpful for the struggling readers, and more so for the dyslexics.

The Reading Focus Card
http://www.focusandread.com/

It all depends on the school, its practices, the teachers and a principal’s belief systems. It has been my observation, the higher the income of the school, the likelihood of seeing such material as the reading focus cards or cognitive software. As for the low income school, the LD students will be lucky to have pencils, and a 1980 something tape recorder. And yes schools are still using them, for students to hear the audio of questions posed on exams. To save the time, money of having a teacher read it out, or providing the digital devices. A ruler, can be seen in the eyes of some schools, as the means to cheat. Therefore no rulers allowed.

There is no standards, and thus it helps to spread the misconceptions, biases on the needs of the SE students and more so for the LD students. The LD students costs are too much for the school to bear.  It never ceases to amaze me, dumb-down curriculum and watered-down programs cost too much? In reality, the school districts are delivering SE, where the costs are related to high-priced support staff and educators to delivered a dumb-down program that literally puts the children and more so the LD children at high risk for dropping out, suicide, and other high-risked activities in their adulthood and adolescent years.

In one comment - “Cutbacks of services for learning disability afflicted students in past years have screwed many. I taught at a college where many students couldn’t properly read and write. One very articulate and keen but dyslexic student told me the only “help” he got was being put in a slow learners’ class was regularly promoted as such. I expect 100s of cases at least will follow upon this ruling.”

Colleges and universities are dealing with the outcomes. Meanwhile the public education systems, and their PR machine are patting themselves for doing such a wonderful job. The media eats it all up, and the real stories are buried, steeped in the biases and misconceptions.

Below another comment, that my child also had to deal with. “New flash. Some parents won’t left their kids play with my normal daughter because her sister has a disability. It’s still happening.”
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1285311—dyslexic-boy-was-discriminated-against-by-b-c-school-district-supreme-court

Oh yes, still happening. For my child, other parents did not want their children hanging around my child, because my child was not smart, as their children.

Here is another common response, the courts are not experts. “The court is forcing an issue they’re not experts in (education). Read the book: Against Judicial Activism. It’s not if you like the decision that counts, it’s the process that counts. Also, this took place 20yrs ago, when we were less enlightened. Think about the implication of that. Did you do something 20yrs ago what was less than stellar?? This precedent is frightening in that context!!”

Ableism rears its ugly head.

The court ruling represents the first opening, to end the dumb-down education, put a dent into the ableism directed at the SE students, and more importantly end the lies to the high costs.  The media won’t be at all helpful, and are much more interested in doing investigated work on counting the number of bricks needed to build a school, instead of the outcomes of students. Inputs over outputs over outcomes.

“Chuck, that was said about the Moores when he started out, and throughout the processes of court, and even up to the last day before the Supreme Court release it on Friday.”

What was Nancy? Malkin’s post?
And please answer with more links and resources, I’ve been a parent in the system for 13 years and have the intelligence to look things up if I wish to.

“I think Malkin and others have underestimated the resolved of the organizations, the human rights lawyers, and the significance importance of the major changes that would have to be made within the public education system to abide by the legal parameters of the ruling. “

That comment alone is an example of why I believe that not too much will change at all. I hope I’m wrong but reality tells me that Malkin’s closer to the truth than we’d like to believe and wish for. 

Bev - you’re 100% correct in your post IMO…on a few fronts. 

“As I had said in an earlier blog, where?s the media? “

The Canadian media, up until recently is liberal media that stands with the PSUs as well. We have always had Sun Media and now SNN.  The TorSun has almost exclusively featured SQE in their ed. reporting. SQE should be SNN’s go-to organization for their education commentary and ed. news reporting IMO.

What I find disturbing is that no one questions WHY there are 15 children in A Teacher’s class with LD? Could some of this be prevented by proper pedagogy at the start?  Do children STILL have to suffer the ravages of whole language/balanced literacy???

The late child psychiatrist, Dr. Carl Kline, asked this question decades ago.  Here’s what was written about him: (from If Learning is So Natural.., A. Nikiforuk, Penquin, 1994)

“At his Vancouver practice Kline soon found that the bulk of his referrals were not frustrated dyslexics but frazzled students disabled by poor reading instruction.  In other words, their varied emotional problems, all stemming from or exacerbated by losing battles with the written word, arose from substandard teaching or no teaching at all.
“Kline now calculates that no more than 10 percent of the school population that can’t read or write well are true dyslexics; the majority of struggling readers, he contends, are the products of whole language reading approaches that have neglected to include structured and sequential teaching of multi-sensory phonics.”

All one has to do is put the Moore decision in the search engine - the history of it.

In the earlier files, of the first challenge at the Human Rights Commission - the naysayers it was not a human rights case. The stance for the education officials has been maintained from day one, and remained virtually the same at the Supreme Court of Canada level. That the LD students and accommodations should be compared to the larger group of the SE population. The only trouble with it, the LD population need specific reading, writing and numeracy remediation. It cannot be easily replace with another type of reading interventions and accommodations.  The usual outcome for LD students, the school will do nothing to remediate the reading concerns. If they do, it is base on reading programs that were never attended to remediate the core reading difficulties of dyslexics.

Ergo, in the minds of the education heavyweights, no discrimination took place, since all SE children were receiving the same SE services and accommodation as other children within the SE group. This is the fast route, to dumb down the programs to the lowest common denominator. In and outside of the inclusive classroom, and all working at two years below grade level. The dyslexics get caught up in a system where their core learning difficulties are never remediated. They fall further and further behind, and by high school are sitting in basic and applied courses.

My child spent two years in a SE math class, obtaining high 90 averages without ever studying. The same thing is happening in the inclusive classroom currently. Differentiation instruction, is what it is called, and what one will hear from teachers in the form of having 15 students with learning problems and sometimes the term is learning disabilities. Two years ago, the grade 10 class of my child’s over 50 percent of the students had some type of accommodation to meet their learning needs. Once sorted, only two students are formally identified - my child and another child with severe ADHD. Guess who never have their learning needs met?

When kids are put in the corner to colour, and other activities that have very little to do with the learning activities of the other children in the classroom, and call it providing an education to children, it is now called discrimination.

As Joanne has stated, why are children suffering the ravages of whole language/balanced literacy, poor instruction methods and curriculum, and which wherein lies the answers to why there is 15 kids with learning difficulties in a classroom. Why parents pay for private tutoring and private schooling? Why, the media does not report on education matters, because they truly believe that some kids just don’t have the stuff to learn how to read, write and do numeracy well. And the one thing that no one wants to talk about in society, the social discrimination that is at play across society,  concerning groups and individuals who are not part of the norm. Its a big group, once the individuals with low literacy and numeracy skills are included.

All of it could be avoided, if the public education system focus on prevention of learning difficulties and timely remediation. Bonus - there will be lots of funding left over for the bells and whistles at every school.

In Canada, the media regardless of left or right leanings, should be reporting the realities on the state of Education, without bias and belief systems tainting the reporting. Its pretty sad, to see scholarship monies dried up for the more successful achieving SE students, since the onset of the economic crisis. The only thing left is the federal grant monies for people with disabilities. Any day that might disappeared, like the federal funding of organizations that deals with children and their learning in some capacity. Where was the media?

There is precious organizations left in Canada to speak on the realities and solutions. SQE still remaining strong, and getting traction within the media. The other side of the coin, are the human rights lawyers and advocates. Without them, the Moore ruling could have been very different.

“In speaking to the CBC?s Rick Cluff on The Early Edition, Moore paid tribute to Kelly, calling her a brilliant human-rights lawyer and a true friend. ?No words can express the depths of our gratitude for everything that Frances and the Community Legal Assistance Society (have done) for our family and now for all of the families who rested their hopes on this case.?

Kelly, some may recall, was the lawyer who acted on behalf of Azmi Jubran, the young man who also won an important lawsuit against the North Vancouver school district for failing to protect him from bullying while he was a student at Handsworth secondary in the 1990s.”
http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2012/11/09/north-vancouver-father-wins-legal-battle-over-special-education/

“What I find disturbing is that no one questions WHY there are 15 children in A Teacher?s class with LD? Could some of this be prevented by proper pedagogy at the start?  Do children STILL have to suffer the ravages of whole language/balanced literacy???”

And those three questions that you raise Doretta are why I’m inclined to agree with Malkin, that nothing will change because in order for it to do so the entrenched pablum of whole language/balanced literacy would have to be undone and effort taken to reeducate a decade of mediocrity. That’s just too much work and makes too much sense.

Best solution, let parents decide to move their kids to the education system that allows them to move away from fad pedagogy.

As much as I find the harsh, pessimistic realism of both Malkin and Chuck unpalatable, I am inclined to agree that only when choice has to been firmly inserted into the equation will the existing order start to be seriously shaken up. I will further qualify by referring back to my initial comment that a serious emergence of major contingency fee law suits will very much help to grease the skids. Choice is the easiest way for the politicians to get off this very barbed hook. My bet is that serious cracks will be evident in the existing structure within three years…and maybe sooner if we get a conservative provincial government in Ontario

” Choice is the easiest way for the politicians to get off this very barbed hook.”

No politicians that I can think of have the will or backbone to move there Frank.

My bet is that serious cracks will be evident in the existing structure within three years?and maybe sooner if we get a conservative provincial government in Ontario “

Not even in Ontario under the PCs I’m afraid.

It could be the act of erosion, Chuck?  Steady erosion by the actions of the public. It never dawn upon me, how many people move deliberately, and even across the country to send their children to a school. How much of it is happening? How many parents are remortgaging their homes to send their kids to the private LD schools?  I know most LD children only need two years to correct and undo the damage, and can returned to the public schools with accommodations.

Steady erosion of the Ontario teachers strike actions. “A growing number of Ontario school boards are considering closing down high schools as teachers escalate their job action ? refusing to supervise students outside the classroom, enter report-card grades into the system and fill in for absent colleagues.” 
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/ontario-boards-may-close-high-schools-as-result-of-job-action/article5225639/?utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_source=The Globe and Mail&utm_type=text&utm_content=TheGlobeandMail&utm_campaign=99235456

I don’t think the Ontario public is in any mood to cater to unions or school boards. Potentially damaging if school boards move to close down high schools on safety reasons.

Then the revamping of Alberta’s education act. More choice, more power to parents.
“?The Education Act is actually the first legislation in Canada to formally recognize the role of parents as a child’s first and most important teacher,? said Johnson. ?As a parent, that is something I am very proud of.?
http://alberta.ca/NewsFrame.cfm?ReleaseID=/acn/201210/331548EBB3EA9-AF86-C55F-F5490089FD305F58.html

Steady erosion, while the public education systems across the country continues to play their fiddles, and sing their tunes. Just wondering, what will be the erosion effect of Alberta’s new education act?  How will it affect other provincial education ministries in a few years from now? 

What of the Moore case?  Payment of $100,000 to the Moores, is probably not going down well at the North Vancouver board. For that matter, at other school boards across the country. Ontario school boards are moving to close down schools, for safety reasons. Translation - they don’t want to get sue by parents. And the unions are a bit upset? 

For what? Objections to a two year freeze wage? The school boards should just get it over with, and lock out the teachers. Start it on the first of December, and the kids will get an extended Christmas holiday.

The erosion of public trust, is another factor. Most of it caused by the actors within the political and public sectors.

Steady erosion, like nature are powerful. Like nature, very unkind to the people who ignore it. Alberta recognizes it, and acted accordingly.

http://www.osstf.on.ca/MR-Nov-12-2012

It’s 1997 deja vu all over again. Wonder when the greeen ribbons will come out? )

I like the line “protecting and enhancing public education.”

I remember 1997. It was a blip, and no I did not buy coffee for the striking teachers.

In the Ottawa Sun - “The strike lasted two weeks before the teachers gave up and went back to work, failing to wrest major concessions from the government.”
http://www.ottawasun.com/2012/09/12/the-1997-teachers-strike

In the Toronto Sun - “Heck, it?s getting downright 1997-ish ? when teachers walked out of class for two weeks to protest the Mike Harris government?s Bill 160 and went into a perma-snit after they returned ? with the Ontario Secondary School Teachers Federation asking its high school teachers to wear black armbands and clothing to class in protest after Bill 115 passed. The union has also told members to cancel after-school sports and clubs on Wednesday.”

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/09/11/2012-is-so-1997-ish

How long will it last? Big difference between 1997 and 2012

Besides, being near Christmas, the public is in no mood. If the strike drags on, parents will vote with their pocketbooks, and enrolled their kids on the many offerings of school on the web. If only to keep up with their studies. Just imagine, if a number of parents did just that?  I be one of the parents to do just that compared to the fewer options in 1997.

So how long will the strike be? Anybody care to wager?

It would be interesting to see if there is presently a dramatic increase in course enrollment inquiries/bookings at the virtual high school.
https://www.virtualhighschool.com/
Yes, Nancy the bricks and mortar constituency may indeed become more familiar with the online community as they step out to pound the pavement. Interesting how a strike could turn out to be a huge opportunity pivot for online high school education. Guess we will have to wait and see.

Here is another one that cross my desk today. As far as I can determined, it is all free for BC residents, but I am not sure what it costs for non-residents living in the rest of Canada. But I bet, there is something for the Ontario students, if the strike drags on.

http://www.navigatenides.com/

I remember 1997. It was a blip, and no I did not buy coffee for the striking teachers. Sarkari Naukri

“Status quo education is very entrenched, and it will take more than a burst dam to change things.” I definitely agree!